I give you the horrible case of Mr. Steven Spader, who was just convicted of first degree murder , in NH: http://bostonherald.com/news/national/northeast/view/20101109nh_jury_reaches_decision_in_fatal_home_invasion/srvc=home&position=also
To spare you the details, Spader and three of his friends formed a club, and decided to murder someone at random.
They chose a house in a rural area, broke in, and hacked a woman to death (and also almost killed her 11 year old daughter).
My question: do such criminals show signs of abnormality in childhood?
This crime is almost beyond comprehension-I cannot imagine how any human being could do such a thing.
In his trial, Spader showed no emotion at all-which leads me to believe that he is only partially human-something is missing.
I can imagine him as a 5 year old child-I feel bad for the parents of this monster.:eek:
Psychopaths (those with the actual diagnosis) do tend to exhibit signs of the disorder in childhood. However, most criminals are not psychopaths, and the vast majority of psychopaths do not commit violent crimes (they have a tendency to commit some crimes but mostly violate the rights of others in subcriminal ways).]
The DSM-IV diagnostic category of Antisocial Personality Disorder supposedly reflects psychopathy, but experts in that area (such as Robert Hare) feel that that particular diagnosis is not complete, and propose a diagnostic scale that incorporates both the criteria of Antisocial Personality Disorder and Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
Antisocial Personality Disorder does require that evidence of Conduct Disorder be present before the age of 15 years.
From that picture in the article that OP linked to, the guy certainly looks the part. Of course, I’m sure the newspaper chose that particular photo for just that reason.
Absolutely. At least some do.
Some classic symptoms which manifest early in childhood are: cruelty to (small) animals, starting fires, and enuresis (bedwetting). These are so commonly linked that the three together have a name: MacDonald’s Triad.
ETA: Of course, like all ‘rules of thumb’ and the like, the MacDonald triad is not 100% specific or sensitive for psychopathy
men are not supposed to show much emotion in any event. Ever heard of the British “stiff upper lip”? Stiff upper lip - Wikipedia
Yes. The primary assessment tool psychologists use to assess psychopathy in adults is the Hare Psychopathy Checklist Revised, also known as the PCL-R or simply “the Hare.” The screening version for identifying traits of psychopathy in juveniles is the PLC-R:VY, or Psychopathy Checklist Revised, Youth Version, designed for offenders between 12 and 18. These aren’t designed to assess psychopathy per se; you generally don’t want to assess a juvenile as a psychopath because even healthy juveniles are going to show signs of narcississm and self centeredness, but psychopathy screenings are still useful for identifying juveniles who are at risk to show signs of full blown psychopathy later in life.
Then you have Leopold and Loeb two geniuses who in 1924 were from very wealthy Chicago families and decided to murder someone to see if they could get away with it. Picked somene at random (happened to be a relation of Loeb) and beat him to death with a chisel.
Or Mary Bell an 11 year old girl who in 1968 decided to kill two boys 3 and 4 and actually carved the inital “M” into one of them
Or Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, two pre-teens, who in 1993 took a 3 year old walking in a mall and beat him with a brick, and did horrible things to him.
Or 11 year old Jesse Pomeroy who in the early 1870s started beating and whipping and attacking kids finally killing one or two, depending on whom you believe
Well you get the idea.
I don’t say this to distract from the OP question which is valid, but just to remind people these crimes as terrible as they are are not new.
And also to remind people when you backtrack you can always find common themes, there are tons of people with those exact same background who DON’T commit crimes like these.
A few more thoughts: two of the items on the Hare Psychopathy Checklist used to assess psychopathy in adults address how early psychopathic traits manifested in the individual’s life, “Item 12: Early Behavioral Problems” and “Item 18: Juvenile Deliquency,” since psychopathy generally starts showing signs early in a person’s life (which is the same reason that some evidence of Conduct Disorder is needed for a formal diagnosis of Antisocial Personality Disorder, as Kolga mentioned above).
The PCL-R technical manual states that the criteria looked for in Item 12 “Early Behavioral Problems” are serious problems in childhood, age 12 and under, which may include “persistent lying, cheating, theft, robbery, fire-setting, truancy, disruptions of classroom activities, substance abuse (including alcohol and glue sniffing), vandalism, violence, running away from home, and precocious sexual activities” to a degree much more serious than in other children. Item 18 “Juvenile Delinquency” criteria are juvenile offenses committed at age 17 and under, particularly serious offenses like murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, rape, arson, robbery, major theft, serious assault, kidnapping, fraud, drug trafficking, and so on. Not all psychopaths will show all the signs in early childhood, and not all people who have early behavior problems and juvenile convictions are psychopaths, but there is a positive correlation with childhood behavior problems, juvenile delinquency, and psychopathy.
Purely for clarification, could you just explain what link this has to anything anyone else has said, and further, whether it is all men, all British people, or merely all British men who you are suggesting are psychopaths.
Why would it take jurors an hour and a half?
Maybe debating the case, maybe reviewing the physical evidence, maybe something as simple as the fact they’ve been together for days on end and this is their first chance to actually discuss the case with each other in any way (“Did you see that guy’s eyes? Wasn’t he creepy? Holy crap!”), or something similar. For example, I had a jury trial (coincidentally involving a psychopath) finish just yesterday where the jury deliberated an hour and a half. They told me afterwards that they had already decided on their verdict as soon as they walked in the jury room, but then the baliff offered to go get them lunch. 
I was going to say a similar thing.
15 minutes for first potty/smoke break
30 minutes of discussion
30 minutes to eat lunch/snack
5 minutes for voting
10 minutes for final potty/smoke break
An attorney and a judge is going to want the jury to spend a minimum amount of time deliberating the verdict. If the jury comes back in a very serious trial such as this in 15 minutes, there may be cause for mistrial. For example, the defense might argue that there was no way all 12 jurors could have been able to speak freely about their decision in just 15 minutes and have had time to vote without being able to talk about reasonable doubt or consider all the evidence. IANAL, but this would be my suspicion.
Wow. I just think it would be a nice way to editorialize if the jury was out, say, 4 1/2 minutes and came back with a verdict.
Thanks…I feel sorry for the parents of these creeps. These kids must have been giving off signals that they were not normal…I belive that they were HS dropouts as well.
As for deliberating…I did watch spader’s defense lawyer deliver his not-too-convincing arguements…basically, he asked the jury “did the prosecutors prove he did this?”.
The evidence was overwhelming-and the fact that this sick little monster didn’t take the stand…oh well.
The fact that he didn’t take the stand is not really an indicator of anything. He was certainly not required to (5th amendment), and the defense probably thought that him doing so might jeopardize his case.
Assuming you find this triad in early childhood, can anything be done about it?
Something of a hijack: I just read about attempts to diagnose (and treat) autism in infants as young as six months. I have wondered if you see an infant who is following people from birth, smiling at one or two months, babbling and even having one or two words (mama, dada) by a year, is it possible for such children to suddenly develop autism at age 2 or 3?
There is a category in the DSM-IV called “Childhood Disintegrative Disorder” that requires a period of at least 2 years of normal development, followed by a marked decrease or loss of adaptive functioning in multiple areas. I think that’s more along the lines of what you’re asking - symptoms of autism generally have been identified much earlier than that, in most cases.
Yeah, he was really inocent-that is why his lawyer issued such a ringing endorsement!
I am suggesting that men (psychopaths, non psychopaths, British, non British etc) should show minimal emotions in public. Leave it to ladies on Oprah.
That being said, there were cases where equally brutal and psychopathic criminals did show effusive emotions of repentance on the stand and thus tried or even succeeded getting a lesser sentence. Good for them, I guess, but not for those who judge character Oprah-style.