Could You Be a Serial Killer’s Next Victim?
A Bit About “The Serial Killer”
While not all people that have difficulty fitting into society are serial killers, with almost no exception, the vast majoirty of serial killers have grave difficulty conforming to the mores of society, its rules and its norms. Despite this, they are often undetectable to the common individual, due to their adept abiity to mask their true feelings and inner turmoil. This trait, along with a well-defined set of additional characteristics, comprises the personality-disordered individual that is capable of serial killing. This personality is commonly referred to as the sociopath. In his book, Overkill: Mass murder and Serial Killing Exposed, the highly esteemed Northeastern University expert Professor J. Levin, supports this statement, citing that the multiple murderer or serial killer “tends to be a sociopath, someone with a disorder of character, rather than the mind. He lacks a conscience, feels no remorse and cares exclusively for his own pleasures in life” (Fox & Levin, 2003). More specifically, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, (DSM-IV), defines a sociopath as an individual possessing the following tell-tale traits: ” a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others…as indicated by three (or more) of the following:
1) failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors
2) deceitfulness
3) impulsivity
4) aggressiveness…indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults
5) reckless disregard for the safety of others
6) consistent irresponsibility
7) lack of remorse…indicated by indifference to hurting or mistreating another…” (APA, 2005)
Of primary importance in understanding and identifying the victimization process of the serial killer is the “common thread” of dysfunction in their backgrounds. It is only in the rare instance that this is not consistently a “given” with any multiple murderer. John Douglas, a veteran law enforcement individual and noted author has written several books on this very topic. Through his research, he has interviewed innumerable presumed and confirmed serial killers, including many of the more famous. As a result of this research he has found that “all of them, on one level or another, came from dysfunctional backgrounds. In some cases, it was overt: physical and/or sexual abuse… In other cases, more subtle…” (Douglas, 1996). This more subtle dysfunction would be as simple as neglect, indifference by a parent, or a feeling of rejection. Yet, however benign it may seem, it is significant enough to wreak havoc in the mind of the serial killer and, as will be illustrated, is significant in identifying one’s victims and their selection.
The Victims: In General and In Detail
Whatever the specific details of a serial killer’s past, their prior feelings of rejection or abuse instill in them a need to feel power and control over their victims. Another researcher in this area, Dr. Apsche, elaborates on this premise, stating that due to the serial murderer’s feelings of inadequacy or rejection, he (she) has a need to sadistically dominate over their victims and they find great enjoyment in the ability and power associated with holding thousands of people who hear of their crimes in a grip of terror. (Apsche, 1993). As the ultimate form of “extreme bullying”, it is ironic that it is their own quest for “power” and their own deviant urges that they seem unable to gain control over, at any cost.
In light of this, much like the “schoolyard bully”, in order to insure the execution of their power, they must choose victims that they perceive to be weaker or less powerful in some way, than they are. In society, as a whole, there are generally certain minorities whose gender, age or circumstance epitomize this kind of vulnerability. Predictably, these groups are women,children (especially runaways), prostitutes, and even at times, the elderly (Hickey, 2005). Homosexuals, who may seem to be effeminate, can also fall into this category.
Women, children and the elderly are all groups of individual who are (at least thought to be) inferior in strength and, therefore, easier to physically dominate. Children, as a group, are additionally often mentally inferior and, therefore, easier to manipulate into an unsafe situation. Lastly, while runaways are easier to lure away because of their vulnerability and need for food or shelter, prostitutes are an even more opportune target for serial killers as they are “readily available”, often found standing alone and unprotected on a street corner in the late, desolate hours of the night. They are also assumed to be “easy prey” as they, themselves , are considered to be deviants of society ansd somewhat disposable. It is often the assumption that they will go unmissed. For example, without doubt, common sense dictates that for a serial killer who may hate and target young girls, it is much more of a task to abduct a child from the environment of a secure and parentally-occupied home, than to just pluck them off the street. Therefore, as Douglas states, “if at any given time we have between 35-50 societal killes operation in our country…they seem to gravitate to parts of the country where they can find high risk victims, such as prostitutes, street people, drug addicts and runaways.” (Douglas, 2000). Thus, within the general “victim population pool”, their exists an even more select subset of potential “targets”.
Personal Preferences of The Serial Killer
From the aforementioned groups of potential victims, which particular group may lead this victim pool at any given time or in a specific geographic is more personally related to the serial killers that are operating within that area, itself. Identifying victim numbers on a more specific level depends on the circumstance and previous dysfunction of the actual perpetrator. From the pool of potential targets, an individual who was molested as a child may, in turn, seek out young boys in an attempt to regain control and, perversely, be the “one in power”. Meanwhile, a potential serial killer who was abused and victimized by his own mother may carry a hatred for all women or seek out only victims bearing resemblance to the mother whose witholding of love bred such hatred. Some specific examples are found in cases of some serial killers that are very familiar to popular society. David Berkowitz, known as the “Son of Sam”, was adopted at a young age and told his birth mother had died. However, he was only to learn later in life that not only was she alive, but he had a sister, as well. Upon contact with them, he was broken and devastated by their blatant rejection of him. Thus, his victims of choice were not only women (as well as some young couples), but more specifically, adolescent girls with long dark hair resembling his mother. In another instance, Jeffrey Dahmer, who was raped and molested as a child, obviously targeted young boys and men. Lastly, in few cases are men victimized by women as they are generally stronger in physicality. Women also tend to develop differently in light of the same dysfunction as their male counterparts. However, nothing is impossible. In the case of Aileen Wuornos, her hatred for men was so potent, it fostered its own adrenaline rush, enabling this female perpetrator to dominate (and overcome) many an unsuspecting male. She was a victim of rape.
In conclusion, the victims of serial killers are most often far from random and comprise their own unfortunate population of society, as a whole. Due to the serial killer’s motives of power and control, this population generally consists of sets of individuals perceived to be weaker in some way than the killer, himself. These subjects are usually women, children and even the elderly or homosexuals. Within these groups, the murderer’s desire for convenience promotes the most vulnerable of these individuals (such as runaways and prostitutes) to a position of preferred targets. This variable, in turn, is only overridden by a specific killer’s personal need to seek out a victim who may physically resemble the mother who abused him or “uncle” who molested him. The presence of a specific killer and his preferential targets would then, obviously, skew the statistics of the victim population amongst that segment of society for the duration of his “reign of terror” in a particular geographic location. Despite this, it is actually comforting to know that these sociopaths comprise an extremely minute facet of our society (approximately only 3%) and most of us will first win the lottery before bumping into one of them on the street (Hickey, 2005). Or, at least “get lucky” on a scratch ticket…!
