I had sex – good sex – with 5 black ladies and they are all alive today. [Notwithstanding the fact that he murdered Felicia Stephens who was black-skinned]. Some may get stoned, but what the hell, it’s their choise [sic]. I do not hate blacks, only some of them, whites as well plus Spanish! You can tell the Rochester police to kiss what the sun does not shine [sic]. Kimberley Logan did not enter my life. I’ve never seen her or met her in real life. I’ll grant a polygraph test to anyone on this subject and talk to the cops. She is not my victim or body.’
When I offered Shawcross the facilities of a lie-detector test along with the opportunity to speak to the police, he flatly refused. Nevertheless, having completely contradicted himself all over again, he then went on to write another letter:
‘None of the women and girls did I mess with near where I lived. I went with about 6 to eight ladies near home and never killed them. Mostly with the mute. I felt sorry for this one. We got along as friends.’ [Author’s underline.]
Even a cursory examination of this categorical statement shows that Shawcross is lying again. In reality, he murdered 30-year-old Dorothy Keeler who cleaned his apartment. Darlene Trippi knew Shawcross well enough to exchange small gifts. And no one has ever told Shawcross that Kimberley Logan was a mute, the fact being that she was the only mute killed.
From the outset, Shawcross had made it perfectly clear that he would not, under any circumstances, discuss the 1972 murder of Jack Blake. Arthur is by no means an intelligent man, but he possesses a certain animal cunning, and has the instinct to smell a rat a mile away, so broaching the subject was not a simple task. But it needed to be done for, although Mrs Blake has been confronted with incontrovertible proof that her son was dead, she still believes that, one day, Jack will return home.
‘They say Shawcross killed my boy,’ she sobbed during a sensitive interview at her home. ‘I believe in God, I am a good woman, Christopher, and I will only rest if I hear the truth from Mr Shawcross. Then I can sleep.’
During a third interview with Shawcross, reference was made to the 14-and-a-half years he had previously spent in prison. I put it to him that to document his life thoroughly, as indeed he wished, just rubbing those years out, as if they didn’t exist, was not good enough. What follows is taken verbatim from this audiotaped interview, and it makes for disturbing reading:
AS: ‘So, whaddaya wanna know about it?’
CBD: ‘Fourteen years jail time, Art. How do we deal with this?’
AS: ‘We don’t. You ain’t taking me there, so don’t fuckin’ try. DON’T FUCKIN’ GO THERE.’
CBD: ‘OK. So, I take out an eraser and out goes 14 years?’
AS: ‘Yes, sir.’
CBD: ‘What about Jack Blake?’
By asking this question, I knew that I was treading on unsafe ground because if the prison population heard that in the past Shawcross had raped and killed two little children, then his problems with other inmates, who would kill him at the drop of a hat, could surface all over again.
Within the blink of the eye, Shawcross’s expression changed. His skin tightened and a curious paleness washed over his face. Beads of perspiration formed across his brow, running in glistening rivulets to stain the collar of his prison-issue shirt. Then, in anger, he suddenly reached out and grabbed my arm in a vice-like grip.
‘You don’t know who ya dealing with, fuck-face,’ he snarled. ‘You don’t know WHO I am, or WHAT I am.’
‘You don’t need to do this,’ I replied. ‘Okay, you have a problem with Jack, and now you have a problem with me. You mess this interview up and Clara will climb the wall, pal.’
At the very mention of Clara’s name, it was as if someone had flicked a switch inside his head. Shawcross’s expression reverted to normal and he relaxed his grip, letting his hand fall away. Now, he looked confused as he shook his head, negatively from side to side. The killer’s eyes started to moisten, and he began to mouth a mumbled form of apology:
AS: ‘OK,’ he said, his voice shaking. ‘Yeah, I killed him, okay. I told him to go home, and he wouldn’t. An’ then I got kinda mad at him. Yeah, I killed him, an’ I buried his body under the dirt, and went fishin’. It was his fault he died. It ain’t got nuthin’ to do with me … I’m sorry.’
CBD: ‘And, the clothes. What about Jack’s clothes?’
AS: ‘He took ’em off, an’ I told him to just fold ’em up, an’ stuff.’
CBD: ‘Why?’
AS: ‘Dunno. Maybe to keep him shut up, ya know. Let him think he’s gonna put ’em again. Stuff like that. I dunno. Just went back and did stuff to him the next day.’
Asked if his parents made him fold his clothes up when he took them off as a child, Arthur replied that it was one of the rules of the house.
I then returned to Jack Blake.
CBD: ‘What did you do to his body, Art?’
AS: ‘I ain’t going there.’
CBD: ‘Why?’
Again I reminded him that if I walked out of the interview, Clara would be furious with him because she was expecting him to be totally honest during the interviews.
CBD: ‘What about little Karen Hill. Why did you murder her?’
AS: ‘Same reason, ya know. She kinda wanted it, ya know. Sex, an’ stuff like that. Then, I get started, an’ she starts cryin’ and wants her mom, so I suffocated her. Not with my hands. Covered her mouth with dirt and stuff.’
CBD: ‘But you did have sex with her. Vaginally and anally, Arthur.’
AS: ‘Yeah. But that was after she was dead. Then I went home.’
Then came the final question:
CBD: ‘Art, how come you stuffed leaves and twigs into your victims’ ears and noses. Things like that?’
AS: ‘I dunno, really, I dunno. Just don’t want to make a mess, I s’pose.’
With that, the interviews were completed. Shawcross rose slowly to his feet and shook my hand for the last time. Meekly, he allowed himself to be body-searched by the guards after his ‘full-contact visit’ with the outside world. Then ‘The Monster of the Rivers’ was led shuffling back into the depths of the prison. He never looked back and didn’t say goodbye.
* * *
At the root of this evil is Arthur Shawcross, for without his antisocial behaviour, the world would have been a much safer place. Having apprehended Shawcross and placed him in custody for the murders of Karen Hill and Jack Blake, the responsibility for his welfare, and society’s common good, fell upon the shoulders of others.
The trial judge for the Rochester homicides was His Honour Donald J Wisner. During a meeting with him during a court recess, he said, upon reflection, that the prosecution should have pressed a first-degree murder charge against Shawcross for the two earlier murders when they had had the opportunity. Indeed, the prosecution could have gone even further and pressed for an aggravated charge, which would have ensured that he would never have been released again.
‘He most certainly would have received a natural life sentence, had that been the case,’ said the judge. ‘Instead, in an effort to save the state the expense of such a case, they opted for a lesser charge and, in doing so, they behaved like Monday morning quarterbacks.’
The State Prosecutor for the Rochester murders felt much the same way, supporting Judge Wisner’s sentiments to the hilt. Charles ‘Chuck’ Siragusa – now a Justice of the Supreme Court, was, and still is, disgusted that Shawcross was released after 14-and-a-half years to kill again and again. Perhaps the most damning indictment of the entire episode came from the pursed lips of Edwin Elwin, the Director of the State Division of Paroles. On learning of Shawcross’s murderous spree of terror after his release from prison, Elwin casually stated that ‘he [Shawcross] did a comfortable adjustment to parole. We simply hate it when one of our people goes sour.’
Greenhaven Prison psychiatrist, Dr Robert Kent, had formed the opinion that ‘Shawcross was possibly the most dangerous individual to have been released to the community for years’, and this evaluatio
n was supported by Dr Y A Haveiwala, another of Greenhaven’s psychiatrists who had completed several evaluations on the killer. Shawcross, who had refused group therapy sessions, could not tell Dr Haveiwala why he had murdered the children, and raped Karen after she was dead; more to the point, Shawcross even expressed his concerns that he might kill again when he was released. Dr Haveiwala had concluded that Shawcross was ‘a grave parole risk with an antisocial personality disorder [sociopath] and schizoid personality disorder with psychosexual conflicts’. Unfortunately, Dr Kent and Dr Haveiwala’s colleagues thought they knew better.
Shawcross’s prison psychiatric records show a hotchpotch of so-called professional interpretations laced with educated and uneducated guesswork with just the one inconsistency; that he might, or might not, murder again. Yet, still this monster was released ten years before his full 25-five-year tariff had expired.
But was justice done on the cheap as the judicial system anticipated? The answer must be a categorical ‘no’, for the cost in the human lives extinguished by Shawcross is immeasurable. While a figure cannot be placed on this degree of suffering, the cost to the public purse can be estimated, and these figures are truly astronomical. Aside from the estimated $35,000 spent to bring Shawcross to justice for the two earlier killings, and the $250,000 to keep him under lock and key at Greenhaven, plus incidentals such as psychiatrists’ bills, there is also the invoice for the Rochester murders to tally up. The Rochester Police conducted 2,210 interviews during this investigation. 3,255 licence plate enquiries were made at $12 a time, and the police developed leads on 150 suspects. On-duty personnel costs added $420,447,00. Overtime costs were $121,916,00. Non-personnel services added $27,196,00. In total, these costs reached a staggering $893,612.
However, the Rochester Police Department add a rider to these figures, noting that the total would have been dramatically inflated – by perhaps an additional $2 million – if factors such as ‘patrol time/area altered to a specific pattern; training of investigative personnel; administrative staff time in managing the project, and volunteer hours spent on the investigation by RPD employees’ were included. Finally, to keep Shawcross in prison until he is 80 will cost the state a further $750,000, making him a very expensive serial killer indeed.
Today, Arthur Shawcross repairs locks for the prison, cooks for fellow inmates and he has, once again, wheedled his way into the psychiatric unit, where he counsels other prisoners. Currently, he claims to be suffering from what he calls, ‘a rare genetic disorder’, and first impressions of this claim may lead us to believe that this is simply one more convenient peg to hang his hat of mitigation upon. But is it? This claim, which is substantiated by many of America’s leading authorities in the field, who subscribe to the theory that XYY abnormalities may be the cause of violent and homicidal behaviour, is that Shawcross is certainly suffering from an extremely rare biochemical imbalance linked to a rare XYY genetic disorder. It is contended that this mix could be the cause of at least part of the reason why he turned to commit such antisocial acts of violence.
Looking back to his formative years, there is well-documented evidence, even then, to show that Shawcross was showing signs of antisocial behaviour. We know he was bullied, before the worm finally turned and he became a bully and sadist himself. The roots of his evil had already been planted at this time; indeed, this genetic disorder was within his at conception, and might account for his being the only member of his immediate family to turn to such extreme practices.
The prison authority medical officer, when approached on this issue, declined to confirm that Shawcross has any such problem. But Dr Kraus, who spent months evaluating Shawcross, found solid evidence that he has an XYY disorder. Approaches to several of the world’s leading authorities, seeking clarification on the XYY phenomenon linked to antisocial behaviour, not surprisingly, brought no clear answer. There are two camps, each with its own strongly felt views. With our present level of knowledge, it seems that chromosomal abnormality can only have a bearing on a minute fraction of the criminal population. It is necessary to consider the millions of people throughout the world who have an XYY abnormality and who exhibit no antisocial tendencies whatever. Consequently, while an XYY disorder might partly account for Shawcross’s behaviour, it cannot provide the total picture.
There are a hundred million brain cells in the average person, and the presence of one extra chromosome in each cell equates to the presence of an additional one hundred million chromosomes in the XYY male, which are not present in the normal XY male. World-respected geneticist Dr Arthur Robinson once screened 40,000 newborns for XYY, and he has claimed that about 2,000 XYY males are born in the United States each year. His research shows that two-thirds are thin, tall and awkward, with an IQ range of 80 to 140. Robinson says, ‘These people are excitable, easily distracted, hyperactive and intolerant of frustration. Fifty per cent are learning-disabled (compared to 2 to 8 per cent in the general population) and most suffer delays in speech development.’ Many of these personality characteristics, uncannily, match Shawcross’s profile.
Dr Kraus has commented: ‘Studies report that the XYY male has a 10 to 20-fold increase in his lifetime risk, as compared to their incidence in the population, of being institutionalised in a mental hospital or prison – a risk that is not trivial. XYY males have a much higher average rate of learning disability and are described as ‘problem children’ who cause serious behavioural and management problems at home and school. Studies describe how ‘at least some XYY boys show behavioural disability that makes them not only a great problem in family management, but also quite disparate from other family members in their behaviour altogether.’
This is a finding consistent with the early life history of Arthur Shawcross and his own frequently reported belief that he was ‘different’ from all of his family members. Personality characteristics associated with these children also include descriptions of them as drifters or loners, disposed to running away from home, who, as they grow up, are frequently agitated, experiencing paedophilic urges, arson, threatening to kill others, molesting children, stealing and exhibiting moments of sudden violence and aggression. These are all the personality traits well documented in Shawcross’s life.
In an article entitled; Human Behavior Cytogenetics, published in the Journal of Sex Research, Dr John Money, adds weight to Dr Kraus’s claim. He wrote, ‘It seems perfectly obvious, that an extra chromosome in the nucleus of every cell of the brain, somehow or other, makes the individual more vulnerable to the risk of developing mental behavioural disability or abnormalities.’
So, it seems that, at the very least, an XYY chromosome disorder is part of Shawcross’s problems. But what of the biochemical imbalance? In searching for a diagnosis in Shawcross’s case, Dr Kraus turned his attention to blood and urine testing where he hit upon a little-known fact revolving around kryptopyrrole. Indeed, so little was known about kryptopyrrole, that half of the authorities Dr Kraus spoke to for advice had never heard of it, and the biochemistry laboratory at the University of Rochester didn’t know how to spell the word, replying, ‘… it sounds like something out of a Superman movie, doesn’t it.’
During laboratory examination of Shawcross’s bodily fluids, Dr Kraus found that while the concentrations of copper, zinc, iron and histamines were all within the normal range expected to be found in a healthy person, one of the results from an analysis of urine showed unexpected findings. Kryptopyrrole showed ‘H 200.66mcg/100cc’ against an expected value 0–20. The ‘H’ was laboratory shorthand for ‘High’. Kryptopyrrole comes from kryptos, the Greek word for ‘hidden’, while ‘pyre’ is a prefix for fire. The derivation is both Greek and Latin, and ‘pyrrole’ is a combination word meaning ‘fiery oil’. Thus, kryptopyrrole becomes ‘hidden fiery oil’, the chemical structure of which resembles other chemicals known to be toxic to brain function, such as LSD. The presence of kryptopyrrole, in elevated amounts, although not considered a sign of a particular, or, specific di
sease entity is, in abnormal amounts, considered a biochemical marker of psychiatric dysfunction, much like the reading of an elevated clinical thermometer. This biochemical metabolite (5 Hydroxy-kryptopyrrole Lactam) is normally present in humans in either very low amounts, or not at all, and it can be detected in the urine, which may have a mauve-coloured appearance.
Feeling now that he was finally on to something, the indefatigable Dr Klaus burned even more midnight oil, and, in doing so, learned that any kryptopyrrole reading of 20mcg/100cc was a cause for concern. Shawcross’s readings were ballistic, at up to 200mcg/100cc. Kryptopyrrole is also related to bile, and when excessive amounts are present, can combine with vitamin B6 and zinc to cause a metabolic defect called ‘pyroluria’. This proved to be another clue to understanding Shawcross, for pyrolurics function well in controlled settings of low stress, proper diet and predictability. Apart from the initial settling down periods, which are common to all prison inductees, Shawcross has always been quite at home within the structured prison system where he enjoys a balanced diet. Conversely, pyrolurics appear to suffer poorly, outside controlled conditions. Unable to control anger, once provoked, they have mood swings, cannot tolerate sudden, loud noises, are sensitive to bright lights, and tend to be ‘night people’. They usually skip breakfast, have trouble recalling night dreams, and they suffer poor, short-term memory, so they make bad liars. Sometimes, they lack pigment in the skin, and are, therefore, pale. The hair is prematurely grey, and they have a diminished ability to handle stress. As such, they may be very dangerous and constitute a risk to the public.
Talking with Serial Killers Page 7
