What if, instead of being an innocent and shattered bystander, you were actually the one who killed them? Would your words be different? Could you convince a 911 dispatcher, who has handled hundreds of emergency calls, that you are a genuinely distressed relative who is in shock and whose only goal is to get help for a loved one?

Get Your A** Over Here!

In my last blog, I talked about lie detection when a murderer fakes a relative’s abduction and goes public to appeal for help. Although not perfect, there were subtle clues that differentiated fake abduction appeals from those of genuinely distressed and innocent family members. Perhaps not surprisingly, given the strength of our nonverbal language to communicate, many of these cues were in found in facial expressions (the inability to express genuine sadness and/or facial expressions that were inconsistent with the situation).

911 obviously removes those visual clues. However, even when we’re blind to how callers look, fake 911 phoners just aren’t able communicate the way we’d expect them to. This is especially true when we look at how fake versus genuine 911 callers handle the request for emergency assistance.

Genuine 911 callers have one goal in mind; to get medical assistance to respond as soon as possible. (I need an ambulance at 1940 Seaview Avenue RIGHT NOW! My husband has been shot!) They don’t care about being polite, offer explanations for where they’ve been before they discovered the victim, or offer extraneous information such as the fact that the two of them had been in an argument or that the victim had been in a car accident two weeks ago. Their message is simple and urgent; get your butt over here as soon as possible and save the person I love. In fact, even when it’s clear to emergency responders that the victim is beyond resuscitation, genuine 911 callers may refuse to believe their loved one is dead and demand that medical professionals continue to attempt to revive their loved one.

Long Distance Calling

On the other hand, researchers who analyzed 100 emergency phone calls found that fake 911 callers tended to distance themselves from their victims. This could occur in a number of ways. Although relatively rare, one of the most telling clues was when the caller either insulted or blamed the victim at the same time they were asking for help. Researchers cited the following communication as an example of a caller who was ultimately found guilty of second degree murder after he punished his 4 year old adopted daughter to drink 64 ounces of water.

“Dispatcher: Do you know what’s wrong with your daughter?

Caller: Not a clue.

Dispatcher: Has she taken any medications?

Caller: She might have, she’s very, very sneaky. She threw a huge temper tantrum earlier;

she might have taken something.”

A guilty 911 caller might spontaneously launch into an explanation of how the “accident” happened (we were arguing and he wouldn’t let me leave) or what s/he was doing before s/he found the victim (I just got home from a business meeting). These statements are especially significant if offered before advising the dispatcher of the seriousness of the event.

I Have a Problem and it’s Dead on the Floor

Since the real goal of a guilty party’s 911 call is to establish his innocence, it makes sense that the focus of the call would be on the caller instead of the victim. In comparison to genuine calls for help, fake 911 callers tended to ask for help for themselves as opposed to their victims. Their choice of words (I have a baby and she’s not breathing; Help me! My father’s been murdered!) tends to suggest that the problem is the victim rather than the victim’s medical condition or injury.

Finally, one distinguishing factor between fake versus genuine 911 calls is in the use of evasion. We all know it takes a lot more energy to lie than to tell the truth and keeping a story straight is especially hard when you’re making it up as you go along. As a result, fake 911 callers are more likely to get thrown by easy questions (Huh? In response to how many stairs did she fall down), give conflicting information (he was fine a few hours ago; I’ve been asleep all night), and avoid or repeat answers.

The Bottom Line

The goals of deceptive versus genuine 911 callers are different. One is to start the cover story that will hopefully persuade the audience of his innocence; the other is to get immediate medical attention for a wounded loved one. These vastly different goals inevitably influence the way these 911 callers communicate to emergency dispatchers, and the words they use are the first evidence in what will turn out to either be a criminal prosecution for the caller – or a tragedy.

However, a series of increasingly bizarre media interviews, the discovery of the mother’s obsession with a married man who didn’t want her children, and the eventual testimony of her surviving 8 year old daughter that eventually led to a more horrifying reality. Diane Downs shot her own children.

Then, in October 1994, along comes Susan Smith, with a similarly wrenching tale. This time the “culprit was a black man, who allegedly hijacked her car and abducted her two small boys. For nine days, police officers searched, Americans prayed, and mom Susan Smith pleaded for the safe return of her 3 year old and 14 month old sons. After repeated police questioning, however, Susan Smith confessed to buckling her two children into their car seats and pushing the car into a South Carolina lake. Once again, the boogie man didn’t exist.

While fake abduction stories aren’t common, they have been increasingly used as cover ups for murdering parents. The question I want to address, though, is not why someone would concoct such a lie but how good she is in telling it. In other words, do lying child murderers show telltale signs of their deception when they’re standing before a camera and pleading for help, or are they indistinguishable from desperate mothers whose child really has been stolen?

The Dance of High Stakes Deception

Psychological research has made one thing pretty clear; human beings are much better liars than lie detectors. In fact, despite the fact that most of us believe we can’t easily be duped, our ability to spot a lie – even if we’re a seasoned cop – is about as accurate as calling heads or tails when flipping a coin.

Little lie detection research, however, has been conducted when the consequence of fooling others is life and death – such as when a parent kills a child and then pretends the perpetrator is someone else. This is a big acting job; not only must the murderer concoct a believable story, she must convincingly, passionately and consistently communicate it in such a way to maximize her credibility. And a 2012 study in the Journal of Law and Behavior suggests that, regardless of the stakes involved or the actor’s acting skill, guilty parents aren’t able to act the same as their innocent counterparts. Signs of their duplicity leak out.

Researchers in this study examined the videotapes of 78 emotional appeals to the public for the return of a missing relative. These pleas were evaluated for behavioral cues often correlated with deception – inconsistent facial expressions, slower speech with more hesitations, emotionally distancing words (not using “I,” words with less emotional intensity), and faster blinking.

In 35 of these cases, the pleader was ultimately found guilty of murdering the victim before going to the media for assistance. The other half was unfortunate – and desperate – victims of circumstance. None of the evaluators were aware which of the pleaders were genuine and which were faking it.

Cry Me a River of Crocodile Tears

We’ve all experienced the impression that what someone was telling us wasn’t how they were feeling. An acquaintance expresses sadness at our recent romantic breakup, yet we get the distinct impression (from the eyes, perhaps) that s/he is secretly delighted. Two weeks later, we discover our ex and our insincere acquaintance are a couple. Or, a work colleague congratulates us on our promotion, yet we detect the distinct curl of distaste in the curl of his upper lip.

These researchers discovered subtle, but distinct, differences in the facial expressions of deceptive murderers versus desperate relatives, too. These differences were twofold; one, the deceptive pleader was less able to accurately mimic genuine emotions and, second, they were unable to mask real (but inappropriate given the circumstances) ones.

For example, throughout the entire publicized plea, genuinely distressed innocent relatives displayed sincere, full-face sadness and distress. In contrast, the faces of deceptive murderers were more likely to express mixed emotions (a surprised brow, a smirk, a sudden smile) in the face of an extremely grim subject. In particular, the facial expressions of murderers were more likely to contain the raised upper lip of disgust even when talking about the terror and sadness they were experiencing. (Although we don’t know the source of this disgust, the researchers hypothesized that disgust in this context was either an involuntary visceral reaction to the act of murder the deceptive pleader engaged in just days before, moral disgust or shame concerning one’s actions, or a lingering revulsion for the victim).

In addition, the words deceptive pleaders used show the cognitive effort – and emotional strain – of living the lie. Deceptive pleaders, for instance, used fewer and more tentative, words throughout the plea, especially when directly appealing to the public for help (e.g., Pam Poirier desperately pleading for her daughter’s return: “… Katie please call us and tell us you’re okay. Whoever took our Katie, please tell her we miss her, we love her, and we want her to come home…” deceptive murderers used tentative words to (unconsciously) avoid commitment in their words to distance themselves from or subtly communicate knowledge of a transgression (e.g., “If whoever has her, or if she’s out there and you see me, and you see this, just stay there, we’ll find you. We will, I’ll find you.” In this way, deceptive murderers subtly acknowledge that the victim will not be found alive, avoid commitment to the lie, and mitigate the psychological conflict resulting from the discrepancy between their secretly held and outwardly expressed knowledge.

The Bottom Line

No matter how high the stakes, murderers who publicly lie about what they’ve done leave telltale signs of their guilt. They use less and more tentative words, distance themselves emotionally in their pleas, and are unable to consistently mimic genuine emotions or conceal inappropriate ones. In fact, researchers who had no idea whether the person they were evaluating was innocent or guilty were able to tell the difference 90 percent of the time when they evaluated the facial expressions and verbal cues in 78 pleas for the return of a missing relative. While these won’t ever replace hard evidence in convicting a deceptive murderer, they do have the capacity to point detectives in the right direction.

Let’s start with their childhoods.

Disorganized Attachment: Frightened and Frightening Parents

In 2005, U.K. researchers interviewed 67 mothers who had been referred by the court system for child maltreatment arising from what they called “abnormal illness behavior.’’ These were mothers who had used their children to gain attention from medical professionals. Some of these women lied or exaggerated about a child’s illness while some went so far as to induce an actual medical crisis. Seven had been charged with manslaughter.

Knowing that the way we ourselves are parented influences how we parent our children, they were interested at how these mothers felt about their own parents and, in particular, the quality of the emotional bond between them. A little background; four main attachment styles have been identified – secure and three subtypes of insecure. Securely attached children have a parent who is emotionally available, appropriately responsive, and is able to see, and accept, the negative and positive attributes of her offspring. On other hand, insecurely attached children tend to have parents who are either distant/disengaged, inconsistent (sometime sensitive, sometimes neglectful) or extremely erratic (ranging from passive to intrusive, frightening to frightened).

Not surprisingly, the vast majority of these women (85%) described an insecure, ambivalent attachment with both their own parents and their children. As children, these mothers saw their own parental figures as an unpredictable. They were the source of both hurt (over half reported physical and/or sexual abuse as children) and comfort.

As a result, these mothers failed to develop a consistent way to interact their parents; after all, if you don’t know whether your parent is going to hit or hug, how do you know when to approach and when to stay away? (Interestingly, a significant subgroup of these women demonstrated a type of attachment known as insecure-dismissing, i.e., a tendency to dismiss a child’s distress at times of illness, fear or loss).

Children whose parents are unable to develop a clear and consistent attachment are caught on the horns of a dilemma, especially when that parent is abusive. On the one hand, a child’s survival instincts tell her to get the heck away from the source of her pain and to safety. On the other hand, our parents are supposed to be the source of our safety. Long-term studies of children with disorganized attachment have found that, as parents, they often become either compulsive or controlling caregivers. Given the extreme maternal devotion noted by health professionals as well as friends and family members of convicted medical child abusers, it is possible that Munchausen by proxy is one expression of highly disorganized attachment.

Illness: The Devil You Know

But why would a mother develop this variant? As it turns out, there’s another life experience that tends to bond women who become medical child abusers – physical illness. For instance, in the 2005 study previously mentioned, almost 2/3rds of the women reported the death of a close family member either in childhood or adulthood. Given that the average age of this group was 28, and that 1 out of 7 American children lose a parent or sibling by age 20, this seems unusually high. Some had experienced multiple bereavements in their lives or lost a close family member when pregnant.

It is also common for Munchausen moms to come from a family background where physical symptoms – real, imagined, or faked – are used to get attention. Children learn that physical illness is the best way to get a parent’s attention while more direct ways (crying, expressing emotional distress) are ignored. Several Munchausen moms have described growing up with a parent who used routinely medical deception to gain the attention of physicians and nurses. Indeed, it is common for the perpetrators themselves to have extensive medical records and a history of faking illness.

The Bottom Line

Most children who grow up in chaotic or abusive homes do not become medical child abusers. Most children who experience the early loss of a close family member do not become medical child abusers. And, most children whose parents use physical symptoms – even fake ones – to get attention do not grow up to induce illness in their own children. However, a combination of all three may set the stage for an abnormal relationship between parent, child and the medical profession. Whether or not the parent will act out this childhood drama depends on other factors (to be discussed in future blogs)

All that logic fails us, though, in those wee hours of the morning when the what-ifs rear their ugly head and torment us with the possibility that – yes – our child could have that rare, unrecognized, or misdiagnosed biological killer that originally masks itself as a typical childhood illness but, over time, sheds its harmless disguise and takes our child’s life.

In fact, the fear that a child has a terminal illness is so strong that it’s unfathomable to think a parent might intentionally cause one. And yet, for those rare parents convicted of medical child abuse, the need to be seen as a heroine coping with one of life’s toughest adversities clearly trumps the maternal instinct.

Real-life Munchausen Moms

Doctors at Children’s Hospital of St. Paul were baffled when Katie Lewis brought her 5 month old son to the emergency room claiming that he would suddenly stop breathing and turn blue. Test after test were run; all were negative. The mystery was solved, however, when video surveillance, placed without her knowledge in the baby’s hospital room, captured her pinching his nose until he passed out. After creating the medical emergency, she then frantically called the nurse for help (seeming to save her son’s life). When confronted, Ms. Lewis confessed to creating these medical emergencies in her son beginning when he was 3 months old.

Amanda Ann Butler had already taken her 2 year old daughter countless times to the hospital for unexplained seizures when the toddler apparently died from one in 2002. Even at the time, authorities worried that the mother had been involved; no one besides Amanda Ann had ever witnessed her daughter’s seizures, endless medical tests were unable to find any medical cause and the medical examiner said the autopsy results suggested the child had been suffocated. However, due to lack of evidence, she was never charged until she was caught on camera surveillance trying to suffocate her three month old son (who had mysteriously developed the same pattern of unexplained seizures). She is currently serving up to 45 years in prison after pleading guilty to second degree murder in the death of her daughter.

Four year old Mikal Pickens and his six year old sister, Kheematah, were hospitalized with severe vomiting and diarrhea in early October 2004. Initially, the children were suspected of the stomach flu, after their mother, Judy, told the medical staff that a stomach bug had been going around the children’s school. However, several days into their hospital stay the children were not getting better and Mikal died shortly after his fourth birthday. As it turns out, the stomach bug story was only one of the many lies Judy Pickens told the doctors and nurses who were taking care of her children. In August 2009, she was convicted of murdering her son via Clonidine (a high blood pressure medication Judy had been taking since 2000) and injuring her six year old daughter (who recovered quickly from her illness once her mother was barred from her hospital room).

The Bottom Line

The article (the first in a series) takes a look at three mothers who were convicted of medical murder. I chose to start by telling their stories lest you doubt that such incidences even happen. Not often, and not every parent who’s accused of it is guilty. But, because the mortality rate for medical child abuse is so high, it’s imperative that we realize that, when it does, a child’s life is at stake.

This is the scenario most of us think of when we think of stalking, i.e., an ex who can’t let go of a former love. However, there is a rarer type of stalker who doesn’t target intimate partners.  This stalker is a sexual predator who goes after casual acquaintances or complete strangers. This is the predatory stalker and, when caught is often proclaimed by those who knew him as the least likely of perpetrators.

The Attorney From Hell  

Take, for example, accused attorney Danford Grant.  Described as an up-and-comer in an elite Seattle law firm, he has been charged with four sexual attacks on three different female massage therapists.  And, as the details in the charges emerge, these attacks appear to be well-planned and researched.

For example, during a rape-at-knife-point of a Bellevue, Washington massage therapist, Grant allegedly told the woman that he had been research on her and accurately recited her home address and husband’s name.   If convicted, Danford Grant would be an example of one of the rarest and most dangerous types of stalkers – the predatory stalker.

The Predatory Stalker

For the predatory stalker, stalking is foreplay; the real goal is sexual assault.  While they may gain satisfaction from the sense of control and power stalking gives them over the victim, it’s the violent and sexual fantasies that they engage in while researching, planning, and following the victim that really gets them off as they prepare for the ultimate thrill – the sexual assault itself.

The stalking may have a sadistic quality to it.  For example, some predatory stalkers mess with their victim’s minds by leaving subtle clues that they are being followed without revealing their identity.  However, even when the victim is unaware that she is being stalked, the perpetrator can still take delight in the details – deciding how long to prolong the suspense, rehearsing the attack, fantasizing about the victim’s response.

Is the Predatory Stalker Mentally Ill?

Not in the way most people think.  Predatory stalkers are not “love-sick” (i.e., due to unrequited love).  Nor are predatory stalkers motivated by strong emotional attachment to their victims. Their stalking does not reflect efforts to establish or maintain close, positive relationships with victims; nor did it reflect separation protest or intense personal distress over the dissolution of a close relationship. Predatory stalkers are more likely to use stalking o gratify their need for dominance and control and, ultimately, to gratify sadistic sexual desires.

Predatory stalkers have a different set of problems.  In comparison to other types of stalkers, predatory stalkers are more likely to have a history of convictions for other sexual offense and to have a diagnosable paraphilia (pattern of deviant sexual arousal), particularly involving sexual sadism. Unlike stalkers who develop delusions that their victim is really in love with them or has committed some imaginary offense, these stalkers rarely have psychotic disorders.  They do, however, often have personality disorders.

Is the Predatory Stalker a Psychopath?

While most stalkers (or sexual offenders, for that matter) are not psychopaths, it is interesting that those stalkers who do have psychopathic traits tend to exhibit pursuit behaviors that are similar to stalking predators.  For instance, research suggests that psychopathy is associated with what could be summarized as “boldness and coldness” in stalkers.

Predatory stalkers are also most likely to lead double lives, leaving their friends and family stunned and disbelieving when they are finally caught.  Night stalker Delroy Grant, for example, who stalked, raped and terrorized retired pensioners for years, was viewed as a friendly, self-sacrificing neighbor who religiously cared for his wife who was paralyzed from the neck down from multiple sclerosis.  Midwestern “Mall Rapist” James Perry stalked young girls in the malls and shopping center parking lots,  was a popular member of his suburban community, where he lived with his wife and two young children.

The Bottom Line

All stalkers have the potential for violence although, fortunately, few actually commit it.  Predatory stalkers, however, are a particularly dangerous breed.  Cold and calculating, on the surface they are often able to maintain a façade as a devoted husband, caring professional or kind-hearted neighbor.  Underneath, though, lurks an underbelly of twisted sexual desires and predatory violence.

Turned On By Violence

The Veronica Compton case is an extreme example of a rare type of serial killer groupie – the hybristophiliac.  Hybristophilia, first defined by the sexologist Professor John Money, falls into a class of disorders known as paraphilias, i.e., abnormal sexual desires that typically involve extreme or dangerous activities.  In this case, the danger is the person.  In other words, the hybristophiliac is turned on by a person who has committed a violent crime.   

Most individuals with this paraphilia have no desire to commit a crime themselves.  Their vicarious exposure to violence is enough.  Instead, they develop a deep attachment to the perpetrator behind bars, making excuses for what he did, fantasizing about rescuing him from prison (or his own inner demons), and believing that the special connect the two of them share would protect them from any harm (no matter how many other people their inmate has victimized).

Here’s an example of an erotic fixation with Luka Magnotti, the charming Canadian who tortured kittens and sent human body parts to various public officials.  “This obsession with you is taking over my life . . . I fear that if it weren’t for ties in life (and the fact I need to work for a living) there would be absolutely nothing to stop me from picking up and leaving to be nearer to you. And this isn’t some delusion, I know full well you’re stuck behind bars and probably will be for the rest of your life, but I would attend your court appearances and visit you. Lost in a world of obsessive fantasy . . .”

“I refuse to believe the reports of people saying you were cold and creepy and had no friends. These comments just make me feel sad for you. I’m sad that you saw flaws when you looked in the mirror, when all I see is beauty in you. I’m sad that your family ostracized you. It’s really a shame that no one was ever there for you. It’s not your fault you’re so messed up inside. I’ll never hold that against you. I think you just need help and I truly hope you get that now and not just reprimand.”

Copycat Killers:  I Want to Be Just Like You

Not all hybristophilia sufferers just sit back and rely on fantasies to get them through the night.  Some women (and, yes, for some reason, most hybristophiles are female) decide to join in the “fun.”  They may participate in their lover’s crimes by luring victims, hiding bodies, providing alibis, or, as we saw in the case of Veronica Compton, committing murder.

Chloe Kelcher was another woman who decided to practice what her inmate preached.  She fell in love with her serial killer, Cortland Bryce Ryan, while serving as a member of his jury.  Knowing they could never be together (he got the death penalty), she talked one of the guards into smuggling out Ryan’s semen and, after he was executed, she impregnated herself.  However, after the baby became ill and died, she settled on another way for him to obtain immortality – by continuing his serial killing.  After killing three victims, she was killed in a shootout by police while attempting to execute the fourth.

Unlike Compton and Kelcher, Rachel Lancroft didn’t meet her violent love interest (Marcus Lee Graham) through the prison system; she met him in an online dating site.  However, through their correspondence, he did inspire her to finish her law degree – and then move on to serial killing so he could get his rocks off behind bars.  Ironically, her own crimes were discovered when Graham asked her to be his lawyer when he was questioned about the murders Lancroft was committing.  Apparently, investigators became suspicious after noticing how submissive Lancroft was around her client and eventually tracked her down to a women’s house, who Lancroft was trying to kill after her lover, Graham, and failed to do the job before he was captured.

The Bottom Line

A small number of serial killer groupies are actually turned on by what repels most of us – the violent acts themselves.  And an even smaller number move from the thrills of vicarious violence to actual participation in the acts themselves.

Luckily for me, I outgrew this fascination and have been married to a great man for over 20 years.  However, apparently not all grown women lose their fascination with the dark side.  Ted Bundy, Ken Bianchi, and Richard Ramirez are just a few of the serial killers who received tons of adoring fan mail and multiple marriage proposals.

Fatal Attraction  

 Virtually all of these women became enamored with their violent paramours after they have committed their crimes.  Some of them meet through the legal system; Chloe Kelcher was on Cortland Bryce Ryan’s jury.  Rosalie Martinez, a mitigation specialist, left her successful attorney-husband and comfortable lifestyle to marry Oscar Ray Bolin, a low life convicted of raping and murdering three young women.  And Christine Kizuka married serial killer Angela Buono (one-half of the Hillside Strangler duo) after meeting him while visiting her then-husband in Folsom State Prison.

Some women, though, go the pen-pal route to romance.  Doreen Lioy started writing to Ramirez after falling for his picture in the paper. They were married in 1996 in the prison waiting room.  Some women write a number of prisoners before they finally make a sustainable connection. They may even take on voluntary jobs in prison, or go on blind-date visits with men they know only by reputation.

However, not all of them had romance on their minds when they sent their first letter (curiosity seekers beware).  Veronica Lynn Compton, for example, wrote Ken Bianchi a letter asking his advice about a female serial killer character in one of her screenplays.

Who ARE these Women?

Many people think women who fall for serial killers must either be a) lonely, unattractive, and unable to find love in the “real world” or b) mentally unstable women who have some kind of strange fixation.  The reality is much more complicated.

First of all, these women come from all sectors of society.  Some of them are beautiful; others are not.  Some of them are highly educated; others are not.  And, based on interviews with these, their motives are just as diverse.

For the majority of these women, moral activism is the primary driver – at least initially.  Several were heavily involved in anti-death penalty campaigns before they met their significant others.  Some were moved by Christian conviction to contact – and save – these doomed souls, only to discover that they ultimately were the ones who needed saving.  (I am reminded of a story in Jacquelynne Wilcox-Bailey’s book about two middle-aged Christian sisters from Australia who left stable marriages to marry recently released violent offenders with whom they had romanced in prison.  One was bludgeoned to death with a hammer and the other one narrowly escaped death after her new hubby tried to cut off her ear and pull out her teeth with pliars).

Of course, many of these men will never be released from jail, which, for some women, may be the best thing about them.  These are men who can’t cheat and who have endless amounts of time to devote to their distant paramours.  In addition, unlike relationships on the outside, the fantasy and emotional intensity that we all feel in the honeymoon phase of a new relationship never has to end.  Add a strong capacity for denial and a fascination with violence and you’ve got the makings of a serial killer groupie.

The Bottom Line

Women’s fascination with men behind bars is a lot more complex than would seem on the surface.  But whether the drive is danger-by-association or misguided compassion, the serial killer groupie often bites off more than she can chew.  And while some serial killer groupies go through a series of death-row inmates looking for that perfect partner, more than one has been bewildered by the discovery that what started as a mission wound up a match.

Sixty one year old John Thompson says he’s a victim too – of a seven year old’s sexual prowess.  Mr. Thompson, convicted of sexual assault of a minor, is now threatening to sue the young girl because she “flirted with him” and then pushed him down and forced her tongue in his mouth.

What Are They Thinking?

We’ve long recognized that erroneous thinking accompanies many psychiatric disorders – consider the catastrophic thinking (I know she’s late to lunch because she died in a car wreck) that can accompany anxiety or the irrational beliefs (I will never feel better; my life is over) that often co-exists with depression.  We’re now realizing that there are also thoughts and beliefs that play a role in initiating and sustaining criminal behavior.

In fact, psychological research is showing us that certain kinds of cognitions are linked to higher rates of violence, impulsivity, psychopathy and criminal justice system involvement.  These are the kinds of thoughts that drive criminal justice case managers and probation officers crazy, because they indicate a pattern of dysfunctional thinking that can only lead to destructive behavior.  Some of the most common include a sense of entitlement (rules don’t apply to me), failure to accept responsibility, short-sightedness (failure to learn from the past or plan for the future), insensitivity to the potential impact of one’s behavior, and a negative attitude toward authority.

Here’s some of the one’s I’ve heard:  “I deserve all the good things in life”  “It’s a waste of time to feel bad about other people’s problems.”  “Life is too short and unpredictable to waste time planning for the future.  “If you show weakness, other people will try to take advantage of you.” “Hey, if she’s that gullible, she deserves whatever treatment she gets.” And, of course, the all-too-popular, “She asked for it.”

The Bottom Line

Thought precedes action, so perhaps it’s not surprising that convicted felons tend to share common thinking patterns.  Hopefully, as we learn more, we can target these dysfunctional beliefs in treatment, reducing the recidivism rate and enabling the person to lead a more productive, crime-free life.  For us non-incarcerated folks, if our date answers, “He shouldn’t have been in the road to begin with,” when we tell him the sad story of a run-over dog, run for the hills.

Tom has long complained about her jealousy and possessiveness.  When he made it clear that he had no long-term plans with her, she made sure he never made them with anyone else.  After hitting him over the head with a cricket bat, she killed him by plunging a kitchen knife into his chest.

If I Can’t Have You, No One Can             

If you look at the psychology literature, you’ll overwhelmingly discover that sexual jealousy and possessiveness are generally viewed as male traits.  It’s not that psychologists are saying that women don’t get jealous; they just tend to say that we get jealous over emotional infidelity.  In other words, as a gender, we’re likely to be less threatened by a lover’s visit to a prostitute than emotionally intimate dinners with a female work colleague.

Perhaps that’s statistically true.  However, we’ve all known women who obsessed about their boyfriend’s faithfulness, who stole passwords to check email and phone records, and who viewed any hint of sexual attraction to another woman as a direct insult to her femininity.  This is a woman who cannot – and will not – tolerate rejection, especially at the hands of another woman.  If you’re looking for a good example, watch Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction.

Dangerous Passion

A recent study in Homicide Studies suggests that real life examples may be more common than we once thought.  While their sample size was limited, 25% of the cases they explored seemed to have what they called “sexual proprietariness” as a motive.  Sexual proprietariness has been a popular evolutionary theory used to explain domestic violence situations in which the man views his mate as “his’ and feels entitled to use control and domination as a way to ensure fidelity.  The evolutionary angle is that, since adultery has particular consequences for men (such as not knowing if you’re the father of your children), sexual jealousy became an adaptive way to minimize those risks.

It’s hard to see how the same theory would apply to women; after all, we know who the father or our children are.  However, whatever the origins, it is clear that, for some women, romantic betrayal isn’t something they’re going to take laying down.

Take the case of the woman who, after 30 years of marriage, finds out her husband has had another family in another city for the past ten years and shoots him dead.  Or the 17 year old who asks her male friends to shoot her 18 year old ex after learning that his new girlfriend was pregnant.  Of course, the sexual jealousy isn’t always directed at the partner;  just yesterday, I read about 48 year old Catherine McCoy who, angry with a younger woman for having sex with her boyfriend, kidnapped, beat, and sexually assaulted her with a golf club.

The Bottom Line

I suspect that, when it’s all said and done, we’ll find that what makes us jealous is more a reflection of our values, beliefs, life experiences, and personality traits than our gender.  What is clear is that some women would rather have a dead lover than one who sleeps around.

A Shot Out of Nowhere  

Apparently, no one saw this coming.  I’ve read two interviews with friends of Ms. Boover and both seemed absolutely stunned that this happened; no warning signs.  One of them, a close friend in high school, said she didn’t think Nicole had a great relationship with her mother but it certainly wasn’t anything that would lead to a spray of bullets.  The other friend, who also attends LSU, says Nicole never said anything that suggested she had evil intentions toward her family.

However, according to 18 year old Nathan Yuhas, money was the motive. Mr. Yuhas, who has been charged as a principal to first-degree murder, said that Nicole promised him $50,000 if he would help her murder her parents.  The two allegedly purchased gloves, duct tape and masks in anticipation of the murder and planned to leave the state after the dirty deed was done.

Is There More to this Story?

Matricide is rare; only 250 parents are killed by their children each year.  And, even though one out of every six victims of matricide is killed by her daughter, there’s not a lot we know about girls who kill their mothers.   We certainly don’t know much about Nicole at this point.

However, when I read this story, one thing didn’t add up.  If I opened the door and my 17 year old son had a gun, I would be dead because it would never occur to me that he meant to shoot me.  My first thought would be that he’s afraid of something or someone and is carrying a gun to protect himself.  My second thought, given that it was 4:30 in the morning, would be that there’s been some sort of accident and he’s in trouble.  Either way, I would automatically assume he was coming to me for help.

Of course, I didn’t see the look on Nicole’s face when the door was opened.  I don’t know what their relationship was like beforehand or what kind of person Nicole is.  And, if it turns out greed was behind the deed, it won’t be the first time;   remember Christopher Porko and Trinity Copeland?  But neither will I be surprised if we learn that all was not what it seemed when the final story unfolds.

The Bottom Line

Murdering a parent for profit is rare but it does happen.  Still rarer – if ever – does an well-adjusted teen with a bright future and close family relationships suddenly decide that money is more precious than a mother’s love.  Time will tell if Nicole Boover is an exception to the rule.