Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice

Volume 5(2), 2013, pp. 735–740, ISSN 1948-9137

THE PROFESSIONAL EXPERINCE OF A KILLER:

DEVOTION OR NEED?

ALEXANDRA NISTOR-LUNG [email protected] Al. I. Cuza Police Academy, Bucharest

MONA-LISA NEAGU [email protected] Al. I. Cuza Police Academy, Bucharest

ABSTRACT. Criminals… a subject much debated and yet exhaustible. Do we talk about pleasure or about dysfunction of the brain? Or is the pleasure a result of a brain disorder? We hear every day people talking about criminals increasingly hard to find or criminals who committed this kind of offenses before. Evidentely, it is a progress, a specialization for them in commiting this type of violence. But which are the reasons that make them feel the need to develop, specialize as criminals? Which is the relationship between the number of serial criminals and the number of criminals of opportunity, the differences between them, the reasons for which they commit such crimes? Some conclusions with respect to this matter are required because we live in a society where moral values have deteriorated greatly and offenses do not impress anyone anymore, becoming something normal in our daily life. Through this paper we intend to show how progressive is a serial killer in committing crimes and some views on the above questions. Depending on the answers, we will conclude if our society is dominated by criminals of opportunity or by serial killers and that because we live in a society increasingly immoral and psycho.

Keywords: criminals, criminal experience, pleasure, brain disorder, specialization

1. Introduction

A constant thoughout the passage of time is the concern of experts on serial killers’ behavior. This is an issue much discussed, analyzed, but without a universally accepted answer. In the past, there were criminological schools that have analyzed the causes of this gruesome and violent crime, each of these schools publishing their theories. According to their thinking, it was concluded that the decisive reasons of serial killers are likely psychological

– the brain dysfunction, or social – influenced by external factors, such as

735

economy. These old theories that form the basis for contemporary criminology were also analyzed by contemporary specialists, especially experts in neurosurgery. They concluded that serial killers suffer of abnormalities in the brain, so that would be a mistake to treat them otherwise that as some sick people who need treatment. However, they need to be punished for the offenses committed. Beyond the inconsistencies with respect to the reason which urges these individuals to commit such crimes, specialists were still able to reach a consensus on the definition of serial killer. The most comprehensive definition of serial killer, in terms of Laurent Montet,1 is that of Egger, associate professor of social justice at the University of Sangamon:2

“It is a crime series when one or more individuals (men, in most cases) commit a second murder and/ or other subsequent offense; there is no predetermination (no prior relationship between the author and the victim); it comes at a distinct moment and it is, apparently, unrelated to the initial murder and is genereally committed in a different geographical area. In addition, the handset is not material gain temptation, but seems to be a desire to exercise power over the victim. The latter may have symbolic value, are seen as insignificant and are, often, unable to defend them or to alert other. Also, they are often perceived as not being too strong, because of their situation in time and space and their status in the environment to which they belong (homeless, prostitutes, migrant workers, homosexuals, lost children, single women or the elderly.” 3 Investigators spend a lot of time to catch a serial killer, often resorting to a criminal profiling, who, on the basis of individual criminal activity can make a profile, which, often, helps at catching the criminal. Opposed to serial killers there are also criminals who kill just once, called criminals of opportunity. In this paper we want to analyze each of the two categories of criminals in order to understand their thinking, but also the causes of the development of killer instinct in them.

2. Serial Killer’s Mind

“I was born with a killer instinct” – an excuse used too often by criminals. Is it true? It is known that each of us has killer instinct, but how do we explain it? Belgian criminologist Ettiene Le Greef4 launched a theory on this issue in 1947 saying that “the criminal personality is determined by instinct.” He mentioned that in humans there is no pure intellectual expression, meaning that more instincts and tendencies act in human behavior at same time, producing effects, and these instinctive tendencies organized together form the affective structure, directly influenced by the intelligence concerns. According to Le Greef’s theory, these affective

736

structures have two types of instincts: defense, contributing to self preservation, are based on aggression and tend to a progressive reduction of the individual to an abstract entity, subject to moral laws designed mechanically.5 Also, there are the instinct of sympathy, contributing to the conservation of the species, are based on subordination and devotion to the other, tending towards an extreme valorization of the other.6 A substantial difference between the two instincts is that while the defense works into a sense of justice and responsibility of “the other,” the second class of instincts works into self-abandonment.7 Between the defense and instincts of sympathy there is always opposition, given that neither of these two types of instincts can be met in full. Of course, in order to emphasize the desire of individual born with criminal instincts, he needed to go through negative experiences. So, many serial killers know childhood trauma. A criminal profiling can make a portrait of the killer taking into account the typology of victims. For example, Heffrey Dahmer,8 called “Milwaukee Cannibal”, has killed at least 17 men as a result of childhood trauma, when he was abused by a neighbor and experienced the divorce of his parents.

Another theory that supported the theory of innate killer is that of Cesar Lambroso,9 the prison doctor of Padova-Italy. In his “L’Uomo Delinquente,”10 published in 1876, is presented the theory in which the criminologist said that criminals can be identified on anthropological profile or anatomical abnormalities, such as stigmata, cranial or anatomical asymmetry, flat nose, prominent jaw, large ears, decreased sensitive to pain, plus other physiological abnormalities, constitutional or psychological. The existence of several theories regarding serial killer aroused the interest of more specialists who wanted to present other points of view. So, among the last studies is the one realized at the Wisconsin-Madison Univeristy - “Psychopaths aren’t just different.” 11 This project was initiated in order to study brain abnormality associated with criminal psychopathy. As stated by Prof. Koenigs, project leader, this study is the first to show both the functional and structutal differences in the brains of people diagnosed with psychopathy. In order to realize the study, Prof. Koenigs and co-author, Prof. Newman, conducted MRI tests on a total of 40 inmates at a prison in Wisconsin. This way, they discovered that in the case of psychopaths there is less communication between a certain area (ventromedial) from the prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for emotions and amygdale (located in the emotional brain), which controls levels of fear and anxiety. On opposition with the configuration of brains of serial killers, at the criminals of opportunity’ brains can be seen a close connection between area responsible for controlling emotions and the one responsible for overseeing the fear, which means that the latter can feel remorse against the violence committed, and in many cases they are crusher of consciousness, reaching

737

to surrender to police. Psychopaths are people who give evidence of much charm, intimidation, manipulation and sometimes violence in order to control others, and all this just to satisfy their own needs. They do not show remorse or guilt, empathy and have no power to take responsibility for their actions.12

For example, the notorious serial killer Anatoly Onoprienko from Ukraine (Figure 1), also called the “Terminator” because of the high level of violence that he had shown at the time of the murders. In order to achieve a more through analysis of Anatoly Onoprienko’s criminal profiling, we must begin with the anthropological profile. According to Lombroso’s theory, presented in this paper, must be considered the psysical characteristics of the perpetrator.

Broad foreheadShort and thick fingers

Prominent cheekbones Flat nose Fig. 1. Anatoly Onoprienko – Ukrainian serial killer

As shown in Figure 1, Anatoly Onoprienko had psysical characteristics that may lead to the conclusion that the individual was a criminal. Features such broad forehead, flar nose, prominent cheeknobes, facial bone structure, short and thick fingers represent, from a criminological point of view, important milestones in the discovery of a killer.

Onoprienko came to outnumber the 50 murders committed in just three months he saying that at one point came to regard these offenses “very simple, like an animal.” 13 So, analyzing Anatoly Onorienko we can understand both Lombroso’s theory, which, as we have seen above, applies perfectly in this case, and the theories of specialist who talk about dysfunction of the brain at serial killers. Moreover, during the process, Onoprienko had to take several psychological tests and doctors concluded that he suffers from mental illness.

3. In the Mind of a Killer of Opportunity

In contrast to the theories according to which the causes of criminal activity are likely mental, highlighting the existence of brain dysfunction,

738

criminologists show sociological theories, according to which deviance depends on external and social factors. Enrico Ferri, the founder of “sociological criminology”, considered that biological factors may play an important role, but the external ones are more important in the development of the individual killer.14 However, the most systematic attempt to formulate a general theory of criminal behavior directly related to the cultural education of the individual is the theory of differential association, proposed by the American sociologist, Edwin Sutherland.15 In his work, Sutherland said that the criminal act requires certain coordinates: criminal behavior is learned, learning criminal behavior occurs through a process of interaction and communication with others, learning takes place, especially, within a small group of people, the reasons an the impulsive tendencies depend on the favorable or unfavorable interpretation of legal dispositions, those who do become criminals make it because they are in direct contact with criminal patterns and less with anticriminale ones.16 This theory aims to explain primarly juvenile delinquency.

In what concerns criminals of opportunity, we do not talk about a “specialization” of them in commiting crimes resulting in death, with a direct intention, but just a need of self conservation or, in some cases, of murder committed by imprudence, such as car accidents. So, taking into account that for criminals of opportunity commiting murders is just a self conservation need, we consider important the actions taken in order to prevent these crimes. A higher standard of living, a better economic situation, a more solid education made durin “the severn years from home”, a greater involvement of parents in child’s life, family, schools, community solidarity in actions of prevention, can lead to a decrease of crimes committed by this category of individuals.

4. Conclusions

In conclusion, relating to the above, we are able to say that we live in a society dominated by criminals of opportunity, but “scared” by the serial killers. We cannot speak about the quality of life without a strong sense of personal security, a necessity increasingly invoked, without adequate security protection and security of both personal and of mutual interest. It creates a strong psychosis when mass-media presents such a case: the existence of an active serial killer in freedom. And it is normal, because as we have presented in Section 2, serial killers act on the basis of brain dysfunction, suffering from some mental illness. What makes them more dangerous is the fact that they do not feel empathy, compassion or fear, but a need and pleasure of killing. Unlike serial killer, criminals of opportunity kill just for self conservation, many of them calling this phenomenon

739

“survival.” The individuals from the second category make more mistakes and leave a trail during the commission of crime, making it easier for policemen to catch them. Serial killers know that they have to grow, to specialize in order to continue to kill and in this case we can talk about devotion for what they do, for the crimes they commit. All in all, we can conclude that the main difference between serial killers and criminals of opportunity lies in the reasons that lead them to the commission of such offense, their criminal experience catching countour according to this criterion: mental illness or dysfunctional association.

NOTES

1. Laurent Montet is doctor in criminology, behavioral analysis specialist, clinical criminology of victims, serial killers and terrorists’ behavior.

2. Montet, Laurent (2003), Serial Killers. Bucharest: Corint.
3. Ibidem
4. Etienne Le Greff, an important Belgian criminologist who approached criminology in terms of psucho. He published “Les instincts de defense et de sympathie” in 1947, paper in which he also published the theory according to which “criminal behavior is determined by instinct”.

5. Le Greff, Etienne (1947), Les instincts de defense et de sympathie.

6. Montet, Laurent, op. cit.
7. Ibidem
8. Jeffrey Dahmer, the homosexual killer, was a known serial killer from USA. He was conconvicted to 937 years imprisonment, but he was killed by a cellmate when he was 34.
9. Cesar Lombroso, Italian criminologist and physician, founded the Positivist Criminological Schoo. He did not agree with the Classic School, accroding to which the commisision of crimes is based on human nature. In opposition, Lombroso said that “innate criminals”can be identified based on their mental illeness.

10. Lambroso, Cesar (1876), L’Uomo Delinquente.
11. The study “Psychopats aren’t just different,” realized by Prof. Koenings and Prof. Newman, was published in The Journal of Neuroscience, in November, 30, 2011.
12. Psychopathy of Serial Killers, material obtained by the National Association of Chiefs of Police from the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit.
13. Lohr, David (1999) “The Story of Anatoly Onoprienko”, Chapter “Obliged to Kill”, The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers, by Michael Newton, December.
14. Ferri, Enrico (1929), Criminal Sociology. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
15. Edwin Sutherland was professot at the University of Indiana and in 1934 he published the paper “Criminology”, lated adites as “Principles of Criminology”, where he presented the theory of diferentiated association.
16. Sutherland, Edwin (1934), Principles of Criminology. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott.

740

Copyright of Contemporary Readings in Law & Social Justice is the property of Addleton Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.