Canada does not have the death penalty, but second-degree murder automatically carries a mandatory life sentence, and so the judge asked the members of the jury whether they wished to make a recommendation on how long Pickton should serve before being eligible for parole – between 10 and 25 years – but they made no recommendation.
The case was then adjourned for the judge to hear submissions from the Crown and defence on the appropriate parole ineligibility period in this case. The Crown indicated it would urge the judge to impose the maximum 25 years before Pickton could be considered for parole. Killers convicted of two or more murders are not eligible to be considered for early parole under the so-called ‘faint hope clause’ after serving at least 15 years.
On 11 December 2007, the trial judge Justice Williams sentenced Pickton to life imprisonment on all six charges. In sentencing Pickton, he told him he would have to serve 25 years of a life sentence before he could apply for parole. This is the maximum sentence that can be imposed for second-degree murder. Justice Williams said: ‘Mr Pickton’s conduct was murderous and repeatedly so. I cannot know the details of what happened. I know this: each of these women were [sic] murdered and their remains were dismembered. What happened to them was senseless and despicable. There is nothing I can say to adequately express the revulsion the community has with regards to these killings.’
Following sentencing, Pickton’s defence lawyers lodged an appeal against his conviction. Pickton still stood accused of first-degree murder in the deaths of 20 other women and is suspected of killing many more.
On 7 January 2008, there was another twist in the Pickton case. In a surprise announcement, Attorney General Wally Oppal announced that the Crown, on behalf of the criminal justice branch, had also lodged an appeal with the Court of Appeal against the six convictions against Pickton, despite the maximum sentence he received. Oppal said at a press conference that the Crown believed Pickton was guilty of first-degree murder. ‘The Crown’s position has always been this was a proper case for first-degree murder and that a certain amount of the evidence excluded went to that,’ he said. In its application to appeal to the Court of Appeal, the Crown said that the judge had made several errors in law. Among those errors was improperly instructing the jury. The Crown maintains that the jury should have been told they could find Pickton guilty of planning and deliberation if they held him responsible for the dismemberment and disposal of victims’ remains. Oppal said the Crown filed an appeal because Pickton had also lodged an appeal that, if granted, would allow him another trial but this time on second-degree murder charges only. The Crown would be asking for the Court of Appeal to order a new trial to hear all 26 counts of first-degree murder, stating that the trial judge, Justice James Williams, had erred when he severed the counts to hear only six of the charges.
On 30 March 2009 Pickton began his appeal against the six counts of second-degree murder in the British Columbia Court of Appeal. His defence lawyers were asking the court to grant a retrial on the second-degree murder charges. The appeal was heard by three senior judges.
The appeal hearing concluded on 11 April. Following lengthy deliberations on Thursday 27 June the Appeal Court finally announced its decision. In a two-to-one decision, it rejected Pickton’s appeal of his second-degree murder convictions. Due to the verdict not being unanimous, this left the door open for Pickton to make a further appeal to the Supreme Court. Pickton’s lawyer Gil McKinnon later confirmed the appeal would go ahead based on dissenting reasons by one of the Appeal Court judges Justice Ian Donald.
Justice Donald said in his written reasons that the original trial judge had not instructed the jury on the issue of aiding and abetting and how it might apply to the Pickton case. He said he would have ordered a new trial. The two other judges rejected defence claims that there were numerous errors in the trial judge’s instructions to the jury and found the verdict safe.
However, Justice Donald disagreed and concluded that there was ‘a misdirection amounting to a serious error of law’. Much of the appeal arguments surrounded a question from the jury on the sixth day of deliberations, and how the trial judge handled the question. Jurors wanted to know if they could find Pickton guilty if they found that he acted indirectly in the murders.
The judge accepted the Crown’s position on the question and re-instructed the jury, telling jury members that if they found that Pickton had shot three of his alleged victims, or was otherwise an active participant in the killings, then they could find him guilty.
‘The trial judge did not provide the jury with an instruction on the law of aiding and abetting,’ Donald wrote. ‘In my opinion this was an error of law.’
Following a lengthy appeals process, on 30 July 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its decision, dismissing Pickton’s appeal and affirming his conviction. The argument that Pickton should be granted a new trial was unanimously rejected by the justices of the Supreme Court of Canada.
A spokesman for the Crown announced that the prosecution of Pickton on the 20 other murder charges would likely be discontinued. ‘In reaching this position,’ the spokesman said, ‘the crown has taken into account the fact that any additional convictions could not result in any increase to the sentence that Mr Pickton has already received.’
Families of the victims had varied reactions to this announcement. Some were disappointed that Pickton would never be convicted of the 20 other murders, while others were relieved that the gruesome details of the murders would not be aired in court.
CHAPTER 3
GERMANY
JOACHIM KROLL, AKA THE RUHR CANNIBAL
In 1955, at the age of 22, Joachim Kroll (b. 1933) committed his first rape, and then went on to murder that same year. His first victim was a 19-year-old blonde he met as she was walking along the road. He invited her to walk with him into the woods, apparently promising her something, and then attempted to kiss her. When she struggled against him, he dragged her into a barn and stabbed her in the neck, then raped her. To make certain she was dead, he strangled her. He also used a long-bladed knife to disembowel her. An autopsy indicated that while he had raped her in a frenzy, this mutilation had occurred post-mortem. Her body was discovered five days after she went missing.
Twelve months elapsed before Kroll killed again. His victim was 12-year-old Erika Schuletter: he raped and killed her. In 1959, after moving to Duisburg, Kroll killed two women in quick succession, in different towns. By now, he had the thirst for more blood. On 16 June, he accosted Klara Tesmer as she walked near some fields. He hit her hard on the head. She continued to struggle as he tried to remove her clothing and they slipped together down the embankment. He grabbed her by the throat to keep her from resisting and throttled her until she no longer moved. He undressed her and raped her motionless body. The more women he killed, the more brutal and horrific his actions became.
On 26 July 1959, he came across Manuela Knodt, aged 16. After raping and strangling her, he stripped her of clothing, then, using his long-bladed knife, he removed pieces of flesh from her thighs and buttocks, which he took home, cooked and ate. He had also masturbated over her, leaving a significant deposit of semen on her face and pubic area. This led police to suspect, wrongly, that more than one person had attacked her.
By now, Kroll believed he could commit the perfect crime. The MO he used made him believe there were few risks. He would take a train or bus to an area that seemed isolated and then he would get out and walk until he spotted a lone female. By now, it was 1962 and he was still active. One of his victims in that year was a 12-year-old girl, Barbara Bruder. She was on her way to a playground near her home in Burscheid, near Hamburg. He spotted her and dragged her into a field where he raped and strangled her. Her remains were never found. During that year he murdered several other young girls in similar fashion. With some of them he again removed pieces of their flesh, taking them home and eating them. Because he was travelling from town to town, the police failed to form any direct link betwee
n the murders. In one case a local man came under the suspicion of the police and when he was found hanged they believed the killer had committed suicide.
Three years passed before Kroll was to kill again, then, on 22 August 1965, he approached a courting couple in their car near a lake outside Duisburg. Twenty-five-year-old Hermann Schmitz was with his girlfriend, Rita. Kroll snuck up on the car and used his knife to puncture a tyre to draw Schmitz outside. He had already planned to render Schmitz incapable of defending his girlfriend. He pounced, stabbing Schmitz several times directly in the heart. However, Schmitz’s girlfriend reacted immediately, jumping into the driver’s seat and sounding the horn. She started the car and tried to drive off, striking Kroll with the car. This panicked him and he made off, though sadly her boyfriend died from the attack. Following this, Kroll committed no further murders until 13 September 1966, when he came upon 20-year-old Ursula Rohling. He met her in a park, talked with her and then dragged her into the bushes, where he strangled and raped her. Her body was found two days later.
Kroll then changed his MO. On 22 December 1966, he abducted five-year-old Ilona Harke. He took her by train to Wuppertal where he made her walk with him until he found a ditch. There he forced her head into the water until she stopped struggling. He then also removed pieces of flesh from her body, taking them home, cooking and eating them. About six months later, Kroll tried to murder again, but this time he was disturbed and almost caught. In June 1967, he met a 10-year-old girl by the name of Gabriele on a park bench. Kroll had some pornography with him. He persuaded the girl to accompany him to a meadow, where he promised to show her a rabbit, but instead he flashed his book of erotic pictures. She tried to run away, but he detained her, pulling her into a secluded area where he started to strangle her. However, a nearby coalmine sounded its siren for a change of shifts. Kroll panicked when he looked up and saw some of the miners walking nearby. He fled, leaving the girl for dead. However, she was found still alive and taken to a hospital, where she remained in a coma for more than a week. On waking, she told her parents what had happened, but they declined to report the incident at the time, perhaps afraid that her attacker would return.
In 1969 and 1970, Kroll murdered two more young victims in similar fashion. Ten months later, he followed 13-year-old Jutta Rahn as she alighted from a train in Breitscheid and started to walk home through a wooded area. He raped and strangled her. Then, in 1976, he raped and strangled 10-year-old Karin Toepfer. By now, he was becoming complacent and he was tired of travelling. It was then that he committed murder in his own domain.
On 3 July 1976, in Laar, a town outside Duisburg, four-year-old Marion Ketter vanished from a playground. It was her disappearance that finally led to the arrest of Kroll, and would finally end his 21 years of deviant, grisly murders. Kroll was living in the town and became known as Uncle Joachim to the children who played near his apartment block. He would befriend them, giving them sweets. He lived alone, but had a collection of dolls and always bought the latest electronic gadgets. He kept dolls specifically for the girls, whom he liked. But what the local residents didn’t know was that he was a sadistic sexual predator living among them.
Shortly after Marion Ketter went missing, one of Kroll’s neighbours met him in the building. The neighbour was going to use the toilet. Kroll told the neighbour not to use it because it was blocked. When asked what it was blocked with, Kroll replied: ‘With guts’. The neighbour didn’t believe him and went to look. He saw that the bowl was blood-red and had a foul odour. Looking more closely, the neighbour believed he could see some sort of skin tissue floating to the top. What he saw did resemble guts and he was puzzled as to why anyone would dispose of meat down the toilet. He immediately called the police, who sealed it off as a crime scene. The bowl was removed and the contents poured into a bucket. To their shock they found what appeared to be body parts: lungs, kidneys, intestines and a heart, together with pieces of flesh.
Kroll was then arrested and when interviewed confessed to 13 murders and one attempted murder. However, due to the passage of time, police were unable to provide sufficient evidence on all charges and he was only charged with eight murders and one other attempt. In April 1982, he was finally given nine life sentences. However, on 1 July 1991, at the age of just 58, Joachim Kroll died from a heart attack in his prison cell.
PETER KÜRTEN, AKA THE DÜSSELDORF VAMPIRE
Like so many other serial killers, Peter Kürten (b. 1883) was involved in lesser crimes before turning to murder. By the age of 16, he was stealing and had run away from home. He was soon to receive the first of 27 prison sentences, which would last 24 years of his life. The crimes were petty at first – mostly stealing food and clothing.
In 1899, Kürten began living with an ill-treated, masochistic prostitute twice his age. His ‘education’ was thus completed and he transferred his inherent sadistic impulses from torturing animals to human beings. He took to crimes of burglary, entering rooms in bars and taverns while the owners were working.
On 25 May 1913, having entered a bar intending to steal and while searching the rooms, he came upon a 10-year-old girl sleeping in one of the rooms. Kürten seized the girl by the neck and strangled her with both hands. The child struggled for some time before lapsing into unconsciousness. He then drew her head over the edge of the bed and penetrated her genitals with his fingers. He had a small, sharp pocketknife with him and he held the child’s head and cut her throat. This was to be the first of many vicious and savage murders, which would later bring terror to the residents of Düsseldorf.
In 1921, Kürten married and for a time resisted the urge to kill, but he was later to return to Düsseldorf and wreak havoc. Around 9 February 1929, he abducted an eight-year-old girl, Rosa Ohliger. He stabbed her body 13 times and also inflicted stab wounds to her vagina, as well as ejaculating over her. He then made an unsuccessful attempt to burn the body, and it was later found under a hedge. He was later to reveal that he got a thrill from ejaculating over the dead bodies.
Only five days after the murder of Rosa Ohliger, a 45-year-old mechanic named Rudolf Scheer was found stabbed to death on a road in the Düsseldorf suburb of Flingern. He had 20 knife wounds, including several in the head. On the following day, Kürten returned to the scene of his attack and even spoke with a detective at the murder scene. Although suspicious, the policeman clearly had no reason for concern and so spoke frankly about the crime: a fantastic cameo episode, which was confirmed during the trial by the detective in question.
On 21 August, Kürten attacked and stabbed three people. None was fatally injured. By now, he was taking enormous risks. On the night of 23 August 1929, hundreds of people were enjoying the annual fair in the ancient town of Flehe. At around 10.30pm, two foster sisters, five-year-old Gertrude Hamacher and 14-year-old Louise Lenzen, left the fair and started walking through the adjacent allotments to their home. Kürten saw them and followed them along a footpath. He stopped the children and asked whether Louise would run an errand for him. She agreed and ran back towards the fairground. Kürten then strangled the second girl before cutting her throat. Louise returned a few moments later and was dragged off the footpath before being strangled and decapitated.
The following afternoon, he accosted a girl and tried to persuade her to have sex with him. When she said ‘I’d rather die’ he answered ‘die then’ and stabbed her. However, she survived and was able to give a good description of her assailant. He then raped and battered to death a young girl named Ida Reuter in September and, on 12 October, murdered a servant girl named Elizabeth Dorrier by beating her to death. This was followed by hammer attacks on two other women, both on 25 October. On 7 November, he abducted five-year-old Gertrude Albermann. He stabbed her 35 times and strangled her. Following this, he sent a letter and a map to a local newspaper setting out where the body could be found. The period between February and May 1930 saw him continue to carry out non-fatal attacks. By now, terror had gripped the residents of Düsseldorf and Kür
ten was now dubbed the Vampire – but he was still roaming free to kill.
On 14 May 1930, Maria Budlick left the city of Cologne in search of work in nearby Düsseldorf. On the platform at Düsseldorf station, she was accosted by a man who offered to show her the way to a girls’ hostel. After walking for a short distance, he started to lead her towards the park. She suddenly remembered the newspaper stories of the murderer and refused to go any further and they started to argue. Kürten, who happened to be passing by, heard the argument and intervened. Eventually, the first man left her alone with Kürten, who then offered to let her stay in his room. They went back to his room and she suddenly said she did not want sexual intercourse and asked if he knew where there was somewhere else she could sleep. The pair went by tram to Worringerplatz and walked deep into the Grafenberger Woods. Here, Kürten grabbed her with one hand by the neck and asked whether he could have her. They had sex and then he took her back to the station. He did not kill her because he knew that a policeman had seen him with her at the station. In the meantime, she had written a letter to her friend back home detailing the attack. Her friend then informed the police. It took only a short time for the police to trace Budlick. She remembered Kürten’s address and three days later took the police to his apartment. At the time, Kürten was not at home, but when he arrived back, he entered the house and began climbing the stairs towards her. He looked briefly startled, but carried on to his room and shut the door behind him. A few moments later, he left the house with his hat pulled down over his eyes, passing the two plainclothes policemen standing in the street, and disappeared around a corner. He was now of the belief that his arrest was imminent.
Kürten went to find his wife and confessed everything to her. She, on his instructions, went to the police to tell all. He had told her that she could then claim the high reward put out for the arrest of the Vampire. She had arranged to meet her husband outside a local church at 3pm. By that time, the whole area had been surrounded and, as Kürten appeared, he smiled at the officers and offered no resistance.
The Evil Within - A Top Murder Squad Detective Reveals The Chilling True Stories of The World's Most Notorious Killers Page 9
