Perpetrators



Perpetrators


John E. Douglas

Mark Olshaker



Where Do We Begin?

Early in the 1980s, when one of the authors (JED) was conducting in-depth interviews with incarcerated serial offenders that would help form the basis for the behavioral profiling and criminal investigative analysis program of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (1 [pp ix–xiii, 15]), he interviewed an inmate of the Joliet Penitentiary in Illinois who had been convicted of murdering a woman by inflicting multiple stab wounds. Throughout the extensive interview, the 5-feet, 9-inch tall white man in his mid-20s maintained a soft, inappropriate affect, smiling frequently. He displayed what FBI special agents referred to as “the look”—darting eyes, nervous twitches, continual hand rubbing. His primary concern was how he had looked in a CBS television interview the day before. When told he had come across well, he laughed, relaxed considerably, and was much more forthcoming.

After the interview, the special agent sought out the prison psychiatrist to find out how the inmate was doing. The psychiatrist gave a positive reaction, stating that the inmate was responding very well to medication and therapy, adding that he had joined a Bible study group in prison and that if the progress continued he would be ready for parole.

The special agent asked the psychiatrist if he knew the specifics of the crime the inmate had committed. “No, I don’t want to know,” he replied. “I don’t have the time, with all the inmates I have to deal with here.” And, he added, he did not want to unfairly influence his relationship with his patient.

Before the psychiatrist could protest, the agent related how this asocial person had joined a church group and how after a meeting, when everyone else had gone, he propositioned the young woman who had hosted the meeting. She rejected his advances, at which point he knocked her to the floor, went to the kitchen and retrieved a knife, and stabbed her numerous times. Then, as she lay bleeding to death on the floor, he inserted his penis into an open wound in her abdomen and ejaculated.

“You’re disgusting, Douglas!” the psychiatrist declared. “Get out of my office!”

“I’m disgusting?” the agent countered. “You’re in a position to make a recommendation that this individual is responding to therapy and could be freed, and you don’t know who in the hell you’re talking to when you’re dealing with these inmates. How are you supposed to understand them if you haven’t taken the time to look at the crime scene photographs or reports, to go over the autopsy protocols? Have you looked at the way the crime was committed? Do you know if it was planned? Do you understand the behavior leading up to it? Do you know how he left the crime scene? Do you know if he tried to get away with it? Did he try to establish an alibi? How in the hell do you know if he’s dangerous or not?” (2 [pp 335–337]).

At the heart of the dilemma is the fact that much of psychiatric therapy is based on self-reporting, and although a patient coming to a therapist under normal circumstances has a vested interest
in revealing his true thoughts and feelings, a jailed convict desirous of early release has a vested interest in telling the therapist what he wants to hear. To the extent that the therapist takes the report at face value without correlating it with other information about the subject, there is grave danger of a fundamental and perilous misevaluation. Edmund Kemper in California and Montie Rissell in Virginia, two of the serial murderers the author (JED) has interviewed and studied, were in court-mandated therapy as a condition of parole while they continued committing new crimes. Both managed to remain undetected and both showed “progress” to their therapists. On at least one occasion, Kemper attended a meeting with state psychiatrists while the severed head of his most recent victim lay in the trunk of his car (3).

The point of this experience and research is clear. Neither the law enforcement nor the medical/health community can effectively deal with violent, predatory, and often repeat or serial criminals or even evaluate the critical question of their current or future level of dangerousness, until the effort is made to understand the nature and type of each offender.

There can be many reasons certain individuals—break almost exclusively males—become violent sexually oriented predators, having do with both “nature” and “nurture,” “hard wiring,” and environment. But studies have shown common elements that are too prominent to ignore. Among these are factors such as family history of alcoholism and psychiatric disorders, instability of residence, mother as the dominant parent, and negative relationship with father or male caretaker. All of these factors came into play in significantly more than half of the instances in the author’s study. In addition, other important indicators such as family members with criminal histories, father leaving before the subject’s twelfth birthday, negative relationship with the mother, the subject’s ongoing perception of unfair treatment, and no older sibling role model all showed up in roughly 50% of the cases. Approximately 40% of the subjects were physically abused as children or adolescents, and nearly 75% experienced some form of psychological abuse; various forms of sexual abuse were also common, but in lower percentages (1 [pp 17–26]).

Not surprisingly, what this type of upbringing led to in the subjects studied was a tendency to fail in interpersonal relationships; aggressiveness and other antisocial behavior patterns; inappropriate emotional responses, including absence of guilt or conscience, chronic lying, and rebelliousness; underperformance in school and underemployment; active fantasy life and preoccupation with fantasies of violence, domination, and control (1 [pp 28–43]). It is therefore not difficult to see the type of background, combined with whatever is inherent in the child’s physical/neurologic/emotional makeup, as part of a template for the adult violent offender.

Is early environment the only determining factor? Certainly not. Many have posed the question, in one form or another, of whether certain people are simply “evil.” Although each of us may have personal views on the subject, we are not qualified, nor is it relevant to this discussion, to pass judgment on that issue. The one thing we can state empirically is that there are many complexities to individual personality that we do not understand or know how to evaluate, some of which do seem to be “inborn” and, together with other influences, unquestionably play a significant role in the formation of the adult criminal. Combining the environmental template with these inherent traits and characteristics, what we often see is an individual whose personality incorporates deep-seated feelings of inadequacy with equally deep-seated feelings of grandiosity and entitlement—that he is better than anyone else and is being held back by society and the people around him.

Once the antisocial behavior begins (often with acts such as starting a fire or causing cruelty to animals and other children), a series of “feedback filters” come into play: the subject justifies the act in his own mind; he sorts out errors in his performance of the act so that he can do it “better” and more efficiently next time; he finds that in performing the act he experiences an increased state of arousal; he discovers increased areas of dominance, power, and control in his life; he learns how to continue these acts without detection or punishment; he progresses to a larger, more elaborate, and harmful acting out of his fantasies (1 [p 70]).

But let us add a word of caution here, because it would be easy to misinterpret the data. As with other aspects of medicine, it is critical to keep in mind that although nearly all the affected subjects conform in greater or lesser degree to these and many other related traits, most of the individuals who have suffered similar backgrounds and upbringing are in no way criminally motivated and, in fact, grow up to lead “normal,” productive lives. This is true not only for this population at large but more specifically for the siblings of criminal offenders, many of whom experienced the same negative influences.

Stated simply, various studies and our own experience have led us to several conclusions: although the background described in the preceding text could certainly result in an adult with serious psychological problems and emotional unhappiness, it does not follow that this adult would then be compelled to perpetrate violent, predatory acts on others. Why, then, do serial predatory offenders do what they do? It is because this act of manipulation, domination, and control—be it rape, murder, arson, or any other criminal enterprise—gives them a feeling of power, satisfaction, and fulfillment that they cannot obtain anywhere else in life. In this one
moment, a “loser” or “nobody” who feels that he has no power or influence in normal life can exert the ultimate power over another human being, can make that other human being suffer and bend to his will, and can decide whether that other human being will live or die. For this type of individual, there is no greater sense of empowerment.

So vital is the sense of self-importance derived by some offenders and the need for recognition that it can lead directly or indirectly to their apprehension. The self-styled “BTK Strangler” terrorized Wichita, Kansas, beginning in January 1974. The name originated with the communications he sent to law enforcement and media, proudly explaining that his technique was to bind, torture, and kill. After some years, the case went cold and the killings ceased. His last communication was in 1979. Then in 2004, the communications began again, containing information that appeared to authenticate the sender as BTK, including crime scene photographs of an unsolved murder. There had been no official police photographs of this scene, owing to the quick removal of the body, but the new communication confirmed the statement in the author’s original profile of BTK that sketches included in the early communications signified he was photographing his victims as “trophies.”

Dennis Rader, a former municipal ordinance official from nearby Park City, was arrested and charged several months after the communications resumed. Among the pieces of evidence that led to his arrest was the tracing of an electronic imprint on a computer disk he had sent to a local television station (4). In a similar manner, Theodore J. Kaczynski was identified as the notorious Unabomber in 1996 after his brother David recognized familiar phrasing in an extensive rambling manifesto the subject insisted be published in national newspapers (5).

This discussion applies primarily—almost exclusively—to male individuals. A girl who appears to have a background identical to that of a boy who goes on to a troubled life of crime will almost never develop into the same type of sexual predator. The types of violent crimes committed by women are different in character from those committed by men, as are preference for weapons and means of murder. For reasons often speculated on but not yet clearly understood, girls and women from dysfunctional and abusive backgrounds tend to direct their rage, anger, and despair inward. Rather than being outwardly aggressive toward others, they often engage in self-destructive or self-punishing behaviors, such as alcohol or drug abuse, suicide attempts, prostitution, and attraction to abusive men (6). What this means, of course, is that violent predatory crimes are almost always committed by men; therefore, men are the focus of our examination.

Are individuals who derive satisfaction from forcibly controlling, assaulting, and killing sick? Depending on one’s definition of the term, this can be a pretty safe bet. Are such individuals mentally ill? We would be more than willing to concede that anyone who derives his life’s satisfaction from inflicting pain and suffering has severe mental problems. But is this individual insane? In other words, is he incapable of understanding the wrongness of his actions and resisting the impulse to follow through on his fantasies? In almost all cases, we believe the answer to that question is no. To our knowledge, there are no recorded cases of the hypothetical “policeman at the elbow,” for example, in which an individual is so compelled to perform a predatory criminal act that he does so knowing that a uniformed police officer is watching him.

Although this may be a rather glib restatement of an important and admittedly controversial issue, our conclusion is that the critical operative word is choice. Regardless of family background and all other formative influences and regardless of intelligence or level of emotional stability, the overwhelming number of predatory criminals choose to do what they do because of the way it makes them feel. They are fully aware of what they are doing, often plan it, and understand that it is wrong and contrary to society’s rules. They simply do not care. Or if they do care, that care is outweighed by the desire to do it anyway.

It is also important to keep in mind that, by definition, a serial criminal is a successful criminal. The more times he is able to get away with a particular offense, the better will be his ability to refine his modus operandi (MO) to continue to get away with the same crime. In any given case, this may be because the offender is above average in intelligence, despite his record of underachievement. Many serial offenders, particularly of the organized variety (a distinction explained later in this chapter), are reasonably bright. But success at avoiding detection and capture can also be related to the obsessive amount of time and energy the offender puts into fantasizing, planning, and evaluating the crime. When one of the authors was a teenaged agricultural intern, he noted with amazement the uncanny ability of cows to wander out of seemingly secure enclosures. He finally concluded that if the cow had nothing else on its mind, it could devote all of its mental resources to the task of finding a way out, however long it took. The situation of the sexual predator who spends an inordinate amount of his time, intellect, and emotional resources on his crimes turns out to be an analogous situation.

Therefore, besides being armed with an understanding of the commonalities among criminal sexual predators, it is equally important to understand
the differences. Only then will we be equipped to evaluate the offender as an individual, lend aid and support to his victims, assist in his prosecution, and make an attempt to predict the likelihood of future violence. The method and manner in which a crime is committed relate directly to the criminal’s personality type.


Sexual Violence

Rape is one of the most common predatory crimes to which emergency medical personnel respond; therefore, it is important that they have a fuller understanding of the rapist than of any other type of perpetrator. We will therefore devote the largest share of our discussion to this subject.

There is an ongoing debate within and between the law enforcement community, the health care community, and the women’s movement about whether rape should be classified as a crime of sex or violence, and this discussion will not abate any time in the foreseeable future. In either category, rape almost always has the key component of anger.

We have heard of no better definition than the one provided by the distinguished prosecutor Linda Fairstein, Esq., former head of the New York County District Attorney’s Office Sex Crimes Unit and now a successful novelist (7,8): rape is a crime of violence in which sex is the weapon. In an interview, Fairstein explained, “There is a sexual element to this that isn’t part of any other crime, and that can’t be denied. It’s very much the piece of the crime that the victim doesn’t want to happen or is afraid of. And so to me, it was about the one weapon that this type of offender had that other offenders don’t use and victims don’t want used against them” (9).

Rape of any kind is a horrible event. Any sexual assault leaves its victim and her partner, friends, and loved ones devastated. But we do a grave disservice to all victims and potential victims if we do not invest the time and effort to distinguish between types of rape and rapists. It may seem more sympathetic and caring to proclaim, for instance, that date rape is the same as stranger rape, but it is not true. So much depends on the circumstances of the assault. To assert that a date rape that does not involve a weapon and does not cause the victim to fear for her life is the same as a stranger abduction–rape at knifepoint or gunpoint in which the victim is brutally beaten dangerously oversimplifies the situation and hinders our ability to defend against both crimes and their different types of perpetrators. All sexual assaults share certain elements, but what they do not share is, in some ways, even more important if we are to learn prevention strategies from them and help victims recover from their individual traumas. Many things are required of the diligent, sensitive emergency medicine practitioners who respond to sexual assault (10). Besides delivering excellent medical care, by far the most important of these are providing emotional support and empathy to the victim.


Crime Classification: Categories of Rapists

In 1992, after more than 10 years of investigation and study by the Behavioral Science and Investigative Support Units of the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia, together with the pioneering research of Dr. Ann Burgess, Professor of Psychiatric Nursing at the University of Pennsylvania, Douglas et al. organized categories of sexual assault, with breakdowns similar to those of homicide and arson, into the Crime Classification Manual (11). Critical research was also conducted by Special Agents Roy Hazelwood and Ken Lanning of the Behavioral Science Unit (12). This research involved the review of numerous case files, victim statements, police reports, court testimony, school reports and psychiatric evaluations, parole and probation records, and records of family and developmental history. Following the analysis, rapists were broken down into four basic types, with the crime of rape further broken down into more than 50 subgroups (13 [pp 93–99]). Over the years, different researchers have assigned their own labels to the typologies, but the behavior is so consistent within each that the types should be recognizable regardless of how they are named.


The Power-Reassurance Rapist

The power-reassurance rapist (numerically, the most common type of rapist) feels inadequate, not being the type with whom women would voluntarily become involved. He compensates for these feelings of male inadequacy by forcing women to have sex with him. All the while, as the designation suggests, he is looking for reassurance of his own power and potency. This type has sometimes been referred to as the “gentleman rapist,” “Gentleman rapist,” or even classified as an “unselfish” rapist, in large part because his offenses, although traumatic, are usually physically less damaging to his victim than those of other types of sex offenders. Such a rapist may even apologize during the assault or ask the victim if he is hurting her—a question that serves his own need for reassurance more than it expresses a genuine concern for the victim. Therefore, the terms “gentleman” and “unselfish” are applicable only within the context of the full spectrum of the types of rapists (14).

This type tends to be a loner who fantasizes that his victim actually enjoys the experience and might
even fall in love with him. He may go so far as to contact the victim after the assault and ask her to go out with him. Of course, the reality of rape cannot live up to his fantasies: instead of winning over a reluctant lover, he has terrorized, hurt, and angered an innocent person. Most rapists of the power-reassurance variety will admit later that they did not enjoy the sex with their victims. The experience did not satisfy the underlying obsession; therefore, he will have to try again with another woman.

Victims of choice are generally about the same age as or younger than the perpetrator and usually of the same race. If the rapist dates at all, the women he dates will be younger and less sophisticated than he; this is the only way he can feel equal. Because of his feelings of inadequacy, he gains control by surprise; he does not have the self-confidence or skills to con his way into a victim’s apartment smoothly, so he is more likely to break into the victim’s home in the middle of the night. When we delve into the past of this type of perpetrator, we generally see a history of unusual or bizarre masturbatory fantasies, often voyeurism, exhibitionism, cross-dressing, or making obscene phone calls. He frequents adult bookstores or movies and collects pornography. If he has a specific sexual dysfunction, it is likely to be premature ejaculation, which would be exhibited in consensual relationships and which he would report as a problem (from his point of view only) in his rapes.

He will tend to prefer the night and operate in his own residential or work area—in other words, within a very prescribed comfort zone—and will usually travel to the crime scene on foot. If he is a serial offender, this is particularly true of his first offense. He uses a weapon of opportunity, often something he finds at the crime scene. His patterns of crime are generally consistent, and the entire act, from the time he overpowers his victim until the time he leaves, is relatively brief, sometimes as short as 5 or 10 minutes. He will not use profanity or try to demean or humiliate his victim to the extent that the other rapist types will, but he may require her to recite a “script” in which she praises his lovemaking or expresses desire for him. He might cover the victim’s eyes or mask his own features, both for the self-preservation motive of preventing identification and the possibility that he knows he should be ashamed of his actions. He is timid and will do whatever the victim allows him to. Rather than tear off her clothes or force her to strip, he may expose only the parts of the victim’s body he intends to assault.

He is apt to keep a journal, news clippings, or some other record of his assaults to reassure himself of his potency. For the same reason, he may take souvenirs, such as pieces of the victim’s underwear. Afterward, he may feel guilty or remorseful. But unless he is a first-timer who tries it, does not like it, and decides never to do it again, he will do it again. He will continue with his acts of rape until he is caught or stopped by being arrested and incarcerated or killed or seriously injured in another crime or an unrelated incident. He tends to live alone or with his parents or in some type of dependent relationship. His mother probably was—or is—very domineering. He is employed below his ability level in a job that does not require a lot of contact with the public. Although he is physically the least dangerous type of rapist, if he is successful over a series of attacks, his confidence may be boosted and he may become more physically aggressive.


The Exploitative Rapist

The exploitative rapist (the second most common type of rapist) is a more impulsive predator. His crimes result from seizing an opportunity that presents itself rather than by fantasizing about the act ahead of time. He might approach a potential victim with a ruse or con, or might employ a direct, overpowering, blitz-style attack. Unlike the power-reassurance rapist, this type will not appear in any way concerned with the victim’s welfare. He is selfish—verbally, physically, and sexually. He may suffer from some form of sexual dysfunction, and if he does, it will be just as apparent with his wife, girlfriend, or any other consenting partner as it will be with a victim of force. Often such sexual dysfunction is because of retarded ejaculation or difficulty in reaching climax.

Victims of preference tend to be around his age. He is on the prowl for a victim of opportunity, and this activity could take place in a bar or neighborhood he has targeted. Once he has a woman under his control, his only concern is getting her to submit sexually to him. That is the real thrill for him—the sex act is satisfying as an act of domination and control rather than providing what we think of as sexual gratification. Once he has forced submission, as far as he is concerned, the experience is over. But during that encounter, he can be expected to inflict multiple assaults on the victim. Anal assaults are common. Masks or attempts at disguise or hiding his face are uncommon. With this type of offender, often there will be an interval between rapes—a day, a month, 6 months—until he goes on the hunt once again; however, unlike the power-reassurance rapist, he will not try to maintain any contact with or come back to a victim once he has left her, although he often threatens to return if she reports the assault to police.

This type is very body conscious. He wants a macho reputation, to be known as a man’s man, and therefore is likely to have some physically oriented employment. He is interested in sports. His vehicle
reflects that image, too. In some regions of the country, it would be a Corvette or other muscle car; in others, it might be a pickup truck, well equipped for hunting. He does not take well to criticism or authority. He probably did not do well in high school or go to college. If married, he has a history of cheating on his wife and paying scant attention to his children. When we look into the background of such offenders, very often we find that his father has treated his mother in the same way the offender treats women.


The Anger Rapist

For the anger rapist, also referred to as the anger-retaliatory rapist, sexual assault is a displaced expression of rage and anger. For this type of rapist, the victim represents a person—or group of people—the offender hates. This could be a mother, wife, or girlfriend, even women in general. But his anger and resentment need not be rooted in an actual or legitimate wrong ever perpetrated against him.

It would not be unusual for this type to be involved in an ongoing relationship with a woman. Because he is driven by rage, the consequences of the anger rapist’s attack can be anything from verbal abuse, to severe beating, to murder, although the fact that his conscious or subconscious intention is to get the anger out of his system means that this type usually will not kill. His attacks will be episodic, not at predictable intervals, triggered by precipitating stressors involving the woman or women at whom his rage is actually directed. In almost all cases, the displacement means he will not attack that person. He may attack someone else he knows, using weapons of opportunity such as kitchen knives or even his own fists if he is strong enough. Because he wants not just to overpower but to humiliate his target, there could be anal sex followed by oral sex and a great deal of profanity, and the context of his behavior will be an intention to degrade, such as by ejaculating on the victim’s face or clothing.

Therefore, it is important for the examiner to realize that DNA and other crucial evidence can be found on many parts of the victim’s body and her clothes. Whenever this is a possibility, a delicate but thorough line of questioning on this topic is indicated, with the twin goals of preserving the chain of evidence while ensuring the victim’s emotional well being.

This type is far less common than the two described previously, possibly accounting for as few as 5% of rapists.


The Sadistic Rapist

The sadistic rapist is the least common type of rapist but in many ways he is the most dangerous sexual predator of all. The purpose of his attack is to live out his sadistic sexual fantasies on the unwilling victim. With this type, sexual fantasy and aggression merge, which is why he is also referred to as an anger–excitation rapist. Aggression and sadistic fantasy feed on each other, so, as the level of aggression rises, his level of arousal rises accordingly. His aggression is not anger based, as it is with the previous category. In fact, he can be quite charming and seductive as he lures the intended prey into his web. He is completely self-centered. The only thing he cares about is his own pleasure and satisfaction. He derives satisfaction from hurting people and having them in his power (15). Therefore, with this type, we expect to see various forms of mental and physical torture, and the physical torture may be directed particularly at sexually significant parts of the body such as mouth, breasts, genitals, buttocks, and rectum. His weapon of choice is frequently a knife, because it is so intimidating and causes mental anguish on the part of the victim. He often cuts or tears off his victim’s clothing because he figures she will not need it after he has finished with her. Depending on his preferences, there may be much sexual activity, probably highly perverse in nature, or even none. He could, for example, prefer to penetrate with a sharp object rather than with his penis. His language will be commanding and degrading, but impersonal. The victim is merely there as an actress in his self-scripted drama, and her role is to show fear and respond to pain. Therefore, there is often a victim of preference, symbolic to him in some way, be she old or young, white, black, or Asian, slim-figured or full-figured, black-haired or blonde, redhead or brunette.

The sadistic rapist anticipates his crime and has perfected his MO over the course of his criminal career. As his fantasy evolves and he gains more experience with different victims, he will take more time planning ahead for successive crimes. He brings his weapon(s) with him and may have a torture kit made up in advance, including pliers or other sharp instruments, whips, manacles, needles, or whatever object he needs to fulfill his fantasy. Because his assault unfolds over a long period of time, he will have a place to which he can take his victim, where he knows they will not be disturbed. This might be an obscure cabin in the woods or a specially outfitted and soundproofed van. He may tell the victim that if she does what he tells her he will not hurt her further or will let her go, but this is only a ruse to control her and get her to cooperate. Because his satisfaction lies in the act of tormenting and dominating his victim, he may take photographs or record the scene as it unfolds on either audiotape or videotape. For the same reason, he may also take souvenirs to help him relive the experience and demonstrate to himself
that he “owns” the victim. These souvenirs might include jewelry, items of clothing or underwear, or even body parts.

The attack itself will tend to be highly symbolic. There will be no remorse because the rapist has totally depersonalized his victim; he does not even think of her as a human being. This is the type of rape that most often ends in murder. In fact, killing the victim may be an integral part of the sadistic fantasy scenario. He may even continue to engage in activity with the body after death. It is generally impossible for the victim to play on his sympathy, because he has none. He wants her to suffer. The only instance in which he might relent is if the victim can somehow break through the depersonalization and get him to regard her as an individual. This occurred, for example, in one instance in which a victim stated that her husband had cancer. It happened that the rapist’s brother was battling cancer, and he let her go. Another time, a sadistic rapist revealed in a prison interview that one of his victims reminded him of his mother and so he had released her. Unfortunately, this is a very uncommon scenario with the sexual sadist.

The sadistic type is usually white, with above-normal intelligence, and may be college-educated with a good middle-class job. He has a dominant personality and likes to collect bondage and sadomasochistic pornography. He may also collect related items, such as knives, guns, or Nazi memorabilia, and read military, law enforcement, or survivalist literature. He may have a large attack-type dog, such as a German shepherd, Doberman, or Rottweiler. Because of his intelligence and planning, he will be difficult to apprehend.


Advice to Victims

As we all know, human nature is not exact, and not every rapist fits neatly into one of the four categories described in the preceding text. There is often a mixed presentation, with elements of one classification grafting onto the general description of another, which is why it is so difficult to give specific advice to potential victims as to how to react to a sexual criminal, particularly under the acute stress of the attack itself. But in most cases, one category will dominate, and our reaction should be molded around the understanding of what motivates that specific type of rapist and what he is after (12 [pp 358–363]).

In any discussion of criminal personality, the cautions and cautionary tales are as important as the conclusions. Montie Rissell, mentioned earlier, was in some ways an unusual rapist. He attacked and murdered five women near his home in Alexandria, Virginia, while still in his teens, later blaming his criminal behavior on having to live with his mother rather than his father after his parents’ troubled marriage broke up when he was 7 years old. By the time he was in high school, he had a rap sheet detailing driving without a license, burglary, car theft, and rape.

Rissell’s first killing was savagely instructive of the dangers of misinterpreting offender behavior. While still in high school, on being put on probation and during the course of receiving psychiatric counseling as a provision in that probation, he heard from his girlfriend—a year ahead of him and then away at college—that their relationship was over. A trigger emotional event of this nature is generally the precursor to a serial sex crime. Rissell promptly drove to the college, where he spotted the young woman with her new boyfriend. Rather than express his rage on the person he felt he was hurt by, he drove back home, fortified himself with beer and marijuana, and spent hours sitting in his car in the parking lot of his apartment complex. Several hours later, another vehicle appeared, driven by a single woman. On the spur of the moment, Rissell decided to get back what he had just lost. He approached the other car, pulled a handgun on the woman, and forced her to go with him to a secluded area nearby.

As it happened, Rissell’s victim was a prostitute, which is significant for two reasons: she would not have the same fear of having sex with a stranger as would someone outside the profession and, although frightened, she would probably draw on a strong and well-developed survival instinct. Her behavior, according to the prison interview with Rissell, reflected this. When she was alone and defenseless and it was clear that her attacker intended to rape her at gunpoint, she attempted to diffuse the situation by hiking up her skirt, asking him how he liked it and in what position he wanted her.

Rather than making him gentler or more sensitive to her, this behavior enraged him. As an anger (or anger-retaliatory) rapist, Rissell was set off by what he perceived as his victim’s attempt to control the situation. In fact, when she subsequently feigned orgasm in an attempt to gratify him, he became greatly upset that she was “enjoying” the experience. This reinforced in him the notion that all women are whores. Because he was able to depersonalize her, it was easy for him to think about killing her, an idea that solidified in his mind when she attempted to run away, thereby further “controlling” the situation (2 [pp 137–142], 16).

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Aug 28, 2016 | Posted by in EMERGENCY MEDICINE | Comments Off on Perpetrators

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access