Evil Serial Killers: In the Minds of Monsters [Fully Illustrated]
Don't have an account? It is 16th century Hungary, and young peasant girls are going missing. They have been offered well paid work in the Castle Czejte, Transylvania and then never seen again. The king sends an army to the castle where they report finding mayhem and bloodshed.
There are witnesses aplenty to testify against the Countess Elizabeta Bathory; the villagers certainly thought she was evil. Describing atrocities over a twenty-five year period, it sounds like the peasants were happy to get their own back on a woman who was probably medically and legally insane, and just possibly the nobles were happy to accept this testimony as fact, because she was the heir to the throne.
Leap forward a few hundred years, and modern cinema sees us depicting Elizabeta and her modern day sisters-in-blood as truly evil or as monsters. These women are not monsters, but people who have done monstrous things. Women who kill multiple times are guilty not just of serial murder, but of being women who step outside of the persona that society creates for them.
This doubly deviant position makes exploring the minds of these women important, not just because they have killed, but also in order to understand the ways in which aberrant femininity is constructed as evil. This chapter examines women who kill, then kill again. Currency and addition of Tax VAT depend on your shipping address. Montgomery is reported to have met her victim in an online chatroom for rat terrier lovers called "Ratter Chatter. Online chatrooms are also used, in some cases, to plan consensual homicides. For example, in , a Maryland woman, Sharon Lopatka , apparently agreed to be killed by torture and strangulation in a conversation with a man in an online chatroom.
In a case that might be regarded as a quasi-consensual homicide, "John," a teenage boy from Altrincham, England , allegedly tricked another teenager into killing him using long conversations in an online chatroom. The other teenager, Mark, apparently believed he was being recruited by some female Secret Service agent.
The suicide-by-homicide failed and on May 29, John pleaded guilty to inciting someone to murder him and was sentenced to three years supervision.
Mark pleaded guilty to attempted murder and was sentenced to two years supervision. The boys were forbidden to contact each other. As an article in the New York Daily News explained in , "Long before there was a craigslist or dot-com dating, there were places where men and women who were too shy or busy to meet face to face could find romance. Calling themselves "matrimonial bureaus," these organizations were known mostly as the "lonely hearts clubs," and they flourished through the middle of the 20th century.
Electronic advertising has gradually replaced printed ads and the Internet is now a venue where murderers who employ a similar modus operandi can meet their victims; in Schecter's Encyclopedia , the entry for "Ads" mentions Internet dating and the use of Internet ads by the so-called "Internet Cannibal" Armin Meiwes.
These killers are sometimes referred to in the media as "Craigslist killers";    the first use of the term Craigslist killings may date to October 31, , when the phrase appeared in a headline in the Saint Paul Pioneer Press in Minnesota , in reference to the murder of Katherine Olson by Michael John Anderson, who was then dubbed "the Craigslist killer".
Since , several suspected and convicted perpetrators have met their victims or solicited murder through Craigslist. Of those cases, two were convicted for crimes in the three-month period encompassing February to April and a further four were accused of crimes during the month span of March through April The victims' deaths may result from a robbery or a sexual encounter that turned violent.
Some of these perpetrators may not have intended to commit murder, but killed their victims during the course of a struggle or to prevent capture. Each case is different. Several legal and technology experts have questioned the idea that there is a phenomenon of Internet killings. A legal theorist pressed for an Internet angle on a murder by a journalist related that "I asked her whether, if I called her up and asked her out on a blind date and murdered her, she would think it was a "telephone-related murder"?
The Craigslist case is the latest example of that phenomenon. Craigslist is an innovative and valuable resource, which frankly, is being unfairly smeared because it is an Internet site. News stories often describe conduct such as this as a cybercrime, or as 'Internet murder. We do not, for example, refer to killings orchestrated over the telephone as 'tele-murder' or by snail mail as 'mail murder. Despite sharing a similar method of contacting victims, they apparently have varied motivations. In the list below, the victims' deaths may have been premeditated, especially if the perpetrator is a serial killer , but they may also have resulted from a robbery , insurance fraud , or a sexual encounter that turned violent.
The theme of internet homicide has proven popular in fiction, with examples seen in books, television shows, and movies, in a number of which the murderer is referred to as "the Internet Killer" by other characters. The following examples are listed by date order of publication or broadcast; three of them predate the arrest in of John Edward Robinson , thought by law enforcement to be "the first Internet serial killer": .
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Further information: Internet suicide. Further information: Lonely hearts killer.
Catch Me Before I Kill More: Seriality as Modern Monstrosity
See also: Internet relationship. This is a dynamic list and may never be able to satisfy particular standards for completeness. You can help by expanding it with reliably sourced entries. Fortinash, Patricia A. Holoday-Worret, - Page , definition: "Internet Homicide: Luring a person from a chat room to an actual meeting. Can turn deadly. May turn deadly.
50 Best Killers images in | Serial killers, True crime, Criminal Minds
Hypercrime: the new geometry of harm. Turvey, " Philadelphia Inquirer. Retrieved Huffington Post. In Robert Kastenbaum ed. Macmillan Encyclopedia of Death and Dying. When after all, It was you and me. The answer, Nick Bloomfield implies, is "you and me" human society. There is no Devil, and Aileen Wurnos isn't some supernatural spawn of Satan.
She was a mentally damaged person who slipped through the cracks of society and in turn destroyed a lot of lives. Society, or rather the justice system, labeled her an abomination and exacted its revenge, washed its hands of her, and all the while made a pretty profit. What's masterful about this documentary is, even though it is very sympathetic toward Aileen in her plight, it never attempts to excuse her for her crimes. Jack Kevorkian's suicide machine, "A Short Film About Killing" which is part of Kieslowsky's powerful "Decalogue" series, and an excellent doc called "The Bridge" that shows real footage of several troubled souls leaping to their deaths off the Golden Gate Bridge and analyzes what made them do it.
In my movies you must see before you die book, this documentary was actually recommended. Not to mention that when I saw the movie Monster, that won Charlize Theron her Oscar, I was more interested in learning about Aileen Wuornos, one of the country's first female serial killers. My mom and I have been watching this show called Most Evil or something like that and Aileen gets mentioned quite a bit, she's up there with most male serial killers on how she thought and acted. So I rented this movie curious on her interviews and what she was like before her execution, man, this woman was disturbed, very badly.
The only problem I have with this documentary is that it seemed like Nick was a hypocrite saying how everyone was trying to make money off of her, but he did just that by making this documentary. Not to mention that I don't like the fact that he tried to make her sympathetic, I'm sorry, just she did still kill these men. There was only proof that the first killing was a possible self defense, but the rest were just out of blind robbery. I know there are a lot of sick people out there, I don't think she did it for pleasure, but still acting upon what she did was just wrong.
Aileen: Life and Death of a Serial Killer is a good documentary, don't get me wrong, this was still incredible and I'm glad that he was able to get these interviews with Aileen. I couldn't believe her last interview, it seemed like she had lost her mind. The only thing that made me feel sorry for her is how long she had to wait for death row, it's like 12 years of torture, but I'm tossed up on the decision of death row.
It's a tough subject. But this was a good documentary on her life and what might have led Aileen to act the way she acted. Aileen killed 7 men, lived as a man hating lesbian, a hitch hiking hooker; did society make her this way or did she just not see the light? Well, check out this documentary if you wanna find out for yourself. After watching this movie, one can only wonder how Hollywood had the gall to make the "Monster" movie.
It's clear from this - and Nick's previous docu on Aileen - that Hollywood's only concern was to make money out of Aileen's misery. Negotiating with the police officials involved in the case and with her former lover for the inside story before judgment had even been passed. Shame on Hollywood. Shame on law enforcement. And shame on her ex. A sickening and a sad reflection on society in general.
Mad as a hatter if her performance in this docu is to be believed - and I have no reason to doubt its authenticity. Clearly, she should have been locked up - not murdered. And if life imprisonment actually meant "life" then the pro-capital punishment lobby would not have a leg to stand on. But it doesn't. And so they do. There were times when Aileen came across as likable. Genuinely likable. And one could fully understand why the film maker felt a rapport with his subject.
When she was lucid she made sense. She knew she had been stitched up by the media. The validity of her argument must be obvious to anyone with a brain. Not everyone who is abused becomes a serial killer. Contributing factor, Yes. Justification, No. Indeed, there is no justification in the final analysis. She killed people. No justification for "Monster" either. I for one will NOT be watching it.
Naive shanayneigh 17 September I'm a firm believer that there is no such thing as a neutral or objective documentary. In fact, some of the best documentaries, in my view, are thesis driven ones with a strong point of view. Nick Broomfield sure isn't shy about his point of view and where his sympathies lie in "Aileen: Life and Death of a Serial Killer".
And that's fine. But what is not fine are the countless factual errors, half-truths and omissions that are too many to list in a simple review. That would take an essay. Let me just say that when Broomfield in his narration describes Wournos as one of the most honest persons he's met, he comes off as more than a little naive. Just hang in there, it picks up after the first quarter or so. If you like documentaries on serial killers or murderers, this is obviously one for your collection.
Nick Broomfield has you captivated from the outset. My only gripe is that I felt that Broomfield laid a bit too much pressure on Wournos. He kept repeating the same question over and over to her and you can sense it is tiring her out, even aggravating her. The repeated questioning also has you believe that Broomfield is doing this for his own agenda and not for getting the points that Wournos wanted to get across to the viewers.
What is Kobo Super Points?
I personally felt she was remorseful for her actions. She was doing her time and she knew where her fate lied. She didn't want to be judged anymore, she was exhausted and just wanted everything to be finalised. A shocking start to her life, you can empathise with Wournos. There's no getting away from the fact that what she did, deserved a life sentence, but death? In my opinion, definitely not. As Broomfield points out, she was clearly insane and even more so towards the end of her sentence, as I guess almost anyone would be in that situation.
A tragic tale of a human life that was definitely drawn the proverbial 'short straw'. Don't forget the tissues, for the ending. This second documentary picks up about a year before the execution as Wuornos' lawyer tries to save her while she wants none of it and seems to just want to die. This time out we get longer interviews with Wuornos and I really enjoyed the way the director didn't try to push any message and instead he just let the convicted murderer speak and the viewer could make up any decision on their own.
Throughout the appeals process there are those who want to spare Wuornos because of her tragic childhood and there are others who want her saved because they feel she's not all there mentally. By the time the movie was over I must admit that I was questioning how the state could legally kill her because it was clear that she wasn't all there and something was obviously missing. It was also fascinating seeing how Broomfield was called into testify and his original movie was also part of the trial. This documentary also goes into a lot more detail on Wuornos' troubled childhood, which included her working as a prostitute before the age of ten, being raped by her brother and getting pregnant at The sequence where her real mom shows up after all these years was quite chilling as was Wuornos' response to it.
If you're familiar with Broomfield's "Selling of a Serial Killer" you're probably comfortable with the directors off cheek way of recording events, almost as if it was shot for a home-video rather than for the BBC. It is difficult to dislike Broomfield, his gentle speech, his unkempt, casual appearance and unpretentious ways. Shot ten years later, "Life and Death of a Serial Killer" shows us Aileen during the last stage of her trial and her final days before execution.
Comparing both films, "Life and Death" is the more important document. It begs to question how anybody could have grown up completely normal in such an environment and how much more monstrosity lies beneath the facade of Norman Rockwell's Americana. More important, Broomfield questions the validity of the death penalty, and even though he makes no effort to hide his personal stance, his points are neither patronizing nor judgemental. There is no lecturing with a pointed finger; the director is simply there, recording a woman who is as obviously guilty as she is obviously insane.
Lawyers and sycophants tried to profit from Aileen's crimes in "Selling" — in "Life and Death", Broomfield shows how the media circus and politicians this being an election year try to profit from her death. It could have been easy to portray Aileen as a "Monster", hiding under the disguise of a human being, but there is no "Monster" in this film.
The director opts to talk to her one-on-one, showing us a human being who, again, is undoubtedly guilty but who would in any other part of the so-called First World, have ended up in a mental institution. At times the viewer finds himself captured by the 'charm of the psychopath', believing Aileen's stories of abuse, poverty and hardship. On many levels those stories may be true, but with time it becomes very clear that we're dealing with a very confused woman. About 20 minutes into the documentary, Aileen having discovered Christ and feeling the need to "come clean" admits that she killed in cold blood, 'not for the thrill but for the bounty'.
It is one of her most sincere moments, yet we see the wide stare of a schizophrenic; a mind so warped that it cannot distinguish between truth, lie or make-believe anymore. There's a feeling of sincerity throughout Broomfield's works, not only questioning the subject but also questioning the filmmakers methods. In one scene, an attorney accuses the director of 'manipulation' by having edited scenes from "Selling". Those court scenes add very little to the progress of the film and Broomfield could have easily cut them out. He kept them, almost as if to ask the viewer: "how far can you be manipulated yourself" and "where does fact end and fiction start".
How far can you trust your eyes in our modern, media-driven world? Sadly, this remains one of Broomfield's lesser known works — I bought the DVD for 99 cent from a cheapo-bin, still slightly confused as to why there are so many more populist, manipulative and exploiting documentaries Michael Moore comes to mind selling for way more. Aileen Wuornos grew up in a financially, and emotionally, deprived family. She later killed seven men in cold blood she may have been defending herself from attack in some cases, but that remains unclear.
She showed little remorse thereafter. She was intelligent, articulate, and although towards the end of her spell on death row appeared wildly deluded, was arguably not insane: her view of the world may have been wrong, but it did make sense. The story of her final year, told in this film by Nick Broomfield who had made another film earlier during her journey through the U. Wuornos does not come across as a "monster" the name of a subsequent fictionalised account of her case but as very human; and yet she seems incapable of comprehending the significance of death, even her own at the hands of the state.
The system treated her badly, and I personally oppose the death penalty in all cases; and yet it's hard to imagine how anyone in her position could generate less sympathy than Wuornos does. In some respects, 'Aileen' is a ghoulish film, peeping through the window of a house of pure horror. Broomfield's earlier film centred on the grotesque way almost everyone involved in the case tried to sell their story to the media.
But Broomfield himself is part of that media, and notwithstanding the fact that he gained Wuornos' trust, this film seems almost out of it's depth. Broomfield's style, first practised on South African white supremacist Eugene Terreblanche, is based on turning up, turning on the camera and letting people damn themselves. In his film of Terreblanche, the tactic worked, brilliantly deflating alarmist rumours of an Afrikaaner coup in it's portrait of it's pathetic subject.
But in 'Aileen', it's unclear who Broomfield is trying to damn, or whether anyone is well served by the putting of the story on camera. In one of the most chilling moments, we see the awful television coverage of Wuornos' execution sample sound-bite: "Date with Death" , but at one remove, through Broomfield's own lens.
Does this make the film an expose, or merely an exploitation of and contributor to our collective and irrational fear of that tiny proportion of humanity who kill for apparently no reason? It might do us more value to look at the socially licensed serial killers on both sides of the war in Iraq. Instead we play "watch the monster". At least 'Aileen' makes you think. But don't expect to understand. This one was made ten years down the line, when Wuornos herself was about to be executed by lethal injection for her crimes.
And what an eye-opener this is. Broomfield uses the case to shine a light into some of the darkest corners of American society. Wuornos turns out to be perhaps the biggest victim of them all, a victim of neglect, abuse, exploitation and patriarchal dominance since childhood. The psychology is in-depth and the documentary never less than compelling, albeit highly depressing and upsetting with it. Hitch-hiker and prostitute, Aileen Wuronos, was convincted for committing the murders of seven men between , and executed for her crimes in The documentary 'Aileen: Life and Death of a Serial' killer is the second of Broomfield's documentaries about Aileen the first was released in and explores her story including her childhood, her experiences as an adult living on the streets and selling her body, and attempts to piece together her truth about her crimes.
As other reviewers have pointed out, Broomfield doesn't attempt to hide his biases throughout the documentary, so if you're looking for an unbiased telling of Aileen's crimes, you won't find that here. Broomfield is clearly sympathetic towards Aileen and the two seem to strike up a friendship of sorts from their many interactions, which perhaps inhibits his ability to be objective. However, it doesn't diminish the impact of the documentary and in journalism there's no such thing as true objectivity anyway. I personally respect Broomfield for making his own opinions clear without forcing them upon the viewers.
It's no surprise that as an English man Broomfield is opposed to the death penalty being English myself, I don't know anybody here that's NOT opposed to it , and that clearly plays a part in his sympathies towards Aileen.
He doesn't even have to make a convincing argument against the legal justice system particularly surrounding the death penalty , because as a viewer I can clearly see how corrupt and inadequate it was in this case. Aileen DID NOT receive fair representation and although her mental state amplified her delusions in her final days, she wasn't completely wrong in her accusations against law enforcement who were making money off her story.
There have been endless movies, books and documentaries produced about Aileen's crimes and even those that were closest to her her girlfriend, family and friends were more concerned with profiting off her case than her well-being. Although Broomfield doesn't delve too deeply into the issues facing the American legal system and the death penalty, those questions are clearly echoing throughout. Broomfield asks if it's moral or just to send a mentally ill person to death, and it's a fair question. As the documentary progresses, Aileen's mental state deteriorates and in her final interview with Broomfield she's clearly suffering from mental illness which she claims she did not receive adequate medical treatment for.
Essentially, Broomfield forces the viewers to ask themselves whether what happens to Aileen is fair.