Wednesday, 6 February 2013

Development of The Sex Killer

Sex killings.  The work of a twisted mind, and individuals with truly disturbing sexual deviances. This is not an unusual crime, as it goes right back through the history of crime.  It is only over the last thirty plus years that the possible deviant desires of killers has come fully into the public perception.  One of the most early and notable British sex killers was John Christie, he of 10 Rillington Place infamy.  It emerged that Christie could only copulate with his victims was when they were dead or unconscious.  They could not resist and here he had total control over them.  His ultimate display of control was his strangulation of them and then concealing their bodies around his property.  They were there and HE had killed them.

    Next on the list is Sutcliffe.  When he was arrested, he was wearing a v-neck pullover, over his legs with his genitals protruding through the neck.  This told it loud and clear that this was a sex crime, and that Sutcliffe obviously masturbated over his victims, or right by their bodies.  Yet, incredibly, this was not considered by the Police.  To be strip-searched and be found to be wearing a pullover in a bizarre fashion with your balls on show, screams sexual deviant.

    Let us have a look at the BTK serial killer, Dennis Rader.  When he murdered his first victims, he hung a young girl in the basement of her home.  Rader matter-of-factly revealed in court, that as the young girl choked, he masturbated.  Again, another display of sexual deviancy.  he was also a man who loved to throw his minor authority around, over the local people.  He thrived on that power.  Another thrill for him.  What truly disturbed me about Rader was just how coldly, and completely unemotionally, he described all ten murders he committed.  It was if it was nothing at all.

    Now we have a look at Steve Wright, the Suffolk Strangler.  Prof. David Wilson, leading Criminologist, conducted an investigation into possible earlier murders that Wright might have committed.  One murder that Prof. Wilson examined was that of a prostitute called Bettles.  Wright was in the area at the time of the murder, and one point that stood out was that this sex worker had met a client who was a cross-dresser.  Wright was known to be a cross-dresser, amongst the working girls of Ipswich.  What conclusions can we draw from Wrights` killing spree?  Did he dress up because it was a sexual turn-on?  Did he try to use this as a ruse, or as a disguise? All his victims were under thirty, so it can be reasonable to believe that women under a certain age represented youth.  Did the victims represent girls of a more innocent age?  Did they look younger than they were?  And what about the actual killings?  All his victims were naked.  Could it have been that he could not get aroused unless they were naked?  If he did murder the girl, Bettles, could it have been that only a choking action could produce an orgasm for him?  Could he have choked that too hard, but the death of the girl intensified his orgasm.  As for the killing spree in Ipswich, for such a high number of victims in such a short time, could Wright have tried to reach the intense level of orgasm that he first experienced, but failed to achieve.  Hence five victims in ten days.  All speculation but all the different deviances that sex killers portray does lead to speculative debate.  What do you think?

No comments:

Post a Comment