|
When two people go on a killing spree together,
the question is always asked whether either would have ever done such
a thing alone. Did they bring out the worst in each other? Had they
never met, might each of their lives have been different?
Roy Hazelwood, a former FBI profiler, and his
associate, Janet Warren, did a study of the patterns they found among
partners in which sexual sadism was a strong dynamic, publishing it in
the third edition of Practical Aspects of Rape Investigation.
They spoke with 20 women who had been the wives and girlfriends of men
whom they considered sexually sadistic. They hoped to learn more
about the habits and sexual preferences of these men, as well as to
understand more clearly how they persuade women to partner up with
them and even get involved in killing. It is one of the few studies
done in which the women get to speak, and while it is valuable for
understanding a certain type of killing couple, some of the
generalizations give the impression that the psychology of team
killers follows a specific formula. Nothing could be further from the
truth.
 |
| The
Gates of Janus, by Ian Brady |
Before looking at this study, let's study a few
different types of couples to see how they portray a certain type of
dynamic. We begin with the case of Ian Brady and Myra Hindley, known
as Britain's notorious Moors Murderers. While their case has been
covered extensively by many authors, a new book by Brady himself gives
their experience together a different cast. That publication came
about from his contact with noted crime writer, Colin Wilson, who
himself offers an analysis.
When Wilson engaged in a prison correspondence
with Brady, he had a unique chance to try to understand a murderer's
logic. Brady wrote him hundreds of letters about the nature of
killing, and the result was Brady's book, The Gates of Janus,
with an introduction from Colin Wilson.
 |
| Ian Brady
(CORBIS) |
Called "the most evil man alive," Brady offers
his insights into many other murderers, affirming Wilson's
classification of Brady as "a self-esteem killer." By that he means
that some murderers are fueled primarily by one of the "growth needs"
listed on psychologist Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of human motivations
(hunger, safety, social connection, self-esteem, and self
actualization). Self-esteem killers act out to feel better about
themselves and to win admiration. That does seem like a feasible
explanation for Brady's crimes, but a look at Brady's philosophies
indicates that he may have been motivated by the need for
self-actualization, a step above self-esteem on Maslow's hierarchy.
In other words, for him, killing appeared to be a creative expression
of his nihilistic ideas about life. He didn't need a partner, but
once he had one, all he had to do was persuade her to accept his
philosophies.
 |
| Crime
and Punishment |
Ian Brady was a fan of Russian author, Fyodor
Dostoevsky, who wrote such classics as Crime and Punishment and
The Possessed. Both books deal with someone who becomes
obsessed with planning a crime, and Dostoevsky had laid out the
psychology of such a person in detail. The character of Raskolnikov
in Crime and Punishment, in particular, is obsessed with
proving that he is beyond the laws of society because he is a
"superior" man. He interprets that to mean that, should he decide to,
he could kill someone at whim, without consequences. He selects an
old woman and carries out his plan, having also to murder another
woman who happens along. Then he writes feverishly about the act and
its proof that he is a superior being. While he ended up
disintegrating, which disproved his ideas about himself, Brady took
the notion seriously. For him, it seemed a real possibility.
Brady developed as a loner in Glasgow, Scotland,
who indulged in petty crimes that by the age of 17 landed him in
jail. His exposure in jail to hardened criminals apparently had some
influence, according to Wilson's understanding from Brady's
correspondence, and Brady developed an attitude that he was going to
act out against society for the injustices against him. His goal was
to amass as much money as he could in the least amount of time. Once
released from prison, he looked for opportunities to achieve that. He
continued to read widely and became a strong admirer of Hitler and
Nazism. He also denounced religion.
 |
| Myra
Hindley (CORBIS) |
Myra Hindley was 18 when she met Ian Brady in
1961. She was a simple girl who loved children, and she took a job at
Millwards LTD in Manchester, England, where Brady was working. She
became infatuated with him and so was an easy mark.
"Ian told me," says Colin Wilson, "that the
relationship was so close that they were virtually telepathic." Brady
managed, according to Myra's diary, to convince her there was no God
and that morality was relative. That meant that her own convictions
could not have been firmly grounded. Did he have a sense of this or
did he manipulate her into being so pliable? It's likely that her
conversion was a little bit of both.
He spoke of Nazism and the violent hedonistic
philosophies of the Marquis de Sade, and soon had her hating people as
much as he did. He proposed that they enrich themselves through a
life of crime, to which she acceded, and she soon found herself
helping him to rape children and bury them on the moors. Their first
victim in 1963 was a 16-year-old girl, but the children got
progressively younger. The next was a 12-year-old boy. (For full
details on these crimes, see Crime Library's story devoted exclusively
to this killing couple.)
Brady hoped to acquire another accomplice,
Myra's brother-in-law, David Smith, who came under Brady's spell. He
tried to get Smith to kill someone, but when the job was mishandled,
Brady grew paranoid, so Myra had to persuade him not to kill the young
man. Brady later got him involved in a murder that he had performed
in the home of Myra's grandmother, with the elderly woman present
upstairs. However, Smith couldn't take what he'd seen, and he told his
wife, who informed the police. They arrested Brady first, and then
Myra. In 1966, both were sentenced to life in prison, but neither
admitted to involvement in these criminal acts. They wrote to each
other from their separate prisons. However, Myra returned to
Catholicism and her attitudes about Brady shifted. She began to say
that she had been under his influence. He had changed her. It had
never been her idea.
Myra wanted out of prison, so she wrote a long
document that detailed how Brady was entirely responsible for the
murders. Like many such psychopathic couples, each partner looks to
his or her own interests, so Myra decided to use him to win parole.
At first, Brady had exonerated her, but upon hearing how she had
turned on him, he implicated her in everything, even saying that some
of the brutality was her idea.
By 1987, Myra had admitted to her part in the
murders, although she claimed that she was forced into it through
blackmail. Brady, she said, wanted to commit the perfect murder, and
she had helped him get victims, but she denied being present to any of
the actual killings. She believed that Brady would kill her, too, or
her grandmother, so she went along with whatever he asked. She also
implicated David Smith as Brady's accomplice. Either she was telling
the truth or she was playing her female advantage while being even
more conniving than Brady.
Yet for all her detail, Brady gave a fuller peak
into the motives and experiences of the career killer. In his book,
he makes it clear that he thinks of crime as an exciting venture for
the solitary explorer, "consciously thirsting to experience that which
the majority have not and dare not." Human nature, he believes, when
not bounded by social convention, is more inclined toward "the
crooked." Nevertheless, it's not the ultimate high; in fact, its lack
of satisfaction can be a real letdown. The doer of such deeds is
generally too preoccupied with the possibility of discovery that he
fails to fully experience it as he might.
As for murder itself, "viewed scientifically,
the death of a human being is of no more significance than that of any
other animal on earth." Serial killers, he adds, are people who are
"unavoidably a failure in many normal walks of life." This would
describe both him and Myra. Such a person lacks patience, he writes,
and eschews the kind of boredom that most other people accept. "The
serial killer has chosen to live a day as a lion, rather than decades
as a sheep." Once he has committed homicide, he accepts his acts as
normal, and the rest of humanity as "subnormal."
While Brady goes on to describe the cases of
individual serial killers such as Ted Bundy and Carl Panzram, he only
addresses the dynamics of a team in depth when he discusses the
Hillside Stranglers, cousins Kenneth Bianci and Angelo Buono. Here he
talks about the shared delusion known as folie a deux, an
intellectual form of persuasion and conversion of one partner by
another. It can only occur, he says, if the target person is "fertile
soil in which such proposals can readily take root." In other words,
the criminal desire must already be present.
This analysis removes any ideas about the
compliant accomplice who was merely the right kind of person in the
wrong place at the wrong time. If a person got involved in crime as
the result of another person's influence, then that person was already
a criminal waiting to happen. That's Brady's take on it, anyway.
Brady takes a swing at Myra when he writes, "It
is human nature that, if caught, the pupil will blame the master for
his criminal conduct." Even so, the pupil's zeal, had she not been
caught, would have outraced the master's. In that case, a role
reversal may occur and the master becomes the pupil. Myra, he seems
to be saying, was as bad as he and might easily have become worse.
While he wrote a letter denying that his
relationship with her was based on coercion, she insists that he had a
certain charm that made her believe anything and want to do anything
for and with him. Was that due to her vulnerability or to his power?
It's difficult to tell.
Whether Myra was a dormant criminal with Brady's
nihilistic criminality a catalyst or whether she acted out of some
other motivation, it seems clear that Brady was the dominant
personality. It's more likely than not that had she never met him,
she would have lived a much more ordinary life. She might have even
been nurturing rather than antisocial.
Yet it's not always the male who leads the
dance. Sometimes two partners are nearly equal in their capacity for
atrocity, and their equal ability to suffer no remorse fuels a pattern
of increasingly aggressive acts against others. Only when they get
caught do they stop. A number of male-female couples fit this
profile, despite the fact that the female inevitably claims to have
been a victim. However, her actual behavior tells a different story.
A case in point is the couple that has become a role model for many
killing couples, Bonnie and Clyde. Their story is fairly well-known
(with full details in another Crime Library story), but let's look at
a brief summary to see how they developed together as killers.
|