A Study on the Representation of Serial Killers in Popular Media University of Denver Carolyn Angiollo Introduction Serial killers are not a new concept, but they are a new phenomenon. Serial killers first began to appear in literature and movies, and now they are a staple of network television. One of the most popular television shows regarding serial killers is CBS’s Criminal Minds. This particular show has brought much attention to serial killers, but it does not necessarily do justice to the very genuine reality that exists. Serial killers are undoubtedly not always accurately represented, yet many people do not realize that the information they are receiving is not completely true. This leads to many misconceptions and inaccurate knowledge about the reality that is the serial killer. Furthermore, there has been a growing desire to learn more about the miniscule percentage of our population that falls under the category of “serial killer”. This research will prove that misrepresentation is a problem and it will also begin to explore the idea that this desire is motivated by fear of a very real monster. Background The Federal Bureau of Investigation defines serial murder as “The unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender(s), in separate events,” (Morton). Serial killers can be further grouped as organized (distinct and meticulous plan, kills quickly and efficiently, and does not typically mutilate or overkill the body) or disorganized (little planning for the crime, tends to be more violent, and often mutilates or dismembers the body) (Aggarwall, Bhullar, & Sharma p. 22). Further classification of the serial killer can be found under the labels of visionary, missionoriented, hedonistic, control-oriented, or predator (Simmons p. 348). Jack the Ripper is one of the best-known serial killers of all time. He murdered 6 prostitutes in 1888 in Whitechapel, England by slitting their throats and mutilating their bodies.
He was never identified (Brown, Keppel, Weis, &Welch p.19). David Berkowitz is also a very well known serial killer from American shores. He is better known as the Son of Sam and he shot 6 people with a .44 caliber gun in New York City in 1976 (Newton p. 15). The BTK Killer, Dennis Rader, killed 10 people over 31 years beginning in 1974 in Wichita, Kansas (Mariotte p. 208). These killers are particularly important to this research because they are theoretically among the best known killers in history.
David Berkowitz, the Son of Sam.
Bind Torture Kill crime scene photo. www.examiner.com
www.deathmerchant.net
Society is becoming more and more fascinated by serial killers, largely in part due to their fame within popular culture. The industry of murderabilia is growing larger, as evidenced by the retail site titled Serial Killer Calendar: Murder, Madness, and Merchandise, where consumers can purchase letters, videos, articles, artwork and more about their favorite serial killers. (Gilks). This fascination is seen on many platforms and the term serial killer has even been described as a “catchphrase” (Aggarwal, Bhullar, & Sharma p. 21) and “popcorn entertainment” (Camilleri). Another example of serial killer based merchandise can be seen in Dennis Rader’s latest endeavor. He will be corresponding with a crime writer named Katherine Ramsland to create a book about his life. “I can never replace their loved ones, the books or movies is the only way to help them,” he said (Dodd). This same thing is seen in the Criminal Minds episode titled “Zoe’s Reprise”. After apprehending the serial killer, the killer offers Agent Rossi a business deal: “You can come interview me for one of your books if you want,” (Davis). Ramsland gives a brief description of this episode in her novel The Forensic Psychology of Criminal Minds: “The episode “Zoe’s Reprise” addresses this cultural phenomenon in several ways…. Rossi wonders aloud whether his books are doing more harm than good,” (Ramsland p. 198). There is a delicate balance between media representation being helpful and detrimental. The media has provided an outlet for serial killers to become famous and this feeds society’s fascination. The media has also become a way for serial killers to become relevant and remain relevant. Despite the fact that serial killers fascinate society, they are still not completely understood. More often than not, the wrong ideas about serial killers are believed. Dr. Scott Bonn, author of Why We Love Serial Killers, makes it clear that most killers are not evil geniuses and they do not usually want to be captured (Camilleri). Most serial killers will also plan their
crimes to some degree rather than just striking out of the blue. Completely opportunistic kills are rare (Haggerty & Ellerbrok p. 7). A review on Criminal Minds from the New York Times titled “On the Case, a Crack Team of Tic-Ridden F.B.I. Agents” states, “As the popular culture fascination with serial killers has grown, audiences have learned to pick up telltale signs: friendlessness, shiftiness, and cruelty to animals at a young age”. However, these “signs” are not deal making or deal breaking. The idea that all serial killers exhibit these signs is a gross misconception. A study performed by Sarah Scott McCready at the University of North Texas found great discrepancies between actual serial killers statistics and what was portrayed in 50 of the most popular serial killer movies. For example, she found that in movies 98% of serial killers are white but in reality only 73% more. 73% is much more analogous to the actual population demographic of the United States. Furthermore, in film 44% have a diagnosed mental condition but in actuality only 4% do (McCready). Most knowledge of serial killers that is held by the average American comes from film and television, this means that the average American is misinformed. Ted Bundy also brought up the stereotype when he was speaking with James Dobson the day before he was executed. “I wasn’t a pervert in the sense that people look at someone and say, ‘I know there’s something wrong with him.’ I was a normal person,” (Dobson). The typical stereotype that is seen in the media is simply not always true, as evidenced by the accounts of experts and killers. While it is based in truth, the umbrella stereotype does not account for all serial killers all of the time. With this fascination and misrepresentation comes the quest for a reason to explain the serial killer. Dr. Bonn says serial killers make people “question human nature” which in turn leads to the internal questioning of “How can someone do this? Am I capable of such darkness?”
(Slifer). In the same CBS News article, Ramsland describes the desire for people to know “what makes a person like this?” (Slifer). These questions help to drive the search for an explanation. Debate surrounds the ideas of nature and nurture. A common belief, highlighted by Loyola University of Chicago psychology professor Arthur Lurigio, is that a genetic factor is present but a trigger is usually activated in childhood through trauma (Slifer). Dr. Bonn agrees with this theory, stating that there is a combination of nature and nurture with a strong genetic predisposition (Camilleri). Still, there are real life examples where it is doubtful if either of these factors played a significant role. In Ted Bundy’s final interview, he praises his family and his upbringing. He partially attributes his reason for murdering to viewing a large amount of violent pornography (Dobson). This is not nature or nurture, but an outside influence brought on by society. Dennis Rader also tried to justify his actions when he told Dateline NBC’s Edie Magnus “I was possessed by demons, I was dropped on my head as a kid…I can’t stop” (Magnus). Rader’s reasoning provides both nature and nurture components. Whatever the situation and whoever the killer, real or fictional, there will always be some reasoning provided to explain the actions. This is also seen in “Zoe’s Reprise” when the killer tells Agent Rossi “The one thing you always ask is the one thing I don’t understand: why? I have no idea why…. It’s all I think about,” (Davis). Despite the fact that the killer gives no reason to justify his actions, the concept of there being a “why” is still brought up. This search for a reason is deeply present in reality and in media culture. Methods To further explore these ideas discussed above, I conducted my own research that consisted of surveys, observations, and interviews. I conducted my survey first (Appendix A). The questions consisted of knowledge of serial killers’ identities, first exposure to serial killers,
and beliefs about serial killers’ traits. These questions were necessary because I needed to determine how many serial killers people knew to further analyze their opinions of serial killers. I included both the actual nicknames and nicknames for the serial killer identification portion of the survey to determine the extent of how much people really know about these killers. The question regarding first exposure was included so I could determine how many people first encountered serial killers because of popular media. I distributed 20 surveys to students studying at the Science and Engineering Help Center in Anderson Academic Commons. I distributed 10 surveys to peers that live on floor 7 North of Centennial Towers. The remaining 30 surveys were distributed to students in the Centennial Halls dining hall. 60 surveys were collected. While distributing the surveys, I did not provide any context other than asking, “Will you please take this survey for my writing class?”. If questions were raised asking for more details about a particular question on the survey, I refused to provide any extra context. In terms of observations, I showed 6 friends (3 girls, 3 boys) the episode of Criminal Minds “Zoe’s Reprise”. I chose this episode because it is about a serial killer that is influenced by books to kill people in the ways of other famous killers (Jack the Ripper, Son of Sam, BTK, etc.). He is a serial killer studying serial killers. He is also the stereotypical white, awkward, mid-20s, male that is commonly pictured when thinking of a serial killer. While viewing this 45-minute episode, I recorded any verbal comments that were made along with some body language and noises (ie. gasps).
Eric Olson, serial killer from Criminal Minds “Zoe’s Reprise”.www.criminalminds.wikia.com For my interviews, I interviewed two professors from the University of Denver and a crime writer from Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The professors I chose are part of the psychology department: one teaches victimology (Appendix B) and the other teaches criminology (Appendix C). I chose these professors because they have knowledge of crime and society from classes they have taken and classes they have taught. The questions I asked these professors included: “Where was your first exposure to serial killers? What are your opinions on television shows like Criminal Minds and their representations of serial killers? Do you think studying serial killers actually helps us prevent serial murder? Why do you think people want to study serial killers so badly? In your opinion, is there always a cause for serial murder and what are the most common factors? Are serial killers monsters?”. For the purpose of this interview, a monster was defined as
“someone or something that inspires fear due to a certain degree of mysteriousness and the nature of being unknown�. I chose to interview crime writer and investigative reporter Gina Barton (Appendix D) because she has reported on serial killers (among other crimes) for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and she has also published a true crime novel titled Fatal Identity. I anticipated that she would bring the media’s perspective on representation with some insight on how the industry has changed over time. I asked her the same questions I asked the University of Denver professors. This interview was performed over the phone.
Fatal Identity by Gina Barton.
www.amazon.com
In all of this primary research, I was looking for information about what aspects of serial killers have been misrepresented and some reasons why. Furthermore, particularly with the
interviews, I was looking for information on the greater implications of this misrepresentation and how it alters society.
Results From my primary research, I found that participants know significantly less than I expected about serial killers’ identities, most people learned of serial killers from television as expected, misconceptions about serial killers are very present, and overall, the presence of serial killers in the mass popular media has led to a misplaced fear. The survey was the first component of my research (Appendix A). The first section simply asked if the participant had heard of the 10 serial killers listed. Nearly everyone had heard of Jack the Ripper. The next most well known killer was Ted Bundy. Something very intriguing about this section is that many people recognized the nicknames of the serial killer (i.e. BTK Killer), but did not recognize the real name of the serial killer (i.e. Dennis Rader). Absolutely no one recognized the name Altemio Sanchez. The numbers from this section are displayed in the table below. Jack the Son of Dennis David The Ripper Sam Rader Berkowitz Campus Killer
BTK Ted Butcher of Killer Bundy Kingsbury Run
Altemio Sanchez
The Bike Path Killer 52 20 3 8 14 26 40 4 0 10 Table 1.1: Results from section 1 of Serial Killer Survey. Each number represents the number of people (out of 60) that have heard of the respective serial killer. The next section of the survey asked about where people first encountered serial killers. In the case of movies and television, it was asked which program (if remembered). This provided more specific information about the source of information. The common sources included: the news (2), Black Butler (2), Law & Order (2), South Park (2), CSI (2), The Fall (2), The Silence
of the Lambs (2), The Zodiac Killer (2), Friday the 13 (2), and Criminal Minds (6). More th
information is given in the table below. TV Movies Book Family Friend School Other 36 12 4 4 0 0 2 Table 1.2: Results from section two of the Serial Killer Survey. Each number represents the source’s frequency (out of 58) as an answer. Each participant gave one response. Two responses were not collected. The final section of the survey presented some true or false questions about the nature of killers. The questions and results of this section are shown below. Most serial killers have a mental disorder.
44
Most serial killers had a terrible childhood.
28
Most serial killers are geniuses. 20 Most serial killers are sexually perverted. 16 Most serial killers are male. 44 Studying serial killers helps us to prevent serial murder. 36 The media represents serial killers truthfully. 10 Serial killers feel bad about their actions. 10 Serial killers want to be caught by the police. 24 Serial killers scare you. 34 Table 1.3: Results from section three of the Serial Killer Survey. The numbers represent the number of participants (out of 60) that circled “true”. In regards of the observation portion of my research, there were many comments made but little was gathered from body language. Body language was simply traditional and nothing jumped out to me as being particularly intriguing. When the first murder occurred, 2 of the girls and 1 of the boys gasped. Person B said, “This scares me so much because this is real life. This could happen to me.” She then added, “He’s attractive. That’s terrifying.” As information was being discovered about the killer, they were able to pull a DNA match instantly. Person C commented on the realism of this by saying, “MATCH FOUND. That’s so unrealistic!” Person C
has a fear of strangulation so as the killer began to murder by strangulation Person C became frightened. Person C was the most vocal of the viewers. She also commented on the treatment of the victim when the FBI agents made the killer’s girlfriend discuss their sex life: “That’s real nice victim treatment,” she said. At the conclusion of the episode, Person C referred to the killer as a “sadistic bastard”. The overall feeling after the episode was excitement, but fear over the realistic nature of the show and the possibility of a similar fate. The final component of my research was the interviews. The first interview was done with University of Denver victimology professor Jessica Mardock. Professor Mardock had great insight about the entertainment and fear factor of serial killers. In regards to them being entertaining, she said, “Crime and gore and blood and all of that stuff sells. The media uses that because they can sell the show. There’s a norm in society that violence is okay and that violence is entertaining and that it might be enjoyable or funny. I think that says that we have a large section of our population that grew up around violence so they don’t see it as out of the ordinary. Or it says that there is a section of the population that thinks it is okay to entertain at the risk of the population that experiences the violence. The media uses it because society likes to see it.” She also said, “People want to study [serial murder] because it is hard for us to understand. It’s harder to understand because it’s not like a gang member that grew up around it.” When asked if serial killers can be considered monsters, Mardock said, “I would say that serial killers still fit the definition of being abnormal and unknown, but perhaps the media and society have attempted to tame them and reduce fear. They still instill fear in people. Yet, the media has tamed them to use them in TV shows so that people will watch, because if they are too scary people wouldn’t watch.”
The next interview was done with University of Denver criminology professor Katie Dingeman-Cerda. Dingeman-Cerda gave expert insight into the negativity effects of media sensationalism of serial killers. “Because [serial murder] is in the media so much we think it is more common that it actually is. It isn’t even just with serial killers. When you think about child abductions and the stuff surrounding them, the vast majority are not random strangers. The media around child abductions and serial killers makes it more prevalent. It would be more beneficial to focus on the crimes that are around not in a sensationalist way, just a way to accurately represent and show what is really happening. I get concerned about the fear established by this because they do not accurately represent the fears of society problems. It might be here that the media is the monster. It leads us in the wrong directions. The media is there to entertain but also to keep themselves alive; they are going to do whatever they can do to attract attention. Their goal is not to reflect society like the social scientist’s goals are. It isn’t necessarily intentional but we must be critical,” she said. The final interview was done with true crime writer and investigative reporter, Gina Barton. Barton illuminated the differences between reality and what is commonly seen in the media. In regards to popular media’s inaccuracy, she said, “I think that anytime you look at crime drama, they play up certain things to make it more interesting to the public. Some of it is accurate, some of it starts with something real that gets dramatized to make it more interesting. For example, DNA is a technique used to catch criminals but DNA isn’t present at every crime scene or you can’t find a match. They take a nugget of fact and dramatize it. It makes it seem realistic but isn’t exactly accurate.” Barton also discussed the real life impact of false expectations: “It can be hurtful in the court room. I have covered a lot of trials and a lot of people will say, ‘This isn’t like TV, there isn’t DNA.’ People will make assumptions about actual crimes,
especially the jury. If they don’t see forensic evidence sometimes they won’t believe it.” In terms of the monstrosity and fear factor of serial killers, Barton said, “I think that maybe the large amount of stories and personifications of serial killers out there has made them scarier, but in some ways knowledge is power. I think the fear of serial killers has stayed the same. I don’t think most people are even scared of serial killers.” Discussion One of the most important points confirmed by this research is that people do not know as much about serial killers as expected. Based on the massive popularity of Criminal Minds and other similar crime shows, one could assume that the body of serial killer knowledge would be much more substantial. Yet, based on the survey results, the gathered information regarding the public’s knowledge of the reality of serial killers is quite limited. Evidence of this can be seen in the numbers from section 1 of the Serial Killer Survey. In 4 cases, both the name and nickname of the same person were listed. When examining this data, it is clear that society is more used to the sensationalized killer and not the real person. First of all, 33% of participants said they knew the Son of Sam, but only 13% said they knew David Berkowitz. This is particularly interesting because these are just two different ways to refer to the same man. Yet, the media particularly uses the nickname far more frequently than Berkowitz. Likewise, 43% of participants recognized BTK, but only 5% reported knowing Dennis Rader. Fewer people recognized this next killer, but still 17% recognized the Bike Path Killer while no one recognized his real name, Altemio Sanchez. The only instance of the reverse of this trend being seen is in Ted Bundy. 67% knew the name Ted Bundy but only 23% recognized the Campus Killer. I attribute this to the fact that the Campus Killer is not a widely used name. In fact, until beginning my research I was unaware that Bundy was referred to as such for a period
of time. This overall trend of nicknames being more recognized than real names shows that the knowledge held by the public is very limited. These nicknames are more widely used by the media, especially in crime shows. As McCready explains in her thesis, “The surging nicknames associated with serial killers bring another level of enjoyment to not only the fanatics, but to the serial killers themselves,” (McCready p. 40). The presence of nicknames glorifies and sensationalizes the serial killer even further. Serial killers themselves are often times responsible for their nickname, because they will receive more attention that way. Jack the Ripper, BTK, and Son of Sam all named themselves before these names were picked up by the media. Furthermore, nicknames are far more present, even in quantity. For example, in “Zoe’s Reprise”, Rader, Berkowitz, and Sanchez are all referred to by their respective nicknames multiple times, while their real names are only mentioned once. If the knowledge of the killers and their crimes existed beyond the media and expanded into true research, the real names would be better known and since they are not, this proves a lack of information. It is stated in “The Social Study of Serial Killers” that “serial killers have become an inescapable point of reference in movies, television, fiction novels…this global system of mass media has made many citizens intimately familiar with the dynamics of serial killing,” (Haggerty & Ellerbrok p. 6). It is incredibly true that the mass media referenced in this study is the main source of knowledge of serial killers for most people. This was further proven by my own research. 90% of the people surveyed first encountered serial killers through a form of mass media identified by Haggerty and Ellerbrok: 62% from television, 21% from movies, and 7% from novels. There is a huge imbalance in the source of knowledge when it comes to learning about serial murder. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but when the misconceptions are uncovered, it becomes clear that there is a correlation between the beliefs and source.
Section 3 of the Serial Killer Survey shed some light on exactly what people believe in regards to the nature of serial killers. In his interview on HuffPost Live, Dr. Scott Bonn directly addressed many of these commonly held misconceptions. He addressed serial killers with mental disorders by saying, “Many of them are highly functioning individuals,” (Camilleri). Another study found that only 4% of serial killers have a diagnosed mental disorder (McCready). Yet, 73% of people surveyed believed that most serial killers have a mental disorder. For the remaining statistics, the misconception was not a majority. Regardless, a significant portion of participants held these beliefs which is concerning. Anyway, another misconception is held by participants in regards to the intelligence of serial killers. 33% believed that most serial killers are evil geniuses. The evil genius serial killer is a stereotype that was largely created by the character of Hannibal Lecter from The Silence of the Lambs. Dr. Bonn dispels this misconception when he states, “Serial killers are typically of average intelligence,” (Camilleri). The idea that serial killers are smarter than the rest of society is simply not true. They are just as smart as any given person, because they are any given person. There is nothing about a serial killer that makes them smarter, and nothing about a smart person that makes them more likely to kill. Another surprising misconception was seen in the question of whether or not serial killers want to be caught. This is occasionally the case, as seen in Bill Heirens (The Lipstick Killer), but more often than not “most of them do not want to be caught” (Camilleri). In the survey, 40% believed that serial killers do want to be caught. These statistics gathered from my survey have clearly proven several things. First of all, the public’s knowledge of individual killers is much more limited than expected based upon the discrepancies in responses between nickname and real name. Secondly, the incredible majority of participants first learned about serial killers from a popular mass media source; television was
the most common. Finally, significant portions of the participants held many common misconceptions about the reality of serial killers that have been disproven by experts in the field. The survey made it clear that serial killers are not understood accurately and this is largely due to the media. The other two components of my research dealt largely with the fascination factor of serial killers and the societal implications that follow. Based on my observations from showing the episode “Zoe’s Reprise” to a group of 6 college students, it is clear that people are amused, but also frightened by serial killers. The gasps and tense body language of the viewers shows the shock factor that the show brought. Yet, the verbal cues showed a great fascination. While some participants voiced their fears, all were still very intrigued by the show. My interview subjects also touched upon other forms of misconception. Dingeman-Cerda discussed the fact that serial murder is so rare, but Barton discussed a misconception in the sense of dramatization by television shows. The real prosecution process is not as simple or straightforward as it is made out to be. “Zoe’s Reprise” makes it seem like finding a serial killer and evidence to convict is so straightforward. Person C in my observations called out this aspect of the television episode as well. The real process is not as simple as the media always portrays it. From my interviews, some of this fascination was illuminated. People are attracted to serial killers because they are different and they are extreme. As Dr. Bonn said, “There is a compelling nature to things that are rare, exotic, and deadly,” (Camillieri). What Mardock described fits hand in hand with Dr. Bonn’s research. She attributed the fascination to an interest in violence and the fact that the media uses what it can sell, which includes violence. She also discussed how the unknown component of serial killers contributes to fascination, which fits my
hypothesis. A major reason we care to research serial killers so much is because we desperately want to understand the unknown. A common thread amongst all of the interviews was the idea of fear. Mardock believes that the media’s vast incorporation of serial killers has lead to an incredible decrease in fear, which also fits with my hypothesis. I believe that the huge exposure to serial killers has led to an acceptance of them, which in turn has bred a massive fascination that is only worsened by the lack of real knowledge. This has been a common thread that I have noticed throughout my research, both primary and secondary. Dingeman-Cerda discussed how the presence of serial killers in network television has led to an unrealistic fear. Serial murder is very rare, but we still pay it so much attention. This contributes to the unnecessary fear of serial killers. It is clear that there is a fear of serial killers based on both my observations and also 57% of survey participants said they were scared of serial killers. However, according to Dingeman-Cerda this fear is misplaced onto something so unlikely that it becomes harmful. Mardock made similar comments, stating that: “the incidents are so small that your likelihood of being a victim of a serial murder is very, very small.” The fact that serial murder is so rare, but so many people are afraid of them negatively impacts society because attention is being paid where it does not belong. Furthermore, this fear is irrational and too much time is being spent on something that is incredibly unlikely to happen. Not only do serial killers in popular media create an unrealistic fear, they also create very high expectations of the criminal justice system. Barton has worked very close in the system and she discussed how the media has damaged the incarceration process. The Criminal Minds review in The New York Times mentions how “a multicultural band of specialists can collar a killer in 44 minutes flat.” This leads to very unrealistic expectation so of how quickly a criminal can be
captured. Barton specifically discussed the prevalence of forensic evidence. Many television shows will catch a criminal partially due to a type of concrete forensic evidence. In the real world, this is not always possible and the expectation that this evidence will be present has negatively affected the decisions made by juries. Barton believes that the volume of stories about serial killers has made them more prevalent but also increased knowledge of serial killers. This leads to a “draw” of sorts, implying that the fear of serial killers has remained constant over time. Yet, he increased presence is something concerning to Dingeman-Cerda. “[The media] does not accurately represent the fears of society’s problems. It might be here that the media is the monster. It leads us in the wrong directions.” It is clear that the media affects our ideas about serial killers and the system surrounding them. It has been suggested, “a possible way to reduce serial killing is to reduce the media coverage and high profile visibility of these gruesome cases,” (Simons p. 354). While the presence of serial killers has increased knowledge, the fear is still present. Some desensitization has definitely occurred, but in the past people did not know serial killers were something to be scared of. The increased presence has made it clear that serial killers are something to fear. I venture to say that all of my interview subjects would be in favor of reducing the media’s use of serial killers as a way to diminish the fear held by society. Limitations While this research was productive, there were some limitations. In terms of the survey, the sample size was very limited and the demographics of the participants were very similar. All responses were from University of Denver undergraduate students. Results may have varied if older people or non-University students were interviewed. The observation sample size was also relatively small. For my interviews, I interviewed Barton because Dr. Scott Bonn never
responded to my emails. While Barton was extremely helpful, Dr. Bonn is an expert on serial killers so the research would have been amplified by his assistance. I have always been a huge fan of Criminal Minds and this show has inspired me to expand my own knowledge of serial killers far beyond the average person’s. Since I feel so passionately about this topic, there was definitely bias about what I studied because not all of the information was particularly new to me. Conclusion Several important things were learned from this research. This research has proven that factual knowledge of serial killers is very limited, largely due to the media. Due to the newfound presence of serial killers in the media, it was expected that many people would have extensive knowledge about serial killers. The reality is that the factual knowledge on this topic is quite limited. The vast majority of people first encountered serial killers through mass media, specifically television. Also, many misconceptions are held about the nature of serial killers particularly their mental capabilities. It became clear that the fear of serial killers is very much present, qualifying them as monsters. Though this fear is present, it is considered irrational because the number of serial killers is so small. Additionally, this fear has a negative impact on society. Further research should explore this concept of fear. I imagine that the fear of serial killers has increased over time due to increased exposure. Despite the relative taming of the serial killer by the media in order to use them in television, the sheer volume of exposure has expanded therefore increasing the volume of fear. Another interesting concept is the idea that because we are scared of serial killers, the desire to study them is so strong because if we find a way to explain them then they will no longer have the power or mystery that currently exists.
Examining the ideas of why society desires to understand the criminal mind would be some very interesting and beneficial research.
Appendix A-Serial Killer Survey
By completing the following questions, you are also granting consent for this information to be used as part of a research project that I am completing for a course at the University of Denver. Your participation is completely voluntary. The information you provide may be used in a project and may be published online and or/in print, but your identity will anonymous. While profile information you volunteer in this survey may be in my writing project (i.e. your age, sex, class standing, etc.), your name and identity will NOT be used or reported. If at any time you do not want to answer a question, or do not want to complete the questionnaire, you do not have to.
Please mark yes for every name/title you recognize and no for every name/title you do not recognize. Have you heard of‌ Jack the Ripper? Son of Sam? Dennis Rader? David Berkowitz? The Campus Killer? BTK Killer? Ted Bundy? Butcher of Kingsbury Row? Altemio Sanchez? The Bike Path Killer?
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No No No No No No No No No No
Where was your first exposure to serial killers? (circle) TV Movies Book Family member Friend School Other List the title (TV/movie/book/other) if you remember:__________________________________ Select true or false for each following statement: Most serial killers have a mental disorder. Most serial killers had a terrible childhood. Most serial killers are geniuses. Most serial killers are sexually perverted. Most serial killers are males. Studying serial killers helps us prevent serial murder. The media represents serial killers truthfully. Serial killers feel bad about their actions. Serial killers want to be caught by the police. Serial killers scare you.
True True True True True True True True True True
Appendix B-Mardock Interview Transcript
False False False False. False False False False False False
Q: Where was your first exposure to serial killers? A: My first exposure to serial killers was in either undergrad or grad school when I took a class in criminology and we talked a little about them. There were less crime shows when I was younger. Q: Do you have a “favorite”? A: I do not have a favorite. I think that the concept is very interesting because of the theoretical implications for that particular type of crime. I find it interesting why people do things the way they do. That gets at more biological and psychological reasons rather than environmental and social aspects. There’s usually at least one biology/psychology factor. Q: What are your opinions on television shows like Dexter and Criminal Minds and their representations of serial killers? A: I think that the shows definitely exist for entertainment. Crime and gore and blood and all of that stuff sells. The media uses that because they can sell the show. The media uses that because they find it entertaining. That’s why even our news is talking more about violent crime. There’s a norm in society that violence is okay and that violence is entertaining and that it might enjoyable or funny. I think that says that we have a large section of our population that grew up around violence so they don’t see it as out of the ordinary. Or it says that there is a section of the population that thinks it is okay to entertain at the risk of the population that experiences the violence. The media uses it because society likes to see it. Q: Do you think studying serial killers actually helps us prevent serial murder? A: In order to take steps in the direction of prevention, we need to attempt to understand why it occurs. We need to know why in order to put preventive steps into place. Q: Why do you think people want to study serial killers so badly? A: I think that one it’s a single person committing multiple events so that gives multiple instances for you to understand how that mind works. More importantly, people want to study it because it is hard for us to understand. It’s harder to understand because it’s not like a gang member that grew up around it. Q: In your opinion, is there always a cause for serial murder and what are the most common ones? A: I have not done specific research into serial killers, but I would say that it is going to be some sort of mental disorder or mental defect such as psychosis or schizophrenia. Or it could be someone who did not develop empathy or sympathy. There usually isn’t one specific factor, but a combination of multiple factors. Some how controls didn’t have any effect. Perhaps there were no family members to prevent them from acting out or helping them control. I would say that in crime shows, they are attempting to portray one possible factor. Crime is often linked back to our developmental years. Perhaps there was some sort of abuse or biological factor like poor nutrition or exposure to toxins; these things could lead to developmentally participation in crime.
Q: Are serial killers monsters?
A: I would say that serial killers still fit the definition (abnormal and unknown). Perhaps the media and society have attempted to tame them and reduce fear. When you look at instances of people being serial killers now I definitely think they are still considered monsters, because they still insight fear in people. The media has tamed them to use them in TV shows so that people will watch. If they were too scary people wouldn’t watch. Q: Should we be scared of them? A: I do not think that we should be more scared of serial killers because the incidents are so small that your likelihood of being a victim of a serial murder is very, very small.
Appendix C-Dingeman-Cerda Interview Transcript
Q: Do you think studying serial killers actually helps us prevent serial murder? A: I think that the scientific endeavor can give us a lot of information about why people commit crime. Without understanding the theories surrounding crime, I can’t imagine that it’s possible for us to understand why they do it. It might need to be helped with a more neuroscience perspective. You get some sort of semblance to why people commit crime and form theories around it to help prevention. This could lead to a smaller quantity of violent crime occurring. Q: Why do you think people want to study serial killers so badly? A: Sensationalization in the media. It’s such a mystery and it is presented as a mystery to us in the media. It is something we just have a desire to understand. A lot of students and people who think about criminology, one of the things that comes to mind is violent and repetitive crimes and it comes from our culture. Q: In your opinion, is there always a cause for serial murder and what are the most common ones? A: I think it is a combination of factors. I look at society to see what is channeling these behaviors. Clearly psychosocial factors are important, but rationality is a factor too. In the media they usually portray killers as having mental disorders like depression and neurosis and even schizophrenia. Q: Are serial killers monsters? A: I think it is the inverse. Because it is in the media so much we think it is more common that it actually is. It isn’t just serial killers. When you think about child abductions and the stuff surrounding them, the vast majority are not random strangers. The media around child abductions and serial killers makes it more prevalent. It would be more beneficial to focus on the crimes that are around not in a sensationalist way, just a way to accurately represent and show what is really around. Emil Durkheim is one of the founders of sociology. He talks about it having a positive impact; by punishing a criminal it reestablishes our societal values. It shows that it isn’t acceptable behavior but I get concerned about the fear established by this because they do not accurately represent the fears of society problems. It might be here that the media is the monster. It leads us in the wrong directions. The media is there to entertain but also to keep themselves alive; they are going to do whatever they can do to attract attention. Their goal is not to reflect society like the social scientist’s goals are. It isn’t necessarily intentional but we must be critical.
Appendix D-Barton Interview Transcript
Q: When investigating a crime, what is your process and how do you insure accurate information? A: One of the first things that we try to do is to get primary sources, such as documents like police notes so it’s as true as the police know it to be. I attend as many court hearings as possible. I went to the entire trial and got a transcript of the trial so that I’m able to review the actual words used. The other thing you try to do is talk to as many people involved as possible. I was talking to the police, the prosecutors, the wife, the killer, the ex, his ex-fiancé, his mother; you want to talk to as many people as possible. The only thing that can be trusted as accurate is where every source says the same thing. Q: Can you tell me about the serial killer case you covered for the Sentinel? A: The serial killer was named Walter Ellis; he was a serial killer in Milwaukee. He acted since the 70s and he was caught through DNA. He sexually assaulted women and killed them. He was African American; his victims were mostly black (7 of 8) prostitutes. Nobody put all of the pieces together until DNA and then they finally realized that his DNA was all the same, but they couldn’t link it to Ellis because he gave another person his ID and someone else gave him his ID. Q: Was this story well received? A: This one was kind of a big deal. People in my newsroom have written about Dahmer. It was really well received because we were able to write a story that showed “Hey finally he’s caught and here’s the police work” and people liked that part. There was an outrage factor as well because we put the pieces together and made them keep investigating this. The other thing that happened was that there were 2 men in prison for killing these women and those 2 guys got out of prison. Q: What are your opinions on television shows like Dexter and Criminal Minds and their representations of serial killers? A: I think that anytime you do a crime drama, they play up certain things to make it more interesting to the public. Some of it is accurate, some of it starts with something real that gets dramatized to make it more interesting. For example, DNA is a technique used to catch criminals but DNA isn’t present at every crime scene. Sometimes when it is it can take 6 or 8 or 10 months. Sometimes you can’t find a match. In a TV show, they find DNA and match it in 4 or 5 minutes. They take a nugget of fact and dramatize it. It makes it seem realistic but isn’t exactly accurate. Q: Are these shows good or bad for society? A: I think shows like Law & Order are more problematic because they say it’s based on actual events. If you have a fictional show that everyone knows is fiction, then I hope that people would know that it wasn’t 100% accurate and maybe it could be beneficial because it could help people want to do research on this type of thing. It goes both ways. It can be hurtful in the courtroom. I have covered a lot of trials and a lot of people will say, “This isn’t like TV, there isn’t DNA”. People will make assumptions about actual crimes, especially the jury. If they don’t see forensic evidence sometimes they won’t believe it. Q: Do you think studying serial killers actually helps us prevent serial murder?
A: I was just writing the other day about Richard Walter; he’s one of the guys that invented profiling. Now he is part of the VIDOQ society. He used to work in corrections in Michigan. He spent hours and hours and hours studying this stuff, kind of like Jodie Foster in Silence of the Lambs. By doing all of that research and study, he was able to come up with us. I don’t think interviewing and studying serial killers will stop them from doing what they do. It won’t help you raise your kids to not be killers. But studying them will help the ones that exist be caught faster. So maybe they’ll be caught after they kill 3 instead of 30. Q: Why do you think people want to study serial killers so badly? A: I would basically say because it’s interesting. I think that an anomaly is interesting. It can be attributed to the fact that from the time we are children that we are fascinated by horror and in horrifying things. I think the reason for a lot of people is a natural curiosity. We are used to knowing and talking to people who think kind of like us. What has motivated me is I want to know what makes peoples minds work and why some people would do things that I wouldn’t. I think the prevention aspect motivates some people too. If it’s a nature versus nurture, it’s interesting to people to figure out how much is what. If you have a mental illness or really great parents, does that make the difference? Q: In your opinion, is there always a cause for serial murder and what are the most common ones? A: This is a problem that the courts have too. Just having a mental illness doesn’t make someone commit crime. Most people with mental illnesses don’t. If you have a mental illness, it doesn’t mean that you wouldn’t have committed that crime anyway. That’s the million-dollar question. I think that if some of the causes were environmental then it would be good to figure that out and lessen the impact of some of these things. If you’re abused as a child, that makes you more likely to be abusive as an adult. Things like that could be causes. Those could be things to focus on as part of prevention. Q: Are serial killers monsters? A: I think that maybe the large amount of stories and personifications of serial killers out there has made them scarier. In some ways knowledge is power. I think they have stayed the same. Back in the jack the ripper days, people had no information about him at all. But now, if someone is out there you can get the information. I don’t think most people are even scared of serial killers anymore. I think there are pros and cons.
Works Cited Aggarwal, K. K., D. S. Bhullar, and Manisha Sharma. "A Case Study of Serial Killers." Medico Legal 10.1 (2010): 21-23. EBSCO. Web. 25 Apr. 2015. Bonn, Scott A. "Criminology Expert on Why We Love Serial Killers." Interview by Ricky Camilleri. Huff Post Live. Huffington Post, 31 Oct. 2014. Web. 24 Apr. 2015. Bundy, Theodore. "Serial Killer Ted Bundy Final Interview Only Hourse Before Execution." Interview by James Dobson. YouTube. N.p., 09 April. 2015. Web. 24 Apr. 2015. Davis, Jeff. "Zoe's Reprise." Criminal Minds. CBS. New York City, New York, 18 Feb. 2009. Television. Dodd, Johnny. "Serial Killer BTK Working on a Book to 'Pay My Debt' to Victims' Families." People. N.p., 09 Oct. 2014. Web. 24 Apr. 2015. Haggerty, Kevin, and Ariane Ellerbrok. "The Social Study of Serial Killers." Criminal Justice Matters 86.1 (2011): 6-7. Print. Keppel, Robert D., Joseph G. Weis, Katherine M. Brown, and Kristen Welch. "The Jack the Ripper Murders: A Modus Operandi and Signature Analysis of the 1888-1891 Whitechapel Murders." Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling 1.21 (2005): n. pag. EBSCO. Web. 24 Apr. 2015. Mariotte, Jeff. Criminal Minds: Sociopaths, Serial Killers, and Other Deviants. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2010. Print. McCready, Sarah S., B.A. Serial Killing Myths Versus Reality: A Content Analysis of Serial Killer Movies Made Between 1980 and 2001. Thesis. University of North Texas, 2002. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print. Newton, Michael. The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers. New York: Checkmark, 2000. Print. "On the Case, a Crack Team of Tic-Ridden F.B.I. Agents." Rev. of Criminal Minds. New York Times [New York City] 08 Sept. 2005: n. pag. Web. Rader, Dennis. "Exclusive Interview with BTK Killer." Interview by Edie Magnus. YouTube. Dateline NBC, 25 Oct. 2009. Web. 25 Apr. 2015. Ramsland, Katherine M. The Forensic Psychology of Criminal Minds. New York: Berkley Boulevard, 2010. Print. Serial Killer Calendar: Murder, Madness, and Merchandise. Ed. James Gilks and Kris Saunders. The Mad Hatter Design Studio, n.d. Web. 23 Apr. 2015. Simons, Cassandra L. "Antisocial Personality Disorder in Serial Killers: The Thrill of the Kill." The Justice Professional 14.4 (2001): 345-56. EBSCO. Web. 25 Apr. 2015.
Slifer, Stephanie. "Serial Killers: Rare in Real Life, Prominent in Pop Culture." CBS News: 48 Crimesider [New York City] 22 Oct. 2014: n. pag. Print. United States of America. Federal Bureau of Investigation. National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime. Serial Murder: Multi-Disciplinary Perspectives for Investigators. Ed. Robert J. Morton and Mark A. Hilts. N.p.: n.p., n.d. The Federal Bureau of Investigation. The United States of America Government, July 2008. Web. 24 Apr. 2015.