SERIAL KILLER MIND

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 30 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   Murders meet the criteria of this item if evidence demonstrates that the victim was helpless and recognized death as destiny. Such cases arise more often in stabbings, where death is not instantaneous. However, there are gun homicides in which the victim clearly experienced terror, helplessness, and anticipation of impending death or serious injury. To that end, stranglings and drownings invariably meet criteria for this item, as do deaths that follow periods of restraint or torture. Attacks which occur in the course of a person being overwhelmed, restrained, and forced to anticipate death meet criteria for this item. Arson and terror attacks may expose many to carnage and their own vulnerability to instant death. Such reactions in survivors, and in the dead

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 29 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   Eligible crimes: Assault, Kidnapping, Murder, Rape, Reckless Endangerment Sources of information: Victim, perpetrator, and witness statements; victim medical, psychological treatment, and autopsy records; witness psychological treatment records; writings in diaries, e-mails, message boards, chats, and letters; weapon choices, ligatures and other restraints; crime scene evidence; video or audiotapes. Examples: Qualifying Exemplars: Rape and less frequently attempted rape traumatize victims and are particularly likely to meet the criteria for this item. Assault victims may also experience indelible emotional impact, which is heightened when such attacks occur in places where the experience of powerlessness and helplessness is more acute to the victim (e.g.

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 28 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   The Depravity Standard in Court Newman, Rayz, and Friedman (2004) coined the notion of “super-aggravators”: those aggravators that, when present, were more likely to result in a death sentence in a capital-eligible case in Pennsylvania:   Exhibit 4.1. Example of Item Description: Actions That Cause Unusual Quality of Suffering Unusual quality of suffering of the victim; victim demonstrated panic, terror, and helplessness. Key Distinctions: Victim terror Description: The key ingredient of this item is the level of emotional suffering endured by the victim during the crime. The presence of post-traumatic stress disorder or acute stress disorder validates the degree of suffering during the crime. However, the absence of t

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 27 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   The descriptions of items also aim to preserve a narrowed class of individuals who truly meet criteria of a Depravity Standard item. These specific parameters preserve the constitutionality of the Standard. One item was ultimately dropped from consideration despite the overwhelming support of participants that it was representative of depravity: our research team concluded that evidence for this item would be too difficult to distinguish consistently and scientifically.

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 24 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   Almost all of the studied items, in research involving thousands of participants to date, have drawn an overwhelming endorsement for being especially or somewhat representative of depravity. There is, notwithstanding differences among the cultures of different states, remarkable consistency of data across American states. Some distinctions have emerged in data comparison between American respondents and residents of Great Britain and other countries. Nevertheless, this phase of the research has demonstrated that no matter what the differences are among us personally, ethnically, or spiritually, consensus can be achieved as to what intents, victimology, actions, and attitudes distinguish a heinous or depraved crime.

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 26 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   Detailed descriptions of items are important guidelines to law enforcement and investigators. Those who investigate crimes have the greatest proximity to evidence that reflects on the required evidence for items such as “disrespect for the victim after the fact,” or evidence that such an item is not present. Evidence for the depravity of the crime may be derived from numerous sources of information available to the investigator. Examples of these appear in Table 4.3. Criminal profiling and even many forensic science methodologies do not reliably guarantee that the same conclusions will be generated by qualified professionals conducting a given examination. This lack of interrater reliability, which has limited the potential for evidence’s admissibility, is care-

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 25 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   Defining the Depravity Standard Items: Implications for Investigators Items of the Depravity Standard have been carefully defined in order to in- spire evidence-based determinations of whether an item is present. What denotes, for example, “actions that cause grotesque suffering”? Given the ramifications of a jury finding that such actions were a feature of the crime, determination of this item must be evidence driven. In order to reduce risk of arbitrariness in decision making, description of this and all other items must ensure consistent examination in court cases everywhere. A description of the item “actions that cause unusual quality of suffering” is seen in Exhibit 4.1.  

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 23 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   This phase of the research was set up on the World Wide Web in order to survey the general public randomly in a secure, confidential, and identical manner. The Depravity Scale research, as it was known at the time, was the first systematic academic effort to engage citizen input to shape a future sentencing instrument for legislatures and courts. Data from this survey have contributed to establishing the intents, victimology, actions, and attitudes to be included in the Depravity Standard. Data collection at this Web site continues, for societal attitudes evolve. The methodology enables the standard to reflect updated societal attitudes, even many years after a valid scale began to be used as an instrument of justice.

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 22 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   The Depravity Standard items were constructed in such a way as to distance themselves from anything that might suggest a perpetrator’s diagnosis or prognosis, so as to avoid prejudices inspired by a particular individual. These approaches aimed to develop a Depravity Standard that emphasizes fairness over arbitrariness. In order that the research yield results that reflect societal attitudes, in keeping with U.S. Supreme Court directives, the next phases of the research explored which of the twenty-six intents, victimologies, actions, and attitudes would draw a consensus of support from the general public as representative of a depraved crime, regardless of a person’s demographic or background.  

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 21 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   In addition, the Depravity Standard items were developed in such a way as to apply with equal relevance to murder as to robbery or other crimes. “Intent to maximize damage,” for example, is as applicable to the planting of a computer virus as it is to a mass casualty terror plot. Moreover, items were worded in order to ensure the instrument would be blind to race, religion, politics, or socioeconomic status. At the same time, “intent to terrorize” works with defined terrorism, something many societies refuse to do for fear of self-incrimination.

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 20 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   Table 4.2. Diagnoses Associated with Criminally Depraved Acts Diagnosis (source)                                        Characteristics Antisocial Personality Disorder                  History of Conduct Disorder in youth; adult pattern of irresponsibility and rule breaking; exploitativeness for money, sex, and other primitive needs Conduct Disorder                                          Childhood/adolescence of truancy, lying, fighting, destruction of property, fire set- ting, impulsivity, and cruelty to animals Narcissistic Personality Disorder                Grandiosity, entitlement, haughtiness, envy, intense anger Psychopathy                     

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 19 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   Thus, a given fact pattern might relate very much to sadism and would be condensed under the heading of “actions that cause a victim emotional suffering.” Or a perpetrator who enlists followers into active criminality may be, according to the construct of antisocial by proxy, represented well by “involving another person in the crime in order to maximize destructiveness.” After expanding the list of potential intents, actions, and attitudes to encompass the range of imagination for potential crimes, the Depravity Standard research project identified twenty-six items for closer study by April 2001 (Welner, 2001). These items focus on the depravity of a crime: that is, what is depraved. The items are event, history, and fact driven. Questions of who is depraved, o

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 18 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors     The research began by identifying numerous examples of intent, actions, and attitudes that appellate courts have upheld as reflecting heinous, atrocious, cruel, vile, inhuman, wanton, or horrible crimes (Welner, 1998). This included a victimology of the worst of crimes as well. In order to distinguish depraved features from those items earning aggravator status to serve the aims of public policy—but that do not uniformly distinguish a heinous or evil act (examples include using a deadly weapon, ambushing, killing a witness to disrupt testimony, and preventing arrest or escaping custody)—the intents, actions, attitudes, and victimologies of those upheld appellate cases were distilled and organized under headings shaped by psychiatric diagnoses associated with the most pern

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 17 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors Given this challenge, the Depravity Standard methodology committed to accomplish the following in order to establish a standard that would unfailingly contribute to justice: •     Can the Depravity Standard be inclusive, to be applicable to the range of all possible crimes? •     Can the Standard emphasize evidence over impressionism?   •     Can its items ensure that such determinations are color, diagnosis, race, religion, nationality, and socioeconomically blind? •     Can its items control for cultural distinctions? •     Can the Standard be neither pro-prosecution nor pro- defense? •     Can its items incorporate the range of values of a free society? •     Can items bridge society’s judgments with psychiatry’s?   •     Can

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 16 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   TOWARD A DEPRAVITY STANDARD FOR CRIMINAL SENTENCING The Depravity Standard research, which I initiated in 1998 (www.depravity scale.org) and is supported by the Forensic Panel, has embarked on a series of protocols designed to create a standardized methodology for distinguishing the worst of crimes in any given category. The research aimed to identify features that would distinguish crimes in which those items were present as depraved, heinous, and the worst of the worst.  

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 15 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors     A Framework for Defining the Worst of Crimes Many of the aggravators noted denote behavior that distinguishes a particularly unusual criminal at work. As such, perpetrators who meet such aggravators earn membership in a narrowed class of defendants. Other aggravators, however, speak more to the goals of society than the exceptional nature of the crime. A police officer is armed, for example, and engages with criminals and in hazardous duty. Society has an interest in protecting law enforcement. Yet when a perpetrator kills a police officer in attempting to escape, that clearly does not reflect an unusual criminal mentality or ensure that such a crime was anything more than a spontaneous, if dramatic, choice. In other words, some aggravators, such as killing in

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 14 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   By now, we have all come to appreciate the role of the press in setting the tone for a case through its coverage and interest. The theater of competitive news coverage creates the risk of a person, not the person’s acts, as the issue. High-profile cases particularly fuel such dynamics for distortion. Finally, consideration of the worst of crimes most frequently attaches itself to murder. Yet there are kidnappings that distinguish themselves as the worst of their ilk, just as there are robberies or even property crimes that may be particularly heinous relative to other property crimes. Legislatures have thus codified that evil crimes exist. But without guidance, jurors struggle to distinguish qualities of a heinous crime. The inspiration for establishing standar

  Crime Classification Manual Part I Chapter 4 13 A STANDARD SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING AND CLASSIFYING VIOLENT CRIMES SECOND EDITION John E. Douglas, Ann W. Burgess, Allen G. Burgess, and Robert K. Ressler, Editors   Ambiguity is present even in some killings of children. Was the small victim nevertheless a witness to another crime and eliminated for crime concealment, as opposed to the handiwork of a predator victimizing a child by design? A lack of clarification to law enforcement and defense investigators as to what evidence is relevant to depravity means that much less factual information about a crime is available to a jury. Without guidance, the jury may be forced to make an uninformed decision, not only for lack of definition but for lack of evidence demonstrating or refuting depraved intents, actions, victimology, or attitudes. With no guidance, as the U.S. Supreme Court has noted, distinguishing the worst of crimes is arbitrary. Arguments readily play to the fact finder