Female Serial Killers

by Peter Vronsky

  THE NATURE OF AGGRESSION IN GIRLS

  One of the reasons that we might not see the manifestation of the classic behavioral triad in women as children and adolescents is that female aggression takes a different form in young girls and continues to do so into adulthood as well. Females often commit aggression through others—by manipulating others to commit a violent act or manipulating the circumstances around an intended victim leading to their exposure to harm.

  Newly emerging studies of female violence in various societies, both primitive and modern, reveal that preschool-age girls are as violent as their brothers. They are equally prepared to push and punch and use physical force to achieve their goals. But when they reach the age of ten or eleven it appears that females become less physically aggressive.

  This does not mean that females are no longer aggressive at that age, but that their aggression begins to take a different form than it does in males. In the male a public display of aggressive prowess is encouraged, while the female begins to use her newly acquired linguistic and social skills to practice aggression surreptitiously. Females begin to use indirect or “masked” aggression, manipulating others to attack or somehow using the social structure to harm their intended victim.73 The use of gossiping, exchanging derogatory notes, and excluding a victim from groups, the forming of hate clubs and recently hate websites are common media for adolescent female aggression and sometimes these forms can lead to serious physical repercussions.

  Anthropologist Ilsa Glazer observed that in both Zambia and Israel, female leaders tended to scapegoat and gossip about other ambitious subordinate women in an attempt to exclude them from power. In nearby Palestine, where often women are murdered by their fathers or brothers to “defend family honor,” Glazer discovered that the killing was actually instigated by women who first insistently spread accusatory gossip, which spurred the men to act.74 In North American youth gangs, girls sometimes instigate violence by deliberately calculated acts of “bad-mouthing” that compel their boyfriends to commit acts of violence. This kind of evidence points to a longer-standing notion of female “masked criminality” where as an offender the woman is perceived as instigating and inspiring violence rather than partaking in it directly.75

  OBESITY, LONELINESS, AND FANTASIES IN FEMALE SERIAL KILLERS

  Schurman-Kauflin further reports that 100 percent of the female offenders she interviewed reported childhood obesity and 43 percent reported teenaged acne. Today, obesity is all too common but when these women were growing up it could have, along with the acne, contributed more severely to their social isolation.

  And social isolation—loneliness—might be arguably the most common characteristic of the childhood of serial killers. Male or female. It is in their isolation from playmates and peers that future serial killers begin to dwell upon violent fantasies of revenge and domination so closely linked to their lack of self-esteem. And fantasy appears to be a key factor. The FBI study of male sexual murderers rejected the notion that they murdered as a defensive-reactive response to extremely abusive experiences in their life. What troubled the FBI analysts was the fact that not all the serial killers they were interviewing suffered severe abuse in childhood. The FBI concluded that serial murderers “programmed” or conditioned themselves in childhood to become murderers in a progressively intensifying loop of fantasies. The most common childhood trait of serial killers, which also extends into adolescence and adulthood, is daydreaming and compulsive masturbation. As defined in the study, daydreaming is “any cognitive activity representing a shift of attention away from a task.” Fantasy is defined as an elaborate thought with great preoccupation, sometimes expressed as images, or feelings only, anchored in the daydreaming process.76 The study found that 82 percent of offenders reported daydreaming in their childhood. An equal 82 percent reported compulsive masturbation (probably accompanying the daydreams.)77 When the offenders reached their adolescence and then their adulthood, there was only a one percent drop in their daydreaming and compulsive masturbation.

  Fantasies serve to relieve anxiety or fear and almost everybody has them to one degree or another. A child that is abused may understandably develop aggressive fantasies in which the child develops a power and means by which he or she can destroy the tormentor. But the trigger of these fantasies does not necessarily need to be an extraordinarily abusive or violent event—relatively common events such as parental divorce, family illness, or even rejection by a friend can all give a child a sense of loss of control, anxiety, and fear, and may as a result spark aggressive fantasies as a method of coping with the stress.

  It is only at this point that the other factors noted in the serial killers’ childhood take effect. The child that lacks bonding and contact with others will internalize fantasy and cloud the boundary between fantasy and reality. Living in a private world the child begins to repeat and elaborate on fantasy, finding comfort while continually narrowing the perimeters between fantasy and reality. Of the killers interviewed in the FBI study, 71 percent reported a sense of isolation in their childhood. As they grew into adolescence, the sense of isolation apparently increased to 77 percent of subjects.78 Such increased social isolation only encourages a reliance on fantasy as a substitute for human encounters. Schurman-Kauflin reported that 100 percent of her female subjects recalled being isolated from others in childhood, adolescence, and adulthood and that their time alone was spent engaging in violent fantasies.

  The individual’s personality development becomes dependent on the fantasy life and its themes rather than on social interaction. The total escape and control that the child has in the fantasy world becomes addicting, especially if there are continued stresses in the child’s life.

  If the particular fantasy involves violence, revenge, or murder, they become part of that addiction and when combined with masturbation, a sexual component to the fantasy is developed. This process is a form of deeply rooted conditioning where the repeated pairing of fantasized cues with orgasm results in the acquisition of sexually arousing properties. Violence and the sexual drive become merged into a murderous obsession, which often is kept secret. As one unnamed killer in the FBI study said, “Nobody bothered to find out what my problem was, and nobody knew about the fantasy world.”

  We have scant data on the fantasy life of female serial killers and no or few studies of the relationship between fantasy and masturbation in female adolescents. Nonetheless, the seven women in Schurman-Kauflin’s study reported homicidal fantasies in their childhood. The study reports that fantasy appears as a critical component of the female killer’s childhood and suggests that not only does it result from social isolation, but contributes to it as well. According to Schurman-Kauflin, at least one of her subjects reported being aware of the inappropriateness of her murderous fantasies toward others and as a result further isolated herself from social contact.79 This, of course, confirms the nondelusional nature of female serial killers: They are highly aware of the character of their fantasies.

  Schurman-Kauflin reports that many of the women reported at first simple and vague fantasies involving the murder of another human being. These fantasies included a specific method of killing. Five reported they fantasized strangling or suffocating their victims, one reported shooting, while the remaining subject refused to discuss the specifics of her fantasies. In the early stages of these fantasies, no identifiable individual figured in them. The fantasy victims were generically identified: children, men, the elderly, women, etc. But after months of this generic fantasizing, the women reported that they began to fixate on a specific individual, usually somebody they knew.80

  The closer the women came to killing, the more detailed and elaborate the fantasies became. The fantasy eventually incorporated the actual MO to be used to ensure that the murder would not be detected and that the evidence would be destroyed. The fantasy became increasingly violent, detailed, repetitive, and intrusive until it gradually became a plan. When there was nothing further to elaborate on, th
e offender would proceed to the next stage—the realization of the homicidal fantasies.

  Several of the women in the study admitted to careful research in forensic pathology, investigative procedures, and criminal psychology. They reported feeling a rise in self-esteem with the success of their multiple murders: They were doing something nobody else could.

  Eventually, in a pattern typical for all serial killers, the problems of their daily life would submerge the euphoria they were experiencing in the wake of their successful murder. They would sink back into depression and isolation and return to their fantasies to seek solace. And the killing cycle would begin again.

  Schurman-Kauflin’s study is problematic: She only had seven subjects, which skews the percentile figure by a huge 14 percent for each subject. Moreover, not all of her subjects were serial killers—at least one if not more was a mass killer, which involves a totally different psychological dynamic more akin with suicide than with serial murder.

  The Keeney-Heide study is also problematic as it relies on records and media reports to collect its data on female offenders. These studies of female serial killers, however, are the best we have, and nothing for females currently approaches the study the FBI conducted when its agents extensively interviewed the twenty-nine male serial killers.

  Despite this lack of parity between male and female studies, gender issues should not entirely obscure our understanding of women serial killers. While there are some significant differences, much of the psychopathology of female serial killers is similar to that of male killers—what we know about males can often be applied to understanding female serialists as well.

  THE MAKING OF SERIAL KILLERS

  We know that an overwhelming majority of serial killers experienced traumatic childhoods usually in the form of physical and sexual abuse. This applies to males as equally as females (with the exception of female partners of males). This observation is not intended to defend the serial killer—lots of children are abused and do not become serial killers. The point is that abused children can develop psychological states that facilitate the emergence of a serial killer—psychopathy in particular, which will be discussed below in more detail.

  A history of chaotic and unstable family life is common to a majority of serial killers. Most serial killers come from broken homes with frequent parental histories of drug and alcohol abuse and criminality.

  Along with abuse, an early disruption of an infant’s physical and emotional attachment to its mother and even father can also result in lifelong behavioral disorders. There are cases of adopted children who are raised in apparently loving and stable families who nonetheless become serial killers. Irreparable damage had already occurred prior to adoption when the child was an infant. But again, none of these factors alone sufficiently explains the mind of a serial killer because there are hundreds of thousands of adopted children who do not become killers.

  Brain injuries can cause violent behavioral patterns and many serial killers have a history of head injuries when they were children or recent injuries prior to the onset of killing. But again, this is not the cause alone of their murderous behavior—already other behavioral problems are frequently present. Most people who sustain head injuries do not become killers.

  Serial killers frequently test positive for abnormal levels of chemicals in their body associated with depression or compulsive behavior, such as monoamine oxidase (MAO) and serotonin. Other biochemical or physiological conditions in serial killers have included cortical underarousal, EEG abnormalities,81 the presence of an extra Y chromosome* and high levels of kryptopyrrole—“hidden fiery oil” (or bile)—a rare biochemical marker sometimes found in severe mental dysfunctions: a natural human organic metabolite with a chemical structure resembling man-made substances similar to LSD.82

  There is also evidence suggesting that there might be some type of congenital genetic abnormalities resulting in brain damage common to many serial killers. One study found twenty-three physical abnormalities common to serial killers, including: bulbous fingertips, fine or electric wire hair that will not comb down, hair whorls, head circumference outside a normal range, malformed ears, curved fifth finger, high-steepled palate, singular transverse palmer crease, third toe is longer than second toe or equal in length to second toe, and abnormalities in teeth and skin texture.83

  Finally, loneliness, an inability to form attachments with peers, social rejection, and isolation combined with the emergence of violent fantasies also characterize the childhoods of most serial killers. Again, it is a chicken-or-egg type of quandary: What comes first—rejection by peers that leads to behavioral disorders or disorders that lead to rejection by peers? Or a cycle of both? Again, not all lonely children become serial killers, some only end up writing books about them.

  The prevailing theory is that there is a delicate balance between a chaotic or abusive childhood, disrupted attachment to parental figures and peers, and biochemical factors that can trigger murderous behavior. Healthy social factors can intervene in a biochemically unstable individual otherwise predisposed to criminal behavior; or on the other hand, healthy biochemistry can protect a person with a turbulent childhood from growing up a killer.

  Violent offenders emerge when all or most elements are out of balance. This theory goes a long way to explain why some children with difficult childhoods do not become serial killers or why not everyone with a head injury behaves criminally. It also gives us clues as to the type or profile of serial killers that emerges: It is like the bass and treble adjustment on a sound system. Some serial killers are self-confident and highly organized; others are extremely shy and chaotic. The combinations of degrees of the above-described childhood factors not only can produce a serial killer but also will determine what kind of serial killer he or she will be.

  DIAGNOSING SERIAL KILLERS: PSYCHOPATHY AND ASPD

  A vast majority of female and male serial killers are psychopaths. Psychopathy is currently called antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) although some argue the two are different disorders. “Psychopath” is a popular and policing term and not an official psychiatric diagnostic term and does not appear in the DSM-IV.

  The psychopath should not be confused with the psychotic, who is often delusional, paranoid, and suffering from an organic disease in the brain like schizophrenia. Psychotic serial killers are extremely rare because psychosis is not conducive to the long-term maintenance of a serial-killing career. Psychotics are clinically and legally insane, and are more often a danger to themselves than to others. The psychotic is unaware of the reality of their situation or of the acts they are perpetrating and are driven by voices in their head and hallucinations. Sometimes these symptoms can be controlled by medication. The psychotic is rarely able to maintain the so-called “mask of sanity”—an appearance of normality—that is required of the serial killer between murders.

  THE PSYCHOPATH

  The psychopath is an entirely different creature. Psychopaths are acutely aware of reality. They fully understand the harmful nature of the acts they commit but simply do not care. The closest things to insanity in psychopaths are their fantasies and their inabilities to resist the compulsion to realize their fantasies. But these fantasies are not delusional. Serial killers are perfectly aware of the criminal and homicidal nature of the fantasies they harbor.

  Psychopaths are essentially incapable of feeling a normal range of emotions but there is more to it than that: Psychopaths are capable of simulating, for various periods of time, those emotions. They display very convincing shows of sympathy, love, attachment, and caring. This is the so-called “mask of sanity.” Psychopaths learn to call on a repertoire of simulated emotions for the benefit of others, while themselves feeling either nothing or entirely opposite emotions. This is critical to understanding the female serial killers, as so many of them kill victims they appear to be intimate with. For the female, this intimacy can be entirely simulated.

  The unique nature of psychopathy has been ide
ntified for at least three centuries now. In France in the late 1700s, the often-called “father of modern psychiatry,” Philippe Pinel, noted that some of his patients committed impulsive, destructive acts despite their awareness of the irrationality and harmful nature of the acts. These patients did not appear to have their reasoning abilities impaired and Pinel called the disorder manie sans delire (insanity without delirium.)

  THE QUESTION OF SANITY

  In criminal justice the notion of insanity as a defense goes back to medieval times but was formalized in modern law in England in 1843 with the M’Naghten Rule, named for a mentally ill man, Daniel M’Naghten, who was charged with murder but found not guilty by reason of insanity and confined in a mental asylum instead. It is used in many Western countries today, including the U.S., to define insanity in the courts. The rule states that to establish a successful defense on the grounds of insanity:

  It must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong.84

  The M’Naghten Rule does not obviously describe psychopaths who are completely aware of “the nature and quality of the act” they are committing. Nonetheless, courts at one time accepted an insanity plea in the defense of psychopaths based primarily on the argument that they suffered from an “irresistible impulse” to kill. In the 19th century, psychopathy was described as “moral insanity” or “moral imbecility” and was grounds for an insanity plea.

  By the 1970s, juries in the U.S., in the face of a rising number of serial killers, began to reject the “irresistible impulse” insanity plea, fearing that the serial killers may eventually be released from their confinement in psychiatric facilities. In 1984, after John Hinckley was acquitted by reason of insanity for his attempt to gun down President Ronald Reagan, Congress passed the Insanity Defense Reform Act. It conclusively excluded “irresistible impulse” as a ground for an insanity plea.