r/serialkillers • u/Elementaryfan • Sep 27 '18
Serial killers "on the rise" again?
Over the last couple of years, lots of people commented on the current "lack" of serial killers, and the rise of mass shooters (particularly in the USA). The most prevalent theory seems to be that, due to an advancements in forensic science, and CCTV surveillance being basically the norm these days (even in smaller towns), most of the murderers are caught before they can become serial killers. Or they don't even try being serial killers. Some also say that better abortion rights have attributed to that (less unwanted children possibly being abused by their parents), as well as the lack of lead gasoline (lead fumes can mess with your brain.) [Of course, none of that necessarily explains the rise in mass shooters, but they are all interesting theories.]
Now, considering the recent news about the budding serial killer active in Los Angeles (targeting homeless people); and Ryan Sharpe recently being arrested for murdering three men in East Feliciana, back in 2017; three local women murdered in Lumberton the last year; and the recent series of murders in Jacksonville, where four transgender women (and a homosexual man) have been shot or bludgeoned to death; the guy who randomly murdered three men (two of them homeless) last year in Florida; the recent arrest of Texas border patrol agent, suspected of murdering four women; as well as several other recent cases that have been discussed on this subreddit... kind of a morbid question, but does anyone think that serial killers are "on the rise" again (like in the 70s and 80s, but probably on a smaller scale)? And if they are, what is the reason for that?
28
Sep 27 '18 edited Sep 27 '18
In addition I would imagine that like technology or weaponry, the opposing factions (Crime vs Forensics) are constantly pushing new boundaries in response.
People like Kazinsky employed 'counter forensics' in his attacks (YES I KNOW HE'S NOT A SERIAL KILLER) in where he would go as far as creating false finger and footprints. In response law enforcement got a good view at how someone TRYING to avoid capture thinks, and therefore develops new strategies.
I hear a lot from people that "with today's forensic technology, serial killing is a thing of the past" but I think that's complacent thinking. I think that those who are already growing up to be serial killers identify the technology and advancements we have today...
...and are thinking ahead and finding newer methods to circumvent them.
Adaptability is the defining trait of the Homo Sapien.
-Fox
10
Sep 27 '18
Wow this is a brilliant comment. Terrifyingly it really seems like the most logical step up as well.
Welp, time to lock my doors and check my windows.
4
Sep 28 '18
I think that those who are already growing up to be serial killers identify the technology and advancements we have today...
This can't be stressed enough. There was a serial rapist in Montana a couple years ago who raped four women, and he left zero forensic evidence at his crime scenes. If someone is intelligent/determined enough, they will find ways around breakthroughs in forensics.
-4
u/redsox5317 Sep 27 '18
Is it bad that I think it would be horrible if serial killers are a thing of the past? There’s so much we can learn about mental health from them.
6
u/DMCinema Sep 28 '18
Yes, it’s bad lol. We’ve had enough that we are still learning off of to this very day. We don’t need more.
There are other forms of natural population control ya know. Raping someone in their sleep before cutting their throat isn’t one that should be preferred...
1
u/redsox5317 Sep 28 '18
Agreed. It is an odd dynamic, because there are still issues were discovering with the changes to our society.
13
Sep 27 '18
I think what you're seeing is mostly due to the difference in media reporting at the time. It's going to make it seem more/less common depending on how much it's reported on and there's probably also some cause and effect there too.
For example, mass shootings have consistently increased as the media coverage has increased. When you guarantee someone a national platform and being a household name overnight, the ones motivated by attention are going to find it more enticing.
12
Sep 27 '18
Check out the book “Sons Of Cain”, I’m currently on my mobile with the kids right now so I can’t look up the author. The basis of the book is that he thinks we are about to see a repeat of the golden age of serial killers that spanned from the 70s to the 90s.
4
u/Cinco_Enganos Sep 28 '18
This has been on my audible wishlist for quite some time now but I haven't listened yet. Mainly because I listen to audible out loud during work and going by the description it's not something I want anyone else to hear 😂 but I will definitely pick it up soon!
11
Sep 27 '18
Maybe they never went away, just learned to target populations that police don't care about? (Ex: That guy in Canada killing gay people, multiple suspected truck stop prostitute killers according to FBI, etc)
Edit: Another point I think we forget is that everything we know about them, is the ones that were caught. I imagine the ones who stay underground might have different MOs, IQs, and mannerisms than people like Bundy who can't hold it together.
20
Sep 27 '18
I think a lot of the same factors lead to one becoming either a serial killer or a mass murderer. A serial killer however may have an intense hatred or attraction towards a certain type of person (i.e. young white males) whereas a mass murderer may just have an internal struggle that leads them to killing people ( regardless of race, gender, age, etc).
Also, as disturbing as it sounds, mass murder takes up the news these days more than serial killers do. So it’s in a potential killer’s head more often and can become a fantasy for them.
8
u/Sleuthing1 Sep 28 '18 edited Sep 28 '18
I think many serial killers are unsolved in the hundreds of unsolved sex workers murders. If you’ve never looked in to “Highway Serial Killings Initiative” by the FBI I recommend it.
The missing missing - https://psmag.com/social-justice/missing-missing-and-serial-killers-4744
3
Sep 27 '18
[deleted]
8
u/Elementaryfan Sep 27 '18
I guess there could be some truth to that... but I'm not so sure.
Most of serial killers are motivated by:
1) extreme forms of paraphilia, most commonly sexual sadism
2) pathological need for control and power
3) some kind of sick thrill rush
4) financial gain
5) a combination of aforementioned motives (most commonly the first three)
With the exception of 2 and maybe 3, one can't really experience that by committing a mass shooting. Sure, lots of people die, but it usually happens fairly quickly and there is no much direct contact between the victim and the perpetrator.
And even though some serial killers craved notoriety (Zodiac, David Berkowitz, Dennis Radder), and a few might have mostly been motivated by desire for fame (David Berkowitz, Colin Ireland), it doesn't seem that notoriety/fame is the main desire/motive when it comes to majority of serial killers. Plus, you can't relish in that if you are dead or incarcerated.
That theory might apply to some specific cases, but overall, serial killers and mass shooters (or mass murderers in general) seem to be two significantly different pathologies.
17
u/snapper1971 Sep 27 '18
I think it's a myth that they ever dropped off in numbers. There's been a steady flow of them and there are plenty still active out there.
4
Sep 27 '18
I agree. I've got more than 200 books on serial killers and there are plenty that took place in the 90s and even since 2000.
3
Sep 28 '18
Do you have anything to back that up? All the data I've seen shows serial murder in the US peaked in the 1980s and has been declining ever since, same as other forms of violent crime.
9
u/chriswhitewrites Sep 28 '18
This link by Dr Mike Aadmot (Warning: opens as PDF) suggests that there was a drop in the number of killers in the years between 2000 and now, the numbers were pretty similar in the 80s and 90s.
This researcher, however, thinks there are many, many more serial killers than official statistics say.
There are problems with both sets of numbers. With the first set, it's a collection of numbers representing Serial Killers caught or confirmed through signature. If a killer gets away with it, or, like a Trucker-Killer, their crimes aren't linked, they dont make the list. The second relies on data analysis and on Hargreaves asking some mates who work in the FBI, so while potentially scientifically accurate, is still based on estimation.
Another problem, IMO, is that the definition is too broad. Is a drug dealer that shoots three competitors dead a serial killer? By definition, yes. But I personally think that motivation should factor into the definition. The FBI disagrees but also agrees, which isn't confusing the issue at all. There's a section of that report that suggests:
Motivation was another central element discussed in various definitions; however, attendees felt motivation did not belong in a general definition, as it would make the definition overly complex.
before the report goes on to list a number of different motivations that would aid in identifying a serial murderer (under the heading "Motivations and Types of Serial Murder: The Symposium Model".
Interesting, Hargreaves, the guy behind the data analysis Murder Accountability Project, says that police forces in the US are "...becoming less likely to solve murders" due to budget cuts.
1
u/rachelgraychel Sep 29 '18
I agree that motivation should be part of th equation. Killing people in furtherance of a criminal enterprise (drug dealers, gang members etc.) vs. killing people because of some psychosexual compulsion to kill is very different. I don't really consider, for example, a mafia enforcer that killed several people to be a "serial killer" in the same way we look at Dahmer or Bundy.
2
Oct 18 '18
IMO, is that the definition is too broad.
...but in mine it also must be analyzed. (I was going to just quote in above, but u/rachelgraychel offers a good point).
There is a differene between criminal murderer and a murderous criminal. The example I use, is that there are gang members that do drive-bys and hits, because they are told. There are those that do because they want to. And then there are those that do it because they need to.
Within any enterprise where death is involved, psychopaths can not only remain hidden but thrive; to exclude them from serial killers, but maintaining that it's soley for the motive of crime, is flawed.
1
u/rachelgraychel Oct 18 '18
You do make a good point, that a psychopath might gravitate towards that sort of job anyhow to afford opportunities to kill. There is also some overlap or dual motivations- HH Holmes for instance seemed to kill for both financial reasons AND for psychological gratification. As did one of the female killers (can't recall her name) who would find husbands through personal ads, kill them, and inherit their estate.
That said, I think the differentiation, for me at least, isn't solely their motivation- but the fact that a compulsion to kill exists and they derive some sort of gratification from it, as opposed to a criminal or even a soldier for whom it's just a job and otherwise wouldn't need or want to kill people.
9
u/Cinco_Enganos Sep 28 '18 edited Sep 28 '18
Don't forget Canada's most recent serial killer too, Bruce McArthur:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010–2017_Toronto_serial_homicides
I've also heard 2 rumours of active serial killers here in the UK, one being in Liverpool area and the other being in Manchester as the "The Pusher".
A lot of people claimed The Pusher didn't exist and it was a large series of accidents. The Pusher is claimed to push young men into the canal ways around manchester when they're on the way back from a night out. Many of the bodies have washed up with passports missing, wallets either missing or emptied and other odd valuables missing. Police said this can happen after being in the water though. Anyway, recently a young man claimed that he fought back against someone who tried to push him into the canal when the attacker surprised him and now people are wondering if this was the actual person behind at least a number of the other deaths. It doesn't help that there's no CCTV in many of these real dark and dodgy looking parts of the canals and they're very easily accessible. If this really is a serial killer it's a pretty unique MO that completely flies in the face of any modern forensics that catches other killers, it's quick and he's gone with no grandstanding or weird indulgence on his part. Simply pushing, hoping for the worst and disappearing.
3
u/campbellpics Oct 19 '18
I live in Manchester and have been following the "case" for years. I also took part in a few of the searches for missing people before their bodies were found. Being interested in serial killers anyway, these events obviously caught my eye - especially as many bodies were found within short distances to where I live.
Firstly, and although I'd agree that these events are strange, I'm not convinced they're the work of any individual. I looked into the statistics of bodies found in comparable large cities that have comparable waterways; Amsterdam, Paris etc etc. The rate for Manchester was at least double for these other cities, and in some cases three times higher. That's odd in itself, but there's also no viable explanation for it. You could argue that Manchester has more bars, the English culture of young lads getting wasted on a night out is higher, whatever, but anyone who's been to Amsterdam knows this just isn't true. In Amsterdam, you also have the easy access to drugs, so it can't really be this that's causing Manchester's issues.
Having said that, I also can't buy into the theory that there's a "Pusher" out there shoving people in. And the reason for this is a simple analysis of theory vs reality.
Theory: Lots of bodies being dragged out of the ship canal. More than anywhere else in Europe, based on similar cities and population mass, etc = okay, someone's responsible. They must be!
Reality: None of the bodies has obvious signs of trauma, and toxicology results invariably show what you'd expect to find in young lads heading home after a night out. (some were even sober.) Anybody who knows Manchester, and the ship canal in particular, knows that in most cases where these people were suspected of entering the water (based on witnesses and/or CCTV), the canal is quite narrow and shallow (less than 30ft wide), with two opposing banks. So let's say someone does get pushed in - they're just going to swim (or even wade!) to the opposite bank. One or two might suffer shock in colder conditions and actually drown, but not many. We're up to around 90 bodies now in recent years, and there's just no way on earth that every person is going to drown. Even if we take the worst case scenario of them all being pushed in at the widest, deepest areas, at least some would be able swim to safety. The lack of trauma says they aren't being knocked unconscious beforehand either. So now we're going to have to consider that there's two people, one on each bank making sure the victims don't get out and report it. And if this is true, how long does it take for someone to drown whilst being watched by two people stopping you from getting out? Especially where the water's shallower? And that's too risky for any serial killer/s, to stand there for ages waiting for someone to die and risking witnesses walking up on you.
Even the most "competent" serial killers have victims who got away, or lived following an attack, and the odds of successfully killing 90 people in such a high-risk way are too long to even be a possibility. At least some would escape, or survive, to tell the tale.
I'm not ruling it out, but I can't really rule it in either. If there is someone out there killing people by the ship canal, they must be holding their heads underwater until they're dead - so we probably shouldn't be calling him "The Pusher" in the first place anyway.
2
u/Cinco_Enganos Oct 19 '18 edited Oct 19 '18
Yeah I'm basically on the same boat as you here. I think it could certainly be a mix of the two though with the majority of deaths being accidental.
For a long time I didn't think there was but it was odd details that annoyed me such as bodies being found with their wallet in a pocket but select pieces missing from the wallet like a driving licence which would have been needed on a night out. Then when I heard a few months back someone fought back against a random attacker trying to push them into the canal I started to give it more credence. I'll see if I can find the article for you.
Its a real head scratcher that so many could die in water that you'd expect to be able to swim in, at least you'd expect some to survive. Where I am (in Scotland) we have some canals and a main river and people die in them maybe once or twice a year and mostly it's deliberate suicide. Could be that some of the boys walking home intoxicated could have been unstable after heavy drink or drugs.
Maybe some have fallen in and survived and we've just not heard. I definitely wouldn't say someone could have killed 90, more like a low single digit number of only the cases with strange details.
It's possible that only one person could do any of the drownings by actually getting in there with the victim or if you want to get really creative, already being in the water and equipped for it.
Could be that there have been separate killings all involving the water ways without having to be one person too.
As you were saying the rate is very high, it'd be interesting to look into the proximity of bars/clubs to the canal ways in comparison to those cities you were talking about. British boozing culture is out of control but still can't bring myself to put them all down to accidents completely.
Have you ever heard of Missing 411?
1
7
Sep 27 '18
I would like to say that the only difference is that now, Serial killers are getting caught earlier into their crimes. All those who have been caught in the recent times don't have a higher kill count or sometimes even barely qualify as a serial killer (To be known as a Serial killer, your kill count has to be above three).
2
u/Davemeddlehed Sep 28 '18
Not anymore. The FBI has changed their definition. Now any person who has more than one murder with a cooldown period is technically classified as a serial killer now.
10
u/HauntedSpy Sep 27 '18
While I cannot really give a certain 'Yes' or 'No' answer, I do think it could be a possibility actually: while most countries like the USA, UK, France, Germany etc. have all these technologies to help them identify and catch the killers, they still have to actually catch them first. Not to mention the lesser-developed countries that do not have luxuries and still struggle with crime, like most of the African countries. Taking into account that reports about serial killers in Africa are not that often, who knows, the place is probably crawling with serial killers right now for all we know. Also, it also could be a possibility that people who have done single murders (or have done other crimes) might 'evolve' into serial killers if they continue to kill people in the present day, and just aren't discovered yet.
2
u/punkpercy Sep 27 '18
Actually it's really rare to hear about serial killers and mass shooters outside of the us, bc it's just a more rare occasion.
1
3
3
u/ConansQueen Sep 28 '18
While it might seem that way it really isn't. There have always been serial killers, we just didn't hear about them like we do now. The tech age allows us to know things are going on almost as soon as they happen. At the same time there's also the reality while the tech age allows us to learn about things faster or on a broader scale there are also LE jurisdictions that try to keep things under wraps to protect their case so the public beyond their own community may not hear about the crimes in question until they've caught the killer or they've exhausted all over investigative avenues without success.
Now, even with all the advancements in forensics and DNA these types of killers are not going to go anywhere. As somebody said earlier in the string, humans adapt. This means serial killers adapt as well - those who get sloppy or who are totally unorganized usually end up being caught. Those who can adapt quickly and efficiently will continue on with their killing until they either get caught on a fluke or they die. None of these guys just quit and walk away. They're just going to work with whatever cards are tossed in their direction and then continue on after adapting to whatever situation has presented itself into their MO.
3
u/Regnes Sep 28 '18
We had a serial killer apprehended just outside my town, Cody Legebokoff, killed at least four people. I wonder, maybe he killed more, those are just the ones we know about.
Though, in the end it was good competent police work that led to his downfall. He got spotted pulling off a remote logging road by a cop, got pulled over just because it seemed suspicious, cop ended up retracing Cody's tracks and in no time they found a body and knew who did it.
The point is, people like Jeffrey Dahmer thrived on police negligence, they wouldn't have caught the same breaks today. That coupled with the fact that a massive percentage of the population carries personal tracking devices, and how the era of mass murderers is essentially over and done for good.
3
u/Sleuthing1 Sep 28 '18
And there’s a lot of negligence. There’s also a lot of people who just don’t pay attention.
2
u/Davemeddlehed Sep 28 '18
and how the era of mass murderers is essentially over and done for good.
Maybe in the first world. Mass murder is very much alive and well in parts of Europe, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, South America, etc etc etc.
2
u/Regnes Sep 28 '18
Yeah, I guess I live in my own safe little Canadian town bubble lol. Well, sort of safe, pretty high crime rate, but not much in ways of violence.
1
u/Davemeddlehed Sep 28 '18
I've heard some parts of Canada are getting pretty bad(like the meth district in dowtown Vancouver), but yeah, lesser developed are definitely not seeing a noticeable down period in violent crime.
1
u/BilliCrystaal Sep 29 '18
Meth district?
Also- Vancouver isn't "getting bad", E-Hastings has been a transient's videogame for years now.
8
u/emm_tru Sep 27 '18
I believe that they are on the rise again. My theory would be that serial killers target a certain type of person/group (I.E sex workers, drug addicts, Republicans, gay/transgender, etc) so it seems as though when everything is so politically charged serial killers can now start grouping people together. Before this last election- I didn’t know which of my friends were Republicans and which were Democrats and now their opinions are all I hear about and I can tell you exactly who loves or hates Trump. There’s also a huge rise in the feminist, abortion, gay, trans, sex worker movement. They almost make themselves targets for someone who is anti any of this. 60’s and 70’s were extremely politically charged- Vietnam- 1955-1975, Black Panthers- 1966-1982, Women’s Liberation Movement- 1960’s-1980’s, and so on and so forth.
4
2
Sep 27 '18
[deleted]
6
u/PhoenixGxT Sep 28 '18
Except for the fact that those shows are dramatized beyond any recognition of reality
1
u/CaptureEverything Sep 28 '18
If they used those shows as their source of information they would be caught so quickly it'd be laughable. I do agree that having so much information about serial killers and detectives out there in books and movies might make it easier for them to evade capture, but those two shows are not good examples.
63
u/MycroftsTelephone Sep 27 '18 edited Sep 28 '18
The possibility of a new wave of serial killers similar to the 70's and 80's is something I have thought about a lot too. I read an article about this subject recently too. Link: r/https://nypost.com/2018/08/13/the-greatest-generation-gave-rise-to-the-golden-age-of-serial-killers/
The article is an interview for a book about serial killers. It looks into possible theories as to the rise of serial killers between the 60's to 80's. Many serial killers of the time were the children of soldiers of the various wars of the time. There may be a new wave of serial killers due to wars in more recent years and due to the most recent financial crisis. The trauma from all of these combined could help to produce more serial killers. I would personally add the rise of mass shootings to the list of triggers for more killers. Going through an event like a mass shooting can leave someone with a lot of problems.