jacktheripper.de
Fachliche Themen => Allgemeine Diskussion => Thema gestartet von: Shadow Ghost am 19.01.2012 00:45 Uhr
-
In der Diskussion um Schizophrenie und Serienmörder hat Lestrade den Fall "Warren" erwähnt, der in Sexual Homicide: Patterns and Motives beschrieben wird. Ich dachte, es wäre vielleicht für die meisten hier interessant, diesen Fall selbst studieren zu können. In den nachfolgenden Posts daher der Auszug aus obigem Buch. (Bitte seht mir nach, dass ich das nicht alles auch noch übersetzt habe.)
-
Warren: A Case Example
The theme for this case is "getting away with murder." It describes the ease with which Warren (a pseudonym), all through his life, manipulated his family and social system (school, juvenile authorities, psychiatric evaluators, court officials) while seriously or fatally injuring many women. It underscores the great difficulty people who came into contact with Warren had in holding him accountable for his behavior.
The case illustrates that some people are highly involved in patterns of planned homicidal behavior and commit murder, not once, but many times. The application of the motivational model will highlight Warren's strong sense of entitlement and identification with his mother; the early development of sexual and aggressive fantasies expressed first through family violence, then extended to neighborhood acquaintances, and then to strangers. As an adolescent, juvenile delinquent acts escalated into
his first murder at age fourteen, which was condoned and not revealed by his parents. Soon after his first separation from his family into the military, he attempted a second murder; the victim miraculously survived, and a jury convicted him. His violent fantasies and behavior continued in prison, but he succeeded in manipulating his evaluators, and his sentence was reduced by thirteen years. He was released, married, and attempted to murder his wife before committing three additional murders.
-
Social Environment
The social environmental circumstances of Warren's case were particularly supportive of family role confusion and deviant, sexually aggressive thoughts and behavior.
Warren was the fourth and last child of Mr. and Mrs. T. Born prematurely; he grew up believing he had died and was brought back to life. Over the years, his mother conveyed, in a dramatic way, other events such as his having seizures because of his specialness in being fragile and premature (even when his physician had said the seizures were due to high fever from tonsillitis). (See table 6-I for Chronology of Events.)
After his birth, his mother took him into her bed (she claims because of crowded living conditions in the house) and relegated her alcoholic husband to the bedroom of Warren's older sister. This bedroom arrangement continued until Warren was fifteen although after age seven, Warren slept in a twin bed. Any efforts he or his sister made to question this arrangement were met by vague comments from both parents. In addition, Warren, his sister, his mother, and a reportedly domineering maternal grandmother were in a tight union against the father. Two older brothers left after high school and were unavailable as male role models. As Warren became older he was used as a foil to ward off approaches of his father toward his mother. He was encouraged by the women, including his sister, to hit his father. The father was said to be verbally abusive toward Warren when drunk.
In contrast to that closeness, the mother was a strict disciplinarian, described as hitting the children with an electrical cord and demanding obedience. The children were often left in the care of the maternal grandmother, who beat the children with impunity. A peculiar combination of being special and being used by the mother characterized Warren's primary relationship with her.
Early school experiences suggest his isolation from peers and a reliance on his mother, sister, and grandmother. As Warren approached puberty, his underlying anger toward females began to emerge. His school performance was inconsistent. Some teachers considered him very obedient, but a school principal noted in a report that Warren was frequently "lost in fantasy." This observation is paralleled in a report by his sister that at times Warren would sit on the couch, his eyes appearing wild and sunk into his head; he would seem totally absorbed. Although not violent toward his mother as a child, he later became assaultive toward her when he was angry. He would get violent over trivial things such as wanting two hot dogs or wanting chocolate syrup on his ice cream.
Some quotes from Warren's autobiography include the following: "I died when a few months old and [was] revived as if it were fate . . . I was a freak in others' eyes . . . I chose to swallow the insults." He made the analogy, "I was a dog who got petted when I used the paper."
-
Table 6-1 Chronology of Events in Warren's Life
Event Observation
1947 Warren's birth Nine days in incubator until weight five pounds.
Summer 1947 Tonsillitis with high fever causing "seizure." Warren believes he "died and was revived; it was fate."
1947-1953 Sleeps in same bed with mother.
1948-1952 In care of grandmother while mother works as a clerk 'in a store.
1953-1965 Mother and Warren sleep in separate twin beds.
1953 Elementary school.
1958 Warren slender.
1959 Warren gains 30 pounds. (in 1976 Warren reports a rape memory of two females using a knife and threatening
castration.)
1960 Warren slender.
1961-1962 Involved in purse-snatchings and gang fights.
April 1963 Charged with assault and intent to ravish a fourteen-year-old
girl. Charged with robbery (purse-snatching of elderly blind
woman). Charges dismissed on a technicality.
May 1963 Interrogated for murder of elderly woman but not charged
because of lack of evidence (admits to murder in 1976).
June 1965 Graduates high school.
September 1965 Enlists in the military.
October 1965 Charged with assault with intent to commit murder (convicted in 1966).
1966 Sentenced to twenty years in federal penitentiary.
April 1968 In penitentiary, threatens classroom instructor with bodily harm. Is disciplined.
June 1971 Writes a letter containing lewd comments and threatening to a
female teacher. Was transferred to a maximum security prison.
Teacher took threats seriously enough to request that she be notified upon his parole.
July 1971 Disciplined for fighting. A knife is found in his cell.
Claims an inmate made a homosexual advance.
November 1973 After serving seven and one-half years, Warren is paroled.
September 1974 Marries a woman with four children.
1975 Wife claims Warren had her write a suicide note and had tried to strangle her with a rope.
March 1975 Terminates psychiatric counseling.
November 1975 Shoots and kills a clerk in a convenience store (admits the murder in 1976).
April 1976 Rapes, murders, and mutilates a forty-four-year-old convenience store clerk.
October 1976 Rapes, murders, and mutilates twenty-four-year-old convenience store clerk. Charged with murder.
1977 Convicted of three murders and sentenced to die.
Granted new trial.
Convicted.
1985 Case under review for sentence.
-
Formative Events
The critical formative events are the overstimulating physical contact between Warren and his mother, the conflictual parental relationship, the physical and verbal abuse of the children, and the family-condoned aggression toward his parents that began around adolescence. These factors support Warren's failure at interpersonal attachment to people outside the family and to males within the family. The home environment denied or minimized the aggressive acts external to the family.
-
Patterned Responses
One critical personal trait of Warren's, entitlement, developed from the preferential treatment of Warren by his mother. Also important was the indication that Warren became lost in aggressive fantasy early in his development. Subsequent information revealed that this fantasy was sexually linked to masturbatory activity. He admits to compulsive masturbation, a fetish for female underwear, and spying on his sister in the bathroom. This clustering of sexualized interests, acknowledged by Warren, is his conscious awareness of his developing fantasies that are first passive (for example, masturbating under bed covers, peeking through keyholes, and stealing underwear) and confirms his reliance on fantasy to generate excitement and states of pleasure (in contrast to normal peer interaction).
The second part of the patterned responses is Warren's thinking. There was an early reliance on aggressive fantasies as the domain of primary emotional expression as noted in family violence. The sexualized fantasies began to merge with the aggressive behaviors, derived, in part, from anger and retaliation from childhood experiences. It is important to note the ease with which Warren can be violent. There are no thoughts blocking him or challenging his behavior either externally or internally. He knows how to be polite and superficially engaging but there is little that inhibits his expression of aggression first toward family members, then to neighborhood acquaintances, and later to strangers.
-
Action Toward Others
Although Warren had no juvenile convictions, there was delinquent gang behavior in his early teens. He and two peers snatched purses on a rather regular basis. He alone was accused of striking an elderly blind woman and taking her purse. The blind woman had a fourteen-year-old niece who accompanied her in the morning to the bus and who would bring her home after work when she got off the bus. One afternoon, Warren cursed at them and snatched the woman's purse. The niece picked Warren out of a
lineup.
While the robbery was being investigated, an elderly woman who lived in the community and had reportedly been talking to Warren about his "wrongdoing" was found hot in the head in the same vicinity where the pursesnatching took place. Tracking dogs were brought to the scene, and the dogs led the police to the Warren's house. The ather said Warren had been home all evening. Warren was taken to the police station for interrogation on the murder and the robbery. He was considered a prime suspect since he was present when neighbors noted their .3 8 -caliber revolver missing. Warren and the boys belonging to this family had been playing with the revolver a day or two before its disappearance.
Warren refused to talk with police until his mother came to the police station. She reinforced that he not talk. Realizing Warren was not going to talk, the police suggested hat he be given some psychiatric help. The parents were angry at this suggestion and retained a lawyer. Subsequently all charges were dropped-the robbery indictment because of a technicality, and the murder charge because of a lack of witnesses.
At no point during his childhood or adolescence did Warren show much interest in girls. His only girlfriend during high school was a thirteen-year-old he was unable to date. He would visit her at her home and maintained contact with her, asking her to wait for him until he returned from the service.
Warren completed his high school education and enlisted in the military. One month later he was charged with attempted murder of a young woman who was found unconscious and badly beaten. Prompt emergency attention was critical in saving her life. Physical evidence linked him to the crime.
-
Feedback Filter I
The dominant aspect of the first feedback filter (that operates until his arrest) is that all Warren's aggressive acts were somehow mitigated by the family system. The mother did not acknowledge or report the family violence but rather constantly protected and defended her son. The father was absent, unavailable and passive as a protector. At this point, we can see a strong environmental system of support for violence by the adolescent and degradation of the father. The family social system fails and the outside social system (police) is unable to intervene. Warren learned the system is basically weak as was his father, and he had complete reign and freedom; this added to an increased preoccupation and realization of very sadistic fantasies. He literally gets away with murder.
He completed high school and separated from the family for the first time when he entered the military. Within one month, he was again in serious trouble. Without parental protection and intervention, Warren was charged with the attempted murder.
-
Psychiatric Evaluation
In November 1965, Warren was psychiatrically evaluated as part of the pretrial investigation to ascertain whether the insanity defense could be raised before the court-martial. The legal standard at the time asked this question: Was the offender so far free from mental disease or defect at the time the crime was committed that he was able to distinguish right from wrong and adhere to the right?
During the examination period at a hospital, Warren made no attempt either to affirm or deny the charges against him. He did relate that he remembered securing the building in question except for one door, and then remembered seeing the woman working at her desk. At five-fifteen he took the bus home, arriving about six. He then went to the mess hall to eat dinner and after dinner went to play pool. At no time did he claim there was a period of time he could not remember. The panel of psychiatrists found him alert and oriented; however, there seemed to be less than the expected amount of anxiety present, considering the nature of the circumstances and the charges against him. Later he denied knowledge of the incident, saying that if he did do it he didn't remember it. The only time he seemed to express some feelings was when he mentioned his mother and how he thought she would be upset by all that had happened. When the victim was mentioned, his face seemed to
cloud up a bit, and he seemed more anxious. If anything, his outward demeanor was calm and relaxed. When questioned about this, he said, "There is no reason to be concerned until I find out what they've got against me."
The psychiatric diagnosis given was: Aggressive reaction, chronic, severe. The report also noted that Warren had intense resentment toward authority figures and toward anyone he felt would be likely to push him around. He had a history of having been involved in gang fights during his teenage years, with aggressive, belligerent attitudes, and admitted fantasies of destructive behavior toward anyone he felt was crossing him. He also exhibited marked dependency needs, which he tended to deny but which were apparent in his intense and close relationship with his mother. The panel further found that at the time of the commission of the alleged offense, Warren was so far free from mental defect, disease, or derangement as to be able to distinguish right from wrong; that he possessed sufficient mental capacity both to understand the nature of the charges against him and to cooperate on his own behalf; and that he was not suffering from a chronic, disabling psychosis.
This testimony was accepted without further analysis, and it effectively ruled out Warren's chance of raising the insanity defense before the courtmartial.
Warren pleaded not guilty at trial. The following, abstracted from the trial testimony of the victim, weighed heavily in the evidence.
A nineteen-year-old enlisted woman, performing duties as an accountant, decided at quitting time to work late. Another department in the building was responsible for securing the building. Normally three doors were padlocked from the inside, and the only exit was through the southeast door. Fifteen minutes after quitting time, a young man came to the door and spoke to the woman. She had not seen the man before and did not recognize him. He was large and wore a uniform. He asked her to be sure to lock the windows and turn off the lights when she finished. She then heard him go to the northwest door, put the padlock on and then walk down through the middle section of the building. She remained ten or fifteen minutes and decided to go home. She picked up her coffee cup and a soda pop bottle and started toward the
section containing the coatroom. The next thing she remembered was lying on the floor with her head over the stairs and someone on top of her choking her.
This was a large white man. She kicked him away and turned over and started trying to crawl away, and he moved toward the corner and was holding a long object, which she thought to be one of the metal ashtrays. He said, "If you scream, I'll hit you." She doesn't remember him hitting her, and the next thing she remembered was someone pulling her hair. She asked why and the doctor said it was all right, that they were sponging her head.
Subsequently, she received medical treatment and was found to have multiple lacerations to the scalp, forehead, face, right ear, and nose. She had a fractured skull. Three teeth were broken. She was hospitalized for seven weeks. After release she continued to have frequent and severe headaches, memory loss, palpitations, and pounding heart.
Warren was convicted of assault with intent to murder and sentenced to twenty years at hard labor.
-
Internal and External Pressure on the System
The curtailment of freedom is difficult for an individual accustomed to getting what he wants. It is no surprise that once Warren was sentenced to prison, he and his mother exerted two types of pressure on the justice and psychiatric systems. At the legal level, letters for appeal began to build in Warren's file. When that endeavor failed, a change in Warren's behavior (from negative to positive) was noted in the psychiatric summaries. Suddenly there was a recommendation for clemency ("good behavioral progress") and a reduction in sentence.
-
Legal Summary of Appeals
The details of the appeal process are presented to illustrate the persistence of Warren and his mother as well as the time and energy provided by the justice system to ensure Warren's legal rights were protected.
Following approval of the sentence by the convening authorities in April 1966, letters began accumulating - first from Warren, regarding an appeal to the court of military appeals (CMA). The two legal issues were: (1) whether the testimony given by a nurse concerning the victim's words when she regained consciousness was hearsay, and (2) whether bloodstained clothing belonging to Warren had been seized illegally, and therefore had been erroneously admitted at trial.
Both of these issues were resolved against Warren, and the CMA affirmed the conviction in June 1967. The hearsay issue was dismissed because the victim had given the same testimony as the nurse. Therefore, the court held, whether the nurse's testimony was hearsay was immaterial, since it merely repeated the victim's testimony. The seizure of the clothing was held to be legal, since it was the result of a search incident to arrest, one of the major exceptions to the rule that a warrant is required before a search can take place.
A July 18 letter informing Warren of the decision of the CMA was received on July 25. He then wrote on October 9 to the director of military justice, Office of the Judge Advocate General, to request a new trial. On October 16, the judge advocate general replied that Warren was no longer eligible to petition for a new trial since the one year period had expired (the convening authority had approved the conviction and sentencing on 28 April 1967).
In a November 1967 letter to a senator, Warren's mother protested the denial of a new trial, pointing out that Warren did not get the final opinion of the CMA until after the one-year period had expired, and that no one had advised him of the necessary petition for a new trial during that period.She also expressed concern about irregularities in the first trial and about her son's mental condition.
The senator referred the matter to the Air Force Office of Legislative Liaison, Congressional Enquiry Division. That office informed him that all procedures had been followed correctly, and that psychiatric testing at the time of the trial had shown Warren to be competent and sane, although suffering from a character and behavior disorder. Thus, Warren had exhausted all his appellate remedies and was not entitled to petition for a new trial after the one-year period had expired. The only avenue left open to Warren, according to this office, was for him to apply to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.
Correction of military records takes place only in extraordinary circumstances. To qualify for this remedy, Warren would have to prove that he had been a victim of injustice, in which event the board would review his case and make recommendations to the Secretary of the Air Force.
Warren's mother also wrote to another senator and congressman because the same information regarding the reason for not granting a new trial was sent to them.
In November 1967, Warren's request for clemency and restoration to duty was rejected.
In December 1967, Warren wrote to a second congressman, the chairman of the House Committee on Armed Services and to the Constitutional Rights Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the judiciary. In both of these letters he explained that he had delayed his petition for a new trial until he received the decision of the CMA, and that at no time had anyone told him about the one-year restriction. Again, these letters were referred to the Office of Legislative Liaison.
In replying to these letters, the Office of Legislative Liaison discussed the then-pending legislation that would extend the period for request for a new trial from one to two years after appeal of sentencing by the convening body. That legislation, if enacted, would make the extension retroactive for two years from the date of enactment. Thus,
if the legislation were enacted on or before 27 April 1968, Warren would be able to petition for a new trial.
The office again suggested that Warren apply for a correction of military records, or that he apply for a writ of error coram nobis. That is, Warren would petition the original court-martial and would bring to the court's attention errors of fact in the original trial.
The new legislation was not enacted until October 1968. Therefore, Warren did not qualify to petition for a new trial, and he did not petition for coram nobis. However, in May 1968 he petitioned the CMA for relief. The basis of that petition was that even though the statute only allowed for the one-year period, the judge advocate general has
discretionary power to ignore the statute, make a decision to set aside the original conviction, and grant a new trial after considering the substance of a particular case. This, according to the petition, was particularly important in light of the fact that the one-year period was so short as to amount to an unconstitutional denial of due process.
On 14 June 1968, this petition was denied. Warren tried again in January 1971, writing the staff judge advocate and designating his letter a notice of appeal. This letter resulted in a reply informing Warren that he had exhausted all appellate remedies and that his only recourse was to apply to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.
This application was made in September 1971 and claimed that error and/or injustice has occurred in his case because (1) he was not given his Miranda warnings when he was arrested, and (2) evidence admitted at trial was insufficient to support the guilty verdict, and certain evidence that had been admitted at trial had prejudiced his case
(presumably the bloodstained clothes).
Both issues were resolved against Warren and the request for correction of military records was denied. Miranda warnings are only required for arrests taking place after 13 June 1966, and Warren's arrest was March 1966, and the evidence questions had already been fully addressed and resolved by the board of review and the CMA.
-
Psychiatric Evaluation Summaries
Concurrent with the legal appeals, Warren was periodically evaluated by psychiatric evaluators at the first correctional facility for young federal offenders. It was recorded that he refused to participate in the vocational and educational training courses available. He did not cooperate with the staff and refused any mental health treatment
offered. Because he was described as being disruptive to the program, he was transferred to an adult facility.
At his second facility, in March 1968, Warren was examined by a psychologist and found to be of normal intelligence, alert, irritable, nervous, resentful, and hostile. He was described as being impulsive, locked in an idiosyncratic view of the world, easily provoked, and suffering from a severe personality disorder. He was recommended for
maximum security.
In September 1969, there was an annual review of his case, and the psychiatric staff did not recommend for clemency at that time. They found Warren had progressed very little in behavior modification and selfimprovement since his previous review. He was described as continuing to show resentment and hostility in regard to his military
confinement.
In October 1969, Warren was examined by a psychologist and diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic in partial remission. He was described as withdrawn, at times preoccupied, and even seemed to be listening to some inner voice (as though he were experiencing auditory hallucinations, which he denied). At intervals he grimaced, grinned for no apparent reason, laughed inappropriately, and frequently engaged in childish talk that was regressive and not pertinent to the examination. He was able
to achieve I 15 IQ on testing in spite of his air of detachment and seeming inattention. He was described as revealing an immature personality with considerable difficulties in his psychosexual development. He was described as having a self-concept more feminine than masculine and that his relationship patterns and feeling for adults
were chaotic. This evaluator was the only one throughout Warren's history who indicated that there might be a possibility of Warren's experiencing auditory hallucinations, and he admitted it was a guess on his part.
In September 1970, Warren was evaluated by a psychologist who described him as being a very immature personality and prone to act inappropriately. He recommended that Warren learn to control and contain himself.
A change from negative to positive evaluations began in October 1970. At that time, the treatment team reviewed Warren's case and wrote that an affirmative action could be recommended in terms of clemency. They felt a reward was in order because Warren had shown constructive behavior patterns and was showing a marked change in his attitude and behavioral characteristics. The team suggested that consideration be given to granting clemency and reducing his sentence to ten years rather than the prescribed twenty. It was the team's belief that a reduction in sentence would allow further latitude in dealing with his repressed hostilities and further strengthen the controls he was exerting over his thought and behavior processes. The staff did not believe that parole at that time was appropriate and would recommend against it, but would suggest that a review of possible parole be given within a reasonable period of time.
In January 1972, however, a psychiatrist remarked on Warren's continued avoidance and denial of the crime. His report urged the parole board to reread the trial testimony, and if they believed Warren did commit the crime, then the parole should be denied. The evaluator did not believe Warren had been rehabilitated and felt he was a very definite threat to every female in the community where he resides. The psychiatrist assumed that he had committed the crime, adding that if he had not a
great injustice had been done to the man. The evaluator continued to state that he would not release Warren until he sat down and talked about his feelings. Warren would not talk about his sexual feelings; he was evaluated as denying and repressing them. This psychiatrist believed Warren was manipulating the staff into thinking his behavior change was genuine. It is clear that staff who were recommending clemency did not believe Warren had committed the attempted murder. To this time, he had not admitted to the crime. This psychiatrist was far more convinced of the dangerousness and aware of the psychopathic quality of Warren. However, he held the minority opinion.
In September 1972, two evaluators examined Warren and their reports were a positive recommendation as to Warren's control of his behavior. They acknowledge that he was somewhat immature and self-centered yet believed he possessed sufficient self-control. It was felt he had grown sufficiently in self-control so that he might be recommended for release into society.
In November 1973, after serving seven and one-half years of a sixteen-year sentence (reduced from twenty years), Warren was given a favorable recommendation by the institutional board for parole to his mother. A job was found for him with a shipbuilding company and he was instructed to seek psychiatric treatment.
Warren's manipulation of the psychiatric evaluators is remarkable. No one recorded talking to him about his violent fantasies. In one example of Warren's self-control, they concluded that because he could work in a kitchen with knives (and not assault with them), he was safe to be released. However, they avoided commenting on two violent aggressions noted in a report toward a female teacher and an inmate.
-
Feedback Filter II
The second activation of the feedback filter for Warren began when he left prison. Prison provides time to reflect on past crimes and thoughts and fantasies that advance the criminal toward perfecting future crimes. We return to Warren's life chronicle and learn what happened after he left prison.
-
Released and Living in the Community
After his parole in November 1973, Warren lived with his mother and began working. He dated a thirty-year-old divorced woman with one child for several months. She stopped dating him because of his "weird" behavior. Two specific behaviors were described as "watching T-V while wiggling his feet and giggling when there was nothing funny on the station," and "making me drive his car because I would have to wear the shoulder seat belt. He would just sit there and watch me drive and grin up a storm." This woman also said he never made any sexual advances toward her.
In March and June 1974, Warren received two moving traffic violations. Warren's mother called the probation officer to report this because Warren was at work. He was given a ticket for speeding and drinking and one for running a stop sign. He was fined $87.50 for driving eighty-five miles-an-hour in a fifty-five miles-an-hour zone. These
tickets were not considered of a serious nature by either his probation officer or his counselor.
Warren met a woman, a divorced mother of four, at work and dated her about seven months before marrying her in September 1974. She described Warren as being very quiet and understanding of her and her problem with her ex-husband over visitation rights. She said he was nice and good and different from other men she had met. She did not feel he exhibited unusual behaviors.
By October, Warren reported to his probation officer that his wife had "run off" and he did not know where she was living. He did know she had been to the home of her ex-husband's girlfriend. At that time, she was arrested by local police on a complaint by the girlfriend and charged with aggravated assault and battery. She was taken to the county jail and booked and released on bond. Following her release she did not return to her husband but went to the home of her parents. As of the November parole report, the couple were separated.
Warren's wife described some upsetting incidents that illustrate a repetitious pattern of family violence. Shortly after their marriage she was depressed over the visitation rights of her ex-husband and remarked that she should just commit suicide. She said she wasn't really serious, but he seemed to take it so and told her that if she
really wanted to die, he would just kill her. At first they were just "playing around" and he picked up a pillow and pretended to smother her with it. She became very frightened when she realized he seemed to be losing control of himself. She lost consciousness and reported the incident to the police. She said he had forced her to write a suicide note.
In a second incident, she referred to a time when Warren had been drinking. She asked him to help her. He became enraged and threatened to crush her skull in" if she didn't leave him alone.
A third incident involved a pet rabbit that killed a baby rabbit. Warren, in turn, killed the rabbit by knocking its head up against a post and then he cleaned it for dinner. His wife was shocked by the amount of blood on Warren.
Warren's wife said they had an active and satisfying sex life until the birth of their daughter, at which point Warren lost all interest in sex and helping her around the house. Initially they both worked the day shift but changed to the night shift when Warren said he did not like getting up so early.
Warren's personality and behavior changed so drastically after the birth of the baby that his wife suspected he was seeing another woman. When she questioned him, he would either tell her she didn't know what she was talking about or he didn't remember. He was sleeping poorly. Previously he would go to bed with her at night, but now he would stay up after she went to bed and sit by himself in the living room and watch TV. One night she found him sitting in the dark living room. The television was on without a picture. He claimed he was concerned that something would happen to the baby or to her. The wife described him as just not being himself.
In December 1974, Warren wrote a letter to his probation officer asking to terminate psychiatric counseling. He related talking to his counselor: "I told him I might be able to get a bonus [at work] if I had no absences. My counselor said he couldn't see any difference in seeing me fifteen minutes -a month than not at all. He said he was satisfied that I had been on my own long enough and had no problems other than my traffic tickets, which he said he also had. He was agreeable to discontinue my visits. I told him I saw no problems that I could not handle and that I would leave it up to him. So if it's all right with you, I will no longer have to visit the clinic. If I have a problem arise I will call my counselor for advice and the help I might need." By March 1975, Warren's psychiatric counseling was terminated after one year.
In October 1975, Warren's probation officer wrote in support of a reduction in sentence. He reported that Warren was reunited with his wife and that he had maintained his job. In November 1975, Warren's sentence was reduced thirteen years and he was due to complete parole supervision March 1979.
-
Charged with Murder
On October 1976 Warren was charged with murder, robbery, and rape after police apprehended him leaving a crime scene. The following include a description of the crime scene and Warren's confession.
A twenty-four-year-old, five-feet-four-inch tall, 170-pound mother of two children was reported missing from her job as a clerk in a convenience store by a customer who found the store empty at 10:00 P.M. The woman was last seen sweeping the steps of the convenience store at 9:45 P.M. by a man living across the street. Another witness stated that about 10:00 P.M. he had heard a vehicle spin out" and leave the store at a high rate of speed. The following day a massive search party failed to reveal any leads or clues.
Two days later a landowner observed a man acting suspicious in his woods. He reported a description of the man and his truck and then went to the site. He found a nonmutilated body and reported it to police. While waiting for the police, the landowner saw the man return to the site. When police arrived, the body was noted to be mutilated.
The body was located in a wooded area adjacent to an old corn field. Approximately thirty yards off the main road appeared to be the initial crime scene. The grass in this area was smashed down, approximately eighteen inches high, and bloody. There were drag marks in this area to where the body was located. Postmortem lividity indicated that the body, found laying face up, had spent some time, probably at least eight hours, on its back after death. Grass found clutched in the victim's hand was growing at the scene where the initial attack was believed to have taken place. The left breast had been cut off and was missing. There was an incision in the right breast at the rib cage approximately three inches long and an incision four inches long in the victim's abdomen. All of the cuts were made postmortem. The body was partially
covered in the lower area by a couple of old boards that appeared to have been in the area. Wounds were noted to the back of the head area.
Police set up a roadblock to apprehend the suspect seen leaving the area. Before reaching the roadblock, Warren turned off the road onto a narrow trail that led to an open field. After wrecking his truck, he jumped out of the vehicle and into some bushes. The police helicopter observed this, and began circling the area; there was no way for him to escape out of the small wooded area as it was soon surrounded with deputies and their cars.
Approximately one hour after the area had been sealed off and secured, Warren's wife was brought to the scene. She was put on the public address system and begged her husband to give himself up. Warren yelled to his wife that he did everything the police said he did. He also said, "I'm going to make you [the police) kill me." Then he walked out and the police handcuffed him.
After informing Warren of his rights, the officers asked some questions and obtained the following information regarding the crime. Warren said there had been a birthday party for his baby that night and his wife's sister, her husband, and Warren's mother stayed for dinner. He took his mother home and stopped to get gas at the convenience store. He then went to the dog track. He left there and went back to the convenience store, forced the clerk into his vehicle at gunpoint, and drove to a
dirt road where he parked the vehicle and raped the woman. He then took her into the woods, forced her to sit down, and shot her.
He went home and lay down, but he couldn't sleep, so he got up and made some chocolate. The next day he went back to the crime scene. He saw some boys walking in the woods and thought they would find the body. He left.
He came back to the crime scene the following day, moved the body to a wooded area, and cut on the victim's breast and stomach with his knife. He then left for a short time, returning to see people and vehicles at the location.
-
New Information Following Arrest
In further interviewing after arrest, Warren confessed to additional murders. On 11 November 1975, a white, twenty-seven-year-old female was found beaten and shot one time over the eye in the convenience store where she worked. Warren reported that he and his wife had bought gas at the convenience store. He later returned, saw boys in the store, drove on, and returned when the boys were gone. He went into the store and shot the clerk in the forehead. He did not take any money.
On 16 April 1976, a white forty-four-year-old, blue-eyed, blond-haired, 170-pound woman clerk at a convenience store was reported missing at 2:50 A.M. by the man delivering the morning papers. The store was empty. The woman's purse, containing $85, cigarettes, lighter, and glasses case, was in the store. There was no sign of a struggle, nothing was disturbed, and nothing was out of place.
Three days later, the woman's naked body was found near an old abandoned farmhouse. The body was lying face upward; her underclothes were around her ankle. Both breasts had been removed and were lying between the legs. There was a midline incision on the body as well as incised wounds on both legs. There was a bloodstained pathway leading away from the house. A detective magazine was lying near the body and clutched in her right hand were dying kudzu vines. It appeared the killer returned to the scene to make cuts to the inner and outer thigh. The coroner listed the cause of death as a hammer blow to the head.
Warren confessed he abducted the woman at gunpoint, taking her to the abandoned house. He forced her to lay down on the ground after making her take her slacks and underpants off. He then shot her in the face. He returned the next day, moving her closer to the house where he cut her in the stomach, cut off her breasts, and cut her legs.
-
Trial Preparation
In preparing for trial, Warren's attorneys continually impressed upon him the seriousness of the charges against him and the need for him to search his background for anything out of the ordinary and to tell, if possible, when he began to act or feel abnormal. After a pretrial hearing; Warren indicated his intent to talk. As he talked he began to sweat profusely. His body tensed and his eyes bulged out to about twice their normal size. He began to shake violently and told his attorneys that two female teenagers raped him when he was twelve years old. He did not know them and they did not go to his school. He said he was walking along a road (the same small suburb where he was living at the time of the murders and where he grew up and where all the victims lived) late in the afternoon from school with a baseball glove in his hand. He said the two women began walking beside him and started talking to him about having sex with him. He said he resisted and they took him by the hand and led him into a grassy field near the road where they opened their shirts and one of them took her shorts off. He said they tried to make him have an erection and he said that he "couldn't get it up-,, He said they kicked him in his testicles and really hurt him. He said they threw him on the ground, one woman sat on him and the other one took off her shorts and placed her vagina over his mouth and, with a knife to his neck, made him "eat her out" (something he says he had never done before or since). He said that after they let him go, he walked home in great pain and was forced by his parents to return to look for his ball glove, which he found near the area where he was
attacked. When asked why he did not tell his parents, he said that his dad was always drunk and that "you never mentioned sex or anything like that" around his mother.
He told his attorneys that, on another occasion, he beat up a woman because she tried to get friendly with him and he was deathly afraid. He also said he shot one woman because she looked just like the woman who sat on top of him. He said he returned to his crime scenes and cut on the women because he wanted them to feel pain, "pain like [the females] made me feel."
The attorneys learned about Warren's assault upon a fourteen-year-old girl before his entry into the military service. His version was that he was about to have sexual relations with the girl when she became frightened and refused to cooperate. He said he had intercourse with her on previous occasions and that she was promiscuous around the neighborhood.
Warren also confessed to murdering the elderly woman when he was an adolescent, a crime he had previously denied. The murder gun, subsequently determined to have killed the elderly woman, was found several years later when his family house was torn down.
-
Pretrial Psychiatric Examination: The Question of Sanity
A pretrial psychiatric examination of Warren was conducted and he was diagnosed as a severe schizoid personality with marked paranoid traits. Also found were necrosadistic traits and episodic discontrol. Warren, it was concluded, was presently sane and competent to stand trial. He knew the difference between right and wrong, he generally had the capacity to adhere to the right, and he could assist in his own defense. However, it was also considered possible that at the time the murders
took place, he had not been able to exercise sufficient control over himself to prevent himself from committing the offenses.
Because Warren had already confessed to the murders, his guilt or innocence in a literal sense was not at issue. The question before the jury at trial was whether he was sane at the time the murders were committed. If the jury were to find that he had been sane at that time, there was a strong possibility that the death penalty would be imposed. If the jury were to find he had been insane at that time, he could not be held criminally responsible for his acts. Defense counsel therefore stressed that although Warren was presently sane and could differentiate between right and wrong, at the time the murders took place he had been unable to control his behavior. This inability, they claimed, was solely the result of mental illness and Warren was therefore not criminally responsible for his actions.
For the defense, one psychiatrist diagnosed Warren as being a schizoid personality with paranoid and necrosadistic features and episodic discontrol. He found Warren competent to stand trial. He described Warren as operating at a level of relative detachment from interpersonal relationships, with an outward appearance of being calm and stable; however, at all times Warren was under massive intrapsychic conflicts and immense anxiety. He possessed projective tendencies and erupted in violent behavior. The psychiatrist believed Warren departed from reality at the times of the murders and stated that the murders were so gruesome that they must be considered acts of a psychotic person. This psychiatrist testified that Warren's personality had always been poor in function and, at times, became so further disrupted that Warren became psychotic. It was at those times that the murders occurred and Warren was unable to prevent himself from killing the women.
In attempting to explain why Warren committed the murders, the psychiatrist pointed to his background, making the following observations:
1. Warren grew up in a home where women were in control and men were denigrated.
2. Warren's traumatic victimization at age twelve by two older girls served to confirm his picture of the world.
3. Warren's marriage to a woman with four children demonstrates his tendency to empathize more with children than adults and his feelings about mother figures.
4. The timing of the murders indicated a rekindling of Warren's own childhood fears as a result of the events of pregnancy and childbirth; thus, he perceived it necessary to destroy these women in order to prevent his own destruction.
5. The mutilation of his victims was an attempt to remove gender identification from his victims and render them nonfemale.
During an intense cross-examination, the prosecution established:
1 . Warren's choice of female victims with a particular physical appearance demonstrated he could exert some control over his behavior.
2. Had another person discovered Warren during the course of one of the murders, he probably would have been able to attempt to leave the scene and escape detection.
3. Warren was sane between his periods of loss of control and that no known psychiatric program could reasonably be expected to be successful in treating Warren; consequently, he would, in all probability, continue his former pattern of behavior, and might even become more violent over time.
For the prosecution, a psychologist found Warren to be overcontrolled in emotional life, and his contact with reality adequate. Warren used defense mechanisms of denial, repression, projection, and rationalization. Warren was found to be highly ambivalent, emotionally immature, demanding, and threatened by adult role relationships and
close ties. Warren was found to have control sufficiently intact to plan and execute the murders without endangering himself. The diagnosis was mixed personality disorder characterized by paranoid and schizoid ideation.
Warren was found guilty on 9 August 1977 and sentenced to death on 7 September 1977. The death penalty was imposed because the aggravating circumstances (the murders were especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel) outweighed mitigating circumstances (no mitigating circumstances such as, offender acting under duress, a consenting victim, or insane).
The conviction was appealed on several grounds. First, it was claimed that Warren had committed the murders under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance, and this should have been taken into account as a mitigating factor in making the decision to impose the death penalty. The court of criminal appeals rejected this argument and concluded that the trial court in this case had applied the aggravating/mitigating circumstances test appropriately, and then
correctly imposed the death penalty.
However, two other arguments made on appeal convinced the court of criminal appeals that the conviction should be reversed and the case remanded to the trial court for a new trial. First, the remarks made by the prosecuting attorney were prejudicial. The remarks in question related to the consequences that would result if the jury found Warren had been insane at the time he committed the murders. A pretrial motion precluded the prosecutor from referring at trial to the fact that an insanity finding might allow Warren's immediate release since he was evaluated as presently sane. It was further ruled that no reference was to be made to the fact that Warren had been released before and had subsequently committed these murders. The reason for this ruling was that such references would have no value in providing whether Warren was
insane when he committed the murders, concededly the only question before the jury. In closing remarks, the prosecutor stressed testimony that referred to Warren's current sanity. The second ground for reversal concerned a problem with the wording of the verdict form. Warren had been indicted for rape and intentional killing. The trial judge, however, instructed the jurors that if they found Warren guilty, the verdict form should read, "We, the jury, find the defendant guilty of murder as charged in the indictment and fix the punishment at death." This instruction, by itself, was considered improper because it theoretically asked the jury to find Warren guilty of a crime for which he had not been indicted. To complicate things even further, the jury then returned a guilty verdict that read, "We, the jury, find the defendant guilty of capital murder as charged in the indictment and fix his punishment at death by electrocution."
If a jury found a defendant guilty of an offense not charged in the indictment, there was, under state law at the time, said to be a "fatal variance" between indictment and judgment. The legal principle was that a defendant may never be convicted of a crime for which he has not been indicted. Under those circumstances the judgment had to be reversed and the case remanded for a new trial.
There were concurring and dissenting opinions written by judges in the court of criminal appeals and the state supreme court. One of the dissenters from the supreme court decision not to hear the case expressed the opinion that the wording of the jury's verdict was adequate to allow the trial judge to enter judgment, the only real requirement. This is in contrast to the judge who wrote a special opinion concurring with the court of criminal appeals decision. That judge would have rejected the prosecuting attorney's remarks as a ground for reversal, but he considered the "fatal variance" problem to have been enough in itself to justify the court's decision to reverse.
The prosecution petitioned the court of criminal appeals for a rehearing, but the petition was denied. They then appealed to the state supreme court, which refused to hear the case. Thus, the reversal and remand order stood and Warren was entitled to a new trial.
Warren was retried and found guilty in August 1981 and the death sentence was again imposed in September 1981. The case was again appealed; the appeals court affirmed the guilty finding and the case then went to the state supreme court. The case was again remanded to the trial court, this time for a review of the death sentence. The certificate for remand was received in the circuit court in July 1984. Also pending is a civil lawsuit brought by one of the victim's husband against the United States Board of Parole and the United States Bureau of Prisons. In that lawsuit, the husband and children claim money damages for injury to them (i.e., being deprived of their wife/mother) caused by the negligence of government employees in releasing Warren when they were in possession of medical reports confirming him as a homicidal psychotic.
The second feedback filter was in operation during Warren's prison time and was activated upon his release from prison for the attempted murder conviction. Our confidence that Warren's patterned responses had not been challenged and our understanding of the escalation of the sadistic violence was information as to his total resistance and refusal to any kind of psychotherapeutic intervention during his prison or parole time. There were no reports of anyone talking to him about his preoccupation with murderous fantasies. These fantasies had not pushed him to where he thought he was abnormal or crazy; rather they continued to be a primary source of pleasure with which he identified. They remained cognitively at the time of his release.
Three aspects of his second set of murders deserve comment: (1) the escalation of the violent fantasies, (2) his identification with his mother, and (3) the report of his adolescent rape victimization by two females.
Without psychiatric treatment to confront his fantasies, they persisted, intensified, and escalated during his prison time. He had time to become more organized in planning the sequence of his crimes. After release he committed three mutilation murders before being apprehended, indicating an escalation of violent bloody fantasies. His planning and fantasy are noted in his revisiting of the crime scenes with every suggestion of sexual encounters with the dead body indicating his rational rather than irrational behavior.
Warren's marriage occurred after release from prison and represented complex dynamics related to his identification with his mother and his selection of wife and victims. Warren's wife symbolically resembled his mother (a woman with four children). His fantasies toward her led to an attempted murder that was missed by the systems (psychiatric and probation). In the second series of crimes, there is the birth of his own child, followed by his sexual rejection of his wife (recall mother's behavior with father following Warren's birth).
Warren then selected victims outside of the family, repeating the behavior noted in the first feedback filter loop. He knew the three victims in an oblique manner such as purchasing items from the store where they work. As with the first murder victims, he then used his fantasy to build up a dialogue that ended in a justification for murder.
That the victims were not total strangers in his mind was the connection and identification with the mother. She is there and she isn't there. He knows them but he doesn't.
With the first crimes, one significant event is his rape at adolescence by the two females. The intriguing question is how to treat this rape memory. One reaction is to disbelieve the account on the basis that deviant female sexuality does not usually manifest itself in such a manner. One could argue that it was a projection of Warren's own
sadistic sexual inclinations. Or it might be argued, if the account of rape were believed, that rather than two females, Warren was raped by two males but was unable to admit this fact. If he believed as he reported, another question would be whether a psychic trauma at age twelve had the power to account for the destructive behavior evidenced by Warren. His symptoms suggest it was a reality: the weight fluctuation (e.g., pregnancy fantasy) and the outburst of aggression through the rape and murder include his rage at being sexually inadequate.
-
Model Summary
When adolescent and adult criminals are studied in terms of the contribution of past events to their criminality, the emphasis in earlier studies has been on the event itself, rather than on the subject's response and reaction to the event. Our motivational model suggests that unaddressed traumatic and early damaging experiences to the murderers as children set into motion certain thinking patterns. Although there may be initial attempts to work through the troublesome effects of the experience, these attempts become patterns for limiting choices. In addition, a structure of thinking begins to emerge that motivates and sustains deviant behavior through developmental and interpersonal failure and through the alliance of distorted perceptions. Of particular importance is the activation of aggression and its link to sexual expression. The lack of attachment to others gives a randomness to the sexual crimes; however, scrutiny of the thinking patterns of the offenders indicates that there is planning in these crimes, whether the men rely on chance encounters with any victim or whether they plan to snare victims. Although the crimes themselves are premeditated, the choice of victim is generally impersonal and a result of chance selection. If lacking in evidence of sexual assault, the crime appears random and motiveless; the killer's internal fantasy motivating his actions remains unknown.
To summarize these points to the case of Warren, his sense of entitlement, derived from his family environment (demanding whatever he wanted), combined with a role reversal (relegating father ineffective with mother) and narcissistic rage at any infringment in this area (family violence).
We next hear of his teenage activities with his neighborhood peers, an involvement not to be confused with friendships. Teenagers with gang mem bership often have empty relationships, feeling different or separate because of their preoccupations and fantasy interests and juvenile delinquency is an outlet (for example, Warren's autobiography quotes). Warren advances to major crimes of rape and murder in frustration over being identified for the purse-snatching. He is furious when betrayed by the elderly lady and the fourteen-year-old girl. The entitlement surfaces and he justifies the rape by projecting the girl to be consenting and/or promiscuous. For the
murder, he thinks to himself: She criticizes me; she is berating me; therefore, I am justified in killing her. There is also a linkage to the peer group: He proved he could rape
and kill. Neither peers nor parents betrayed him; both provided protection and alibis. The childhood indulgence by the parents is the psychopathy; he learns he can get away with murder. He becomes bolder in his violence.
Separated from parental protection, his next known violent act catches him. Physical evidence links him to the crime and he is convicted.
Once inside prison, pressure is applied for his release. He claims innocence and begins the appeal process. The justice system responds fairly to Warren and his mother's letters to high-placed persons and the conviction holds. In prison, he is not held accountable for his actions; he maintains his innocence, which divides and confuses the psychiatric evaluators. Only one evaluator fully appreciates his dangerousness; the majority voted for clemency and he is released after finishing one-third of his sentence. There is no evidence that psychiatric intervention has touched his patterned responses and violent fantasies.
In the community, both the mental health counselor and probation officer are totally unaware of the sexually violent thoughts and behaviors and permit all external controls to be terminated, at which time his third murder is discovered and he is again apprehended and convicted. The justice system is tested a second time; a retrial held; and the appeal to the death sentence is still pending.
-
Danke für diese Ausführlichkeit...