Charles Howard Schmid, Jr., was a little pipsqueak of a guy, standing just about 5'3" tall.
To compensate, he bragged non-stop and wore freaky makeup and oversized cowboy boots, which he stuffed with socks, rags, and crushed tin cans to add inches.
When all that failed to pump up his ego, he killed girls.
In the early 1960s, Schmid, the adopted son of a nursing home owner, was a fixture on a sleazy strip in Tucson, Arizona, known as the Speedway. He was a sight to see.
Concealing Schmid's naturally handsome face was a bizarre mask of his own design - dark tan pancake makeup, white lipstick, and hair dyed jet-black. He topped it off with a beauty mark on his cheek made of putty and axle grease.
He told wild tales of sexual conquests. "I can manifest my neurotical emotions, emancipate an epicureal instinct, and elaborate on my heterosexual tendencies," was one of his frequent rants.
Although out of high school for years, Schmid had never bothered to get a job. He lived on handouts from his parents, who paid the rent on his cottage and covered living expenses.
Despite his creepiness, ladies loved Smitty, as he was known. His power over women would later prompt newsman Don Moser, who wrote a book on the case, to give him the sobriquet the "Pied Piper of Tucson." He was never without a fawning female. In the spring of 1964, that female was Mary French, a dumpy 17-year-old.
On May 31, during a beer binge with his gal and another buddy, John Saunders, Smitty blurted out: "I want to kill a girl."
French was eager to help him lure the victim, Alleen Rowe, 15, a high-school sophomore. That night, French persuaded the girl to sneak out of the house after her mother, a night nurse, left for work. French said they were going to a party.
Instead, Schmid, Saunders and French drove Rowe into the desert, where the men raped her, and then cracked her skull with a rock. She had been wearing curlers in her hair when she slipped out of her room. French dug a hole and buried the curlers, while the men buried her corpse.
Soon after the disappearance, detectives quizzed Schmid, who said he knew Rowe and had planned to take her to a party that night, but insisted she was gone when he arrived. French backed him up.
As time passed, Saunders joined the Navy, and Schmid got a new buddy, Richie Bruns, an oddball straight out of reform school. Schmid told his new friend all about the killing.
Schmid also found a new squeeze, Gretchen Fritz, 16, the naughty daughter of a wealthy Tucson heart doctor. Blond and slender, Fritz was a troublemaker in her private school, where she scared her teachers. Wild parties, drinking, and stealing were among her favorite pastimes.
The relationship soon soured, but Schmid kept seeing the loud, headstrong girl. He had blabbed to Fritz about Rowe, and he was worried that if they split, she'd tell.
On August 16, 1965, Fritz told her parents she was taking her 13-year-old sister, Wendy, to an Elvis Presley movie. They never returned.
It seemed as if the girls, like Rowe, had just vanished, and may have run away, until Schmid's big mouth gave police a break.
As he had with the earlier killing, Schmid blabbed to Bruns about murdering the Fritz sisters. This time he asked Bruns for help burying the bodies, which he had left rotting in the desert.
Bruns kept the secret, until he became infatuated with a girl, and started having nightmares that she was next on Schmid's list. By October 1965, his anxiety reached fever pitch; he spewed out the story and led police to the graves. He also told of Schmid's boasts about the Rowe murder.
Police rounded up French and Saunders, who confessed about the Rowe killing and agreed to testify against their former friend. French was sentenced to five years, and Saunders got life.
At his trial for the Fritz murders, which started on February 15, 1966, Schmid appeared to be average, clean-cut even. Gone were the mole, the makeup and the bizarre attire. The wholesome veneer, however, did little to sway the jury. After two hours they found him guilty and worthy of the death penalty.
A significant weakness in the Rowe case was the absence of a body. Saunders and French had led police to the spot in the desert where they had buried Rowe, but, while they could find the curlers, they could not find her grave.
Even with lack of a body, and the services of the brilliant F. Lee Bailey, the defense team could do no better than a murder two plea. Schmid was sentenced to 50 years to life.
Within a month, Schmid asked for a new trial, offering to produce Rowe's body. That would be proof, he said, that she was not killed by a blow to the head, as Saunders testified. He knew the exact location because, without knowledge of his pals, Schmid had reburied the girl.
The autopsy confirmed Saunders' story, and there was no retrial.
After 1971, when Arizona abolished the death penalty, it looked as if Schmid was destined to spend decades behind bars. But in 1975, two inmates cut his sentence short by beating and stabbing him to death.
His bizarre life inspired a story - "Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?" - by Joyce Carol Oates. It was later adapted into a film, "Smooth Talk," starring Laura Dern as a young girl whose "trashy daydreams" leave her vulnerable to a dangerous stranger.
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
The author uses these words to belittle schmid.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
That stood out to me because its like the guy is short.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
It sounds like the guy from “where are you going.”
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
The author is portraying Schmid as a guy who is trying to look more scary than he actually is.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
Again this writer is stuck on his height, he talks about how he was a freak and how he would stuff his shoes with the socks and tin cans.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
The author says this nonchalantly. She uses syntax and diction to make the sentence very powerful. The thing that is interesting about this sentence is not as much the words used but the words not used. She doesn’t build up the tension to make the reader anxious to know about Schmidt, she blatantly says “…he killed girls.”, making the reader look back and read it again. The short sentence cut into two fragments adds to the casual tone. She doesn’t use too many words to make the tone formal and she doesn’t make the sentence short and choppy for effect. She uses it to create a calm reader who then suddenly becomes confused and frightened.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
“When all that failed to pump up his ego, he killed girls.” This sentence is short and to the point- it’s blunt and harsh to shock the reader.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
When I read this sentence (WHEN ALL FAILED TO PUMP UP HIS EGO. HE KILLED GIRLS.) I think that this guy is really something else, I say that because I believe its not really about his ego but, too see if the girl would actually sneak out of her house to go to a party. The tone of this story is really deep and can affect people emotionally. Personally I think that he deserved what he got.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
The impact of this sentence is adding more character.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
It is interesting that the author thought he was “naturally handsome” but describes his looks and wearing make-up like you would describe a woman’s make-up and pointed out he had a “beauty mark”. Perhaps she wanted the readers to view him as less than masculine.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Charles Schmid is physically described to show the readers that he is not mentally sound. The murders were committed out of a power-lust and need to dominate others. In this case, with the sexual-driven murders of young girls. He shows abnormal ego behavior and would maybe be diagnosed with histrionic personality disorder, along with sexual deviancy and antisocial tendencies.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
I think that the author used this specific rant he used often to show the choice of words that he had. The words that he used like “neurotical” and “epicurieal” show how smart he really was because those are big words that you dont really use on a daily basis. This is an example of diction. This also reminded me of the previous article we read about him which stated that he was intelligent.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
New Conversation
Charles Schmid almost definitely “went wrong” far before that. Most murderers survived horrific child abuse, bullying, or have severe mental illness, or all of the above. Him not getting a job is a sign of mental illness, not a cause. Extremely few mentally ill people commit crimes, by the way!
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
New Conversation
The author’s diction here seems to point out that Smitty was rather drunk when he decided to murder a woman. Not only did she flat out state he was on a drinking “binge” meaning he drank a lot at one time, but he just said this as a strange passing thought. Which puts a very dark head on the body of “Smitty.”
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
This paragraphs is one of the most terrifying paragraphs in the article as it describes some very gruesome activity, yet it doesn’t come across that way. The diction in this paragraph shows that the author is not trying to create suspense, she is simply telling the facts of what happened with no particular emotion or attitude. I think the author is doing this because the article is about a very emotional topic and writing in this style causes the reader to focus on and understand the facts rather than feel so distraught about what happened they can’t think about anything else.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
Besides the fact that curlers are identifiers, they were probably fascinated with the objects and buried them separately out of a fixation.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
Schmid was very insecure about his life and appearance, so when he was proud of something he did. He was the type of person to tell people about it.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
This is an example of direct characterization of Gretchen Fritz. The author is directly telling us that Gretchen is loud and headstrong, and knowing these character traits about her helps us understand why Schmid was so worried she’d tell people about the Rowe murder.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I think this shows how messed up in the head he really is. The fact that he has a growing list of people he wants to kill further proves that something is wrong. His friend was so scared that his girlfriend might get hurt he confessed to helping with murder. If his friend hadn’t said anything, lots more woman would would have eventually been raped and killed who were on his so called “list”.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
The word “spewed” is often associated with vomiting, which shows that the author is trying to demonstrate that Bruns was feeling so scared and anxious he felt he had to tell the police—it was practically involuntary. The choice of the term “fever pitch” in the same sentence strengthens this idea; it shows that the author is purposefully choosing words that make the reader think of sickness and the desperation of a sick person to do whatever it takes to make themselves feel better.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
I agree completely with you analysis of how the author wanted him to seem sick, but I think its sick with worry for his new girl. This is because she also said “until he became infatuated with a girl, and started having nightmares that she was next on Schmid’s list.” Showing why he went to police.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
She actually was killed by a blow to the head. Schmidt knew that but he still wanted a retrial because he thought he could convince the jury otherwise. Also, he moved Rowe’s body on his own, so then he had leverage to perhaps get a shorter sentence. Yet, his plan backfired and the autopsy showed that Saunders, Schmidt’s accomplice and the man who testified against him told the truth about Rowe’s body. Thus meaning, Schmidt was not getting out of jail anytime in his life.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
General Document Comments 0
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
Schmidt was at least in his mid twenties when he started killing girls. I wonder it was still illegal for a 17 year old to date a man of his age back then, as it its now? If it was this would add to my evidence of Schmidt being a pedofile. Also it might explain why so many young girls were attracted to him. Since he was “off-limits”, girls probably saw that as mysterious and sexy so they sought after him.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
Charles Schmid, who preyed exclusively on teenage girls, absolutely fits the criteria for being a pedophile. Rather than making him “off-limits” to girls, which falsely puts the blame on them, he was a violent manipulator and used his age and “charm” to manipulate girls.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
New Conversation
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
I think he decided to start killing people because it’d make him feel stronger, however, I think he killed girls because in his eye, they would be easier to drag away and kill. Also, if he were to be dragging their corpses around in a desert, he would probably want something lighter, seeing as he wasn’t that big himself.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
I agree that it would have been because they would be easier to drag away and kill. Although, I also think it could be because women were more vulnerable and couldn’t really fight back. He went after girls who were a little more rebellious and probably thought that they would come with him for something scandalous and risky.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment