Re: PING SNYDER: Female Serial Killer Has To Work Twice As Hard To Achieve Notoriety


"Bo Raxo" <crimenewscenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1194977248.671807.237340@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Nov 13, 5:32 am, "ItsJustMe" <ells9...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Like I said earlier in the thread, I admit I don't know much about FSK at
all. I always thought serial killers were people that went after a "type"
of
person,or at least a common thread ran through their victims, as opposed
to
mass killers who killed random people with nothing in
common(students,people
in a building,or bus,or something similar)

I'm dead serious here, not trying to bait you at all. Educate me.

*Some* have a fetish that has a particular victim profile - these are
your classic (and usually male, though occaisonally couple) SKers.
They usually rape their victims. They have a particular kink and
carry it out over and over.

But motivation is the thing that provides categories of serial
killers. The fetish type are motivated by a psychosexual drama they
need to play out, a ritual that they like to enact and then relive
over and over. As with most things sexual, looks count, which is why
this best known type of serial killer makes you think of SKer sin
general as having a particular victim profile.

Think of SKers as really selfish people - it's all about them. For
the psychosexual types, it's about getting their rocks off, and so
they have a particular look they like. But think of the "angel of
death", a killer who is a health care or assisted living worker and
offs geezers. This is most often a female SKer, often with a high
victim count, often gets away with it for a long time. Perfectly
plausible, given the victim profile (very old and usually in bad
health) that many or most of these never get caught.

That type has a pretty loose victim profile - because it's all about
them.

Another largely female serial killer offender profile is the classic
black widow - lures men in with promises of sex and/or companionship
(often in the form of marriage in the old days, perhaps updated now)
and then offs them. This is what is known as a comfort killer in more
general terms - they aren't killing for a psychosexual motive like,
say, Ted Bundy. They are killing for financial gain, similar to a
professional hit man who has many victims and kills when there's money
to be made.

Now someone who kills for a living, say a Sammy the Bull, has
something of a victim profile: usually it's someone who is involved
with organized crime, the victim is typically a white male native born
to the U.S. But the victim profile isn't what describes that kind of
killer, it's the motivation, just as it is with the black widow.
Motivation is the factor that defines and divides the classifications
of these killers.

Put another way: imagine a serial killer who killed a long series of
middle-aged white men in isolated spots, the bodies found in their
cars. That victimology doesn't tell you much. But if the motive was
robbery, and the guys had a history of seeing prostitutes, you might
have an Aileen Wuornos type. If the guys were involved in gambling,
you might have a comfort killer who is hired to get rid of those who
can't pay their debts. If the guys are utterly unrelated to each
other but killed in a very specific identical fashion, and the last of
the victims has someone with a motive to kill him, and opportunity to
kill all of the others, you have an A-B-C killer. Same victim pool,
so you look at what they have in common (or don't) to try and
understand the killer's motivation.

Which leads to you a profile. Profilers are looking at the victims to
understand the killer's motivation, and that's why victim similarities
are not an end in themselves (gee, Bundy likes slim brunettes) but a
step in understanding what type among a half dozen or so groups the
killer falls in to.

Hope that helps, I'm sure there are sites on the net that explain this
much better than my little rambling here.


Bo Raxo

I guess I really need to research this myself. I'm sure *my* ramblings will
appear stupid and childish,but I'm not trying to be at all.

With the absence of value on human life, people(hit man for instance)can
kill as his job with out remorse. Would he really be a serial killer, as he
kills only when hired to do so? I know from what I've read some really like
to torture first,so would they be the exception or the rule? A killer who
puts 2 behind the ear or one who pulls out fingernails and teeth before they
garote with piano wire.Both are murderers....unless its the MO that
matters,as motivation would be the same(monetary gain) BUT..the one who
tortures would also be filling a (sick)need.

What about the guy who mixes the chemicals for a death sentence? I mean, he
kills,its his job,is he also a serial killer even though its sanctioned?
Then of course,you could argue that the mob is its own world,and they okay
hits on people who have done wrong-even members-so in that way the people
carrying out the hit are committing sanctioned murder in "their world" (for
the record,I am not anti-DP,just an example)

I've never heard the term "comfort killer" ...it would be hard to draw a
line there,too. A lady her murders husbands,borders,family, etc to gain
wealth or possessions....vs an escaped inmate or refuge from an asylum of
some sort,killing several people in their attempt to escape their current
fate -i.e. -an escape who kills guards to get out,and people for clothes and
cars and money. They are seeking "comfort and gain" when they kill...but
really they wouldn't be serial killers, would they,just sociopaths?

This is confusing.



.

Relevant Pages