Dark Dreams: Sexual Violence, Homicide And The Criminal Mind by Roy Hazelwood, Stephen G. Michaud Page A
Authors: Roy Hazelwood, Stephen G. Michaud
Ads: Link
think of a baseball team. All nine players are members of the same club; but they can bring widely differing skills, mental approaches, and levels of experience to the game. A long ball slugger, for example, goes about the game very differently than the spray hitter. Third basemen and pitchers do not see the action on the field in the same way. The same is true with ritualistic offenders; there are many types.
To narrow down the complexities of so many individual offenders, Dr. Warren and I identified five specific components that are common to all ritualistic offenders’ fantasies. We call them:
RELATIONAL
PARAPHILIC
SITUATIONAL
VICTIM DEMOGRAPHICS
SELF-PERCEPTIONAL
Relational
The relational component is whatever the offender fantasizes the relationship between himself and his victim to be. Within this category we see a wide range of behaviors. For instance, although these men target strangers as victims, the most common relational fantasy I have encountered among them is boyfriend-girlfriend, husband-wife, or lover. At the opposite end of the relational continuum is the fantasy of “master-slave.”
To define a rapist’s relational fantasy, I examine his crimes through a three-step process: (1) learning what the offender said to the victim and/or demanded that she say to him; (2) interpreting the amount of physical violence that he used against the victim; and (3) ascertaining the type and sequence of sexual acts involved.
For example, an offender who is acting out a “boyfriend-girlfriend” fantasy is typically not profane and can be even complimentary. He uses little or no physical force, preferring the types of sexual acts I call “criminal foreplay” (i.e., kissing, caressing, and cunnilingus), behavior that reflects his desire to have the victim become (in his mind) an active, willing partner.
On the other hand, a perpetrator acting out a master-slave relational fantasy will degrade his victim verbally with epithets such as “slut,” “whore,” or “bitch.” He demands subservience.
I would expect a high level of physical violence, possibly involving whipping, slapping, or hitting, and the use of painful restraints, such as handcuffs or chains. His sexual acts of choice are intended to degrade and humiliate his victim.
In a sexual homicide, testimony from the victim, of course, is not available; however, investigators can make inferences from other sources.
A few of the methods we use include: (1) accounts given by informants; (2) the nature and extent of injuries sustained by the victim; (3) the materials recovered from the offender; and (4) the theme of his pornography collection.
Robert Leroy Anderson, for example, had a master-slave relational fantasy. He told Glenn Walker, “It’s the rush…of having a total stranger do what you want.” Anderson repeatedly told Glenn Walker that Larisa Dumansky pleaded with him to do with her what he wanted but not to hurt her. These entreaties, of course, were in vain.
Compare this behavior with that of the offender who fantasizes a husband-wife relationship with his victim. “Tom” * was such a rapist. Responsible for eighteen assaults, he interacted with his victims in a highly individual way. Tom would capture a victim and take her to a river or lake. There he would instruct her to periodically ask the following questions: “Do we have enough money to get the kids’ teeth fixed this year?” “What is your bowling average?” “Have you rented the mountain cabin yet?” “When are you going to get the refrigerator fixed?”
Most people would laugh at such nonsense, but to the behavioral scientist, it is critical information. These questions tell me what is in Tom’s mind, what fantasy he is trying to bring to reality.
Paraphilic
The second component of the ritualistic offender’s fantasy world is its paraphilic dimension. Paraphilia is the preferred mental health term for sexual deviation. Sexual sadism is a paraphilia, as are voyeurism,
To narrow down the complexities of so many individual offenders, Dr. Warren and I identified five specific components that are common to all ritualistic offenders’ fantasies. We call them:
RELATIONAL
PARAPHILIC
SITUATIONAL
VICTIM DEMOGRAPHICS
SELF-PERCEPTIONAL
Relational
The relational component is whatever the offender fantasizes the relationship between himself and his victim to be. Within this category we see a wide range of behaviors. For instance, although these men target strangers as victims, the most common relational fantasy I have encountered among them is boyfriend-girlfriend, husband-wife, or lover. At the opposite end of the relational continuum is the fantasy of “master-slave.”
To define a rapist’s relational fantasy, I examine his crimes through a three-step process: (1) learning what the offender said to the victim and/or demanded that she say to him; (2) interpreting the amount of physical violence that he used against the victim; and (3) ascertaining the type and sequence of sexual acts involved.
For example, an offender who is acting out a “boyfriend-girlfriend” fantasy is typically not profane and can be even complimentary. He uses little or no physical force, preferring the types of sexual acts I call “criminal foreplay” (i.e., kissing, caressing, and cunnilingus), behavior that reflects his desire to have the victim become (in his mind) an active, willing partner.
On the other hand, a perpetrator acting out a master-slave relational fantasy will degrade his victim verbally with epithets such as “slut,” “whore,” or “bitch.” He demands subservience.
I would expect a high level of physical violence, possibly involving whipping, slapping, or hitting, and the use of painful restraints, such as handcuffs or chains. His sexual acts of choice are intended to degrade and humiliate his victim.
In a sexual homicide, testimony from the victim, of course, is not available; however, investigators can make inferences from other sources.
A few of the methods we use include: (1) accounts given by informants; (2) the nature and extent of injuries sustained by the victim; (3) the materials recovered from the offender; and (4) the theme of his pornography collection.
Robert Leroy Anderson, for example, had a master-slave relational fantasy. He told Glenn Walker, “It’s the rush…of having a total stranger do what you want.” Anderson repeatedly told Glenn Walker that Larisa Dumansky pleaded with him to do with her what he wanted but not to hurt her. These entreaties, of course, were in vain.
Compare this behavior with that of the offender who fantasizes a husband-wife relationship with his victim. “Tom” * was such a rapist. Responsible for eighteen assaults, he interacted with his victims in a highly individual way. Tom would capture a victim and take her to a river or lake. There he would instruct her to periodically ask the following questions: “Do we have enough money to get the kids’ teeth fixed this year?” “What is your bowling average?” “Have you rented the mountain cabin yet?” “When are you going to get the refrigerator fixed?”
Most people would laugh at such nonsense, but to the behavioral scientist, it is critical information. These questions tell me what is in Tom’s mind, what fantasy he is trying to bring to reality.
Paraphilic
The second component of the ritualistic offender’s fantasy world is its paraphilic dimension. Paraphilia is the preferred mental health term for sexual deviation. Sexual sadism is a paraphilia, as are voyeurism,
Similar Books
