Son of Sam a media pundit? Fuck that, Fox News.

The BBQ Pit
41

vanilla - actually, it has. . .
Not the “conversion to Christianity” in and of itself per se, but serial killer types have claimed reformation of one sort or another, been let free, and then gone back to killing again.

There are two issues here: the Christian concept of forgiveness and repentance, which are spiritual/religious concepts, and the psychology of this kind of criminal.

On the true-blue spiritual side, if Berk. says that he has embraced the love of Christ, then more power to him. It is his path to follow. But psychologically, admission of faith means less than nothing, particularly when the subject’s core psychology motivates him to manipulate situations to his benefit. And I personally believe that his admission of Christianity is not sincere, but rather another attempt to manipulate the system.

It’s easy for one to say they subscribe to a religion. It’s another story for them to actually live it.

As you are a Christian, I sense that you want to take Berk. at his word, to forgive him, and to embrace him as a sinner. At my most cynical, I see that as a desire to believe the miracles of your faith, but more generally I perceive it as a part of the magic of your religion, and I find it admirable. However, based on my (albeit amateur) understanding of serial killers and their psychology, I don’t see this as the honest admission of one who has found Christ and seeks redemption. I see instead the manipulations of a cunning and psychopathic mind.

42

Some people are mentally ill. It’s hard to be mentally ill, and harder still because when you are mentally ill, people tend to immediately declare you a non-existent, non-important part of reality. That’s wrong. And when a mentally ill person’s delusions lead them to acts which, for mentally sane people, would be a crime, they are even further marginalized.

But this is wrong. Mentally ill people are part of the human experience. They are not an untouchable, irrelevant factor in human life. They are people’s brothers, fathers, mothers, sons. And their conditions are not things that are simply beyond the experience of other humans: their conditions are simply the extremes of certain human functionings and neurological dispositions. Learning about them DOES tell us infinately more about all of us.

So, yes, I do think Berkowitz is relevant here. I don’t think he should simply be filed away and never heard from again. Are news agencies simply trying to fill time with tangential and outrageous connections? Sure. But the Son of Sam is relevant. He killed people, and his illness led him to that. He understands what it is to be mentally ill, and his condition should not preclude him from being part of our national debate about how to deal with such things, how to deal with killers. He is relevant.

I hate FoxNews. They are sloppy, unproffesional, and ridiculously over the top. But sometimes, a scattershot, unthinking, idiotic approach can randomly hit on something worthwhile. I think that Berkowitz is worth considering in a case like this, and frankly, I think case is worthwhile.

43

Some felons “became Christians” before they did their crimes. So what?

P.S.: Diogenes, I am really digging you!

44

7:00pm - Father Degenerate Teaches Ethics
8:00pm - Jeffery Dahmer’s Severed Hand & Head Puppet Theater
9:00pm - Clownin’ Around with John Wayne Gacy
10:00pm - Ed Gein’s Soup Cooking Kitchen
11:00pm - NEWS
12:00pm - The Wayans Brothers Get Down With A Mangled Whore
1:00am - Assorted Infomercials

45

Apos, Berkowitz was examined by multiple psychiatrists and was actually found NOT to be mentally ill. Berkowitz himself admitted that he made up the whole talking dog story.

In recent years he has claimed that some some of his murders were not committed by him but that he was framed by some satanic cult. This shows me that he has no remorse for his crimes, that he is a liar, and that he has no credibility as an “expert.”

(Rilchiam, thanks)

46

Really? Then substitute “evil” for “mentally ill” in my post then. :slight_smile:

I’ve never quite understood the whole “this shows me that he has no remorse” bit. It seems to go at the end of every sentance. If someone breaks down in tears apologizing, people would still say “this shows me that he has no remorse.” Remorse is not inconsistent with a whole host of other psychological coping devices, including blaming others. It’s nice and all that people have one note reactions to evil, but it’s not particularly telling or psychologically insightful.

He’s a credible expert at killing people and terrorizing a community. I, for one, would love to find out from such people why they do what they do, and how they came to be.

47

Nope. He may be an expert in how he killed, but his relevence to this case is very tenuous.

There’s very little to connect the two cases except for the fact that in both people were killed with firearms.

And sane or otherwise, I don’t think even Berkowitz understands why he killed, so why would he have any insight into why Muhammed and Malvo (allegedly) killed their victims?

There may be a time and place for stories that compare and contrast the two cases, but I think now, especially in the days before Muhammed and Malvo were apprehended, was not the time.

Why killers kill is an important question to ask, but who you ask determines whether the answer will be relevant or just played for a cheap thrill.

48

Hear hear -

49

Sorry - lack of coffee clearly blunted my posting skills.

Apos:

What’s stupid about a show of remorse in this sort of situation is that serial-type killers showing remorse are the definition of crocodile tears. The people who study serial crime have demonstratable proof that “reformations” in serial killers are categorical manipulations. Their psychosis are, in fact, fed by attention; the Public’s in particular.

I strongly urge you to read some of the books out there that deal with profiling and behavioral science, particularly as they relate to serial killers. I only skimmed this site, but it seems to have at least some decent basic info on serial killers as a breed - a good digest if you want the highlights.

As far as Berkowitz being a killer and therefore a good resource for finding out about them, read the first three paragraphs or so on that site. 7 killers, 7 different motivations, 7 different manifestations, 7 different personalities. In many cases, the killer’s “insight” into their own actions is so basic and tenuous as to be laughable. The problem is that some of them are smart enough to feed the interviewer bullshit and make it taste like cherries, so the interviewer has got to be sharp and experienced enough in the field to not be mislead. I assure you that the average reporter looking for the “scoop” story does not qualify.

It’s only in the popular Thomas Harris books and films that the psychotic murderer has a truly deep insight into the mental workings of his “colleagues”.

I’m now kicking myself in the ass for not keeping a copy of Oct 23rd’s USA Today’s Editorials, which featured a piece by Jack Levin, titled Making Celebrities of Serial Killers Elevates Threat. The basic gist of this article was a warning by Levin, a criminologist, that the hyped media attention to serial killers tends to breed more, and that once they’ve started, many serial killers will go “above and beyond” to garner more media attention. His articles included verbatim quotes by killers referring to the TV to their victims: “You know the killer they’re talking about on TV? That’s me.” Apropos of my last paragraph, one even pleaded to be given the moniker “Hannibal Lector”.

As JonScribe mentioned, it important to learn why killers kill - the average person can educate themselves by taking classes, going to lectures, and reading books. The Media can do a good job of informing the public in a danger-management capacity (as they did warning the public about Ted Bundy’s preferred target: long, straight dark hair.). But interviewing Berkowitz on national TV is blatantly pandering to the worst voyeuristic aspects of the public, does not actually penetrate the issue in any real way, and by way of gratuitous sensationalization gives both killers a big ol’ stroke. It’s useless, with only the thinnest veneer of legitimate reporting.

50

What he said.