Serial Killers; love them or hate them?

briannasealock

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
273
Reaction score
13
I can't lie. I love the NBC Hannibal tv show and I watch a lot of documentaries on SK's. So, naturally, the first book I plan to be published for an adult audience includes an SK.

Just tell me any thoughts on SK's. Why you love them, why you hate them, cliches you don't want to see, something you want to see more of?
 

Wilde_at_heart

υπείκωphobe
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Messages
3,243
Reaction score
514
Location
Southern Ontario
, cliches you don't want to see,

That they're super-intelligent.

I've read enough real-life cases of turf wars and bungled investigations, as well as the number who prey on vulnerable segments like runaways, prostitutes or completely random victims that it isn't usually their own sharp wits that stop them from being caught quickly.

I wouldn't say I love or hate them, but did go through a phase where I was a bit morbidly fascinated by them. The most interesting ones for me were those who seemed to maintain relatively normal lives otherwise, but then I wonder how much media myth-making goes into that. For example, people who knew Karla Homolka before she hooked up with Bernardo thought she was a complete whackjob already. Some people were fooled by Ted Bundy (including Ann Rule at the time that she knew him), yet others pegged him as a creep almost immediately.

I always thought people's varied perceptions of a serial killer in their midst would be interesting to explore.
 
Last edited:

jeseymour

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
1,098
Reaction score
127
Age
61
Location
seacoast New Hampshire
Website
jeseymour.com
I have to say I think serial killers in crime fiction are way overdone. Blech. So, this is television and not a book, but I started watching this Irish series (The Fall) with my hubby, and it turned out to be a serial killer thing, and I lost interest immediately. It was all the same old same old, only set in Belfast. Meh.
 

Cranky

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
14,945
Reaction score
8,145
I have to say I think serial killers in crime fiction are way overdone. Blech. So, this is television and not a book, but I started watching this Irish series (The Fall) with my hubby, and it turned out to be a serial killer thing, and I lost interest immediately. It was all the same old same old, only set in Belfast. Meh.

Can't help myself --- you might wanna keep watching that one. :D
 

briannasealock

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
273
Reaction score
13
That they're super-intelligent.

I've read enough real-life cases of turf wars and bungled investigations, as well as the number who prey on vulnerable segments like runaways, prostitutes or completely random victims that it isn't usually their own sharp wits that stop them from being caught quickly.

I wouldn't say I love or hate them, but did go through a phase where I was a bit morbidly fascinated by them. The most interesting ones for me were those who seemed to maintain relatively normal lives otherwise, but then I wonder how much media myth-making goes into that. For example, people who knew Karla Homolka before she hooked up with Bernardo thought she was a complete whackjob already. Some people were fooled by Ted Bundy (including Ann Rule at the time that she knew him), yet others pegged him as a creep almost immediately.

I always thought people's varied perceptions of a serial killer in their midst would be interesting to explore.

Hmmmmm. That is something I am going to look at. I've heard that some professionals in the field think that the SK's who are caught are the stupid ones. They're far too interested in the public knowing about it.

The good SK's are the one's who get away with it for years. I heard a radio show about a SK who got away with killing for 66 years.
 

briannasealock

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
273
Reaction score
13
I have to say I think serial killers in crime fiction are way overdone. Blech. So, this is television and not a book, but I started watching this Irish series (The Fall) with my hubby, and it turned out to be a serial killer thing, and I lost interest immediately. It was all the same old same old, only set in Belfast. Meh.

I'd suggest Hannibal, we, the audience, knows that Hannibal is an SK it's just everyone else who doesn't and the second season got done...a month ago...or something. I dunno, if you can handle cannibalism I guess you could try it out. It's very different.
 

Wilde_at_heart

υπείκωphobe
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Messages
3,243
Reaction score
514
Location
Southern Ontario
Hmmmmm. That is something I am going to look at. I've heard that some professionals in the field think that the SK's who are caught are the stupid ones. They're far too interested in the public knowing about it.

The good SK's are the one's who get away with it for years. I heard a radio show about a SK who got away with killing for 66 years.

It's not so much that they're stupid - or the ones who get caught necessarily are - but they usually aren't these freaky super-geniuses portrayed in the media or in fiction either.

It's hard to catch them partly because of the complete lack of relationship they have with the victim. They often prey on those unlikely to be reported missing to begin with, such as teen runaways, street-walking prostitutes, hitch-hikers, etc. By the time any body is discovered - if it is - the killer is often long gone.
In the Pickton case, Vancouver police were criticised for not pursuing missing women who were often drug addicts or vagrants; if it had been a blonde teenager from a suburban middle class family the pressure would have been much greater much sooner to catch the perpetrator.

What I do find interesting as well, is that according to most crime states, the number of them peaked in 1980 and has been in fairly steady decline ever since.
 

Jamesaritchie

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
27,863
Reaction score
2,311
I'm curious about real life serial killers, but I want no part of books or movies that treat serial killers like heroes.
 

Helix

socially distancing
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
11,698
Reaction score
12,082
Location
Atherton Tablelands
Website
snailseyeview.medium.com
I'm at the point where I won't even pick up a novel about a serial killer unless it comes highly recommended by someone whose opinion I trust. The stories are often wildly unrealistic and are becoming even more so as writers try to bring something new to the trope. Unfortunately, too many writers think 'something new' = even more violence, mostly against women, described in gruesome detail. (NB: Among the books I've read. I'm sure I've missed some excellent stories.)

I might pick up another SK novel if it were realistic. That is, showed a plausible SK and something approaching a proper police investigation. It would also have to be written very, very well.
 

briannasealock

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
273
Reaction score
13
It's not so much that they're stupid - or the ones who get caught necessarily are - but they usually aren't these freaky super-geniuses portrayed in the media or in fiction either.

It's hard to catch them partly because of the complete lack of relationship they have with the victim. They often prey on those unlikely to be reported missing to begin with, such as teen runaways, street-walking prostitutes, hitch-hikers, etc. By the time any body is discovered - if it is - the killer is often long gone.
In the Pickton case, Vancouver police were criticised for not pursuing missing women who were often drug addicts or vagrants; if it had been a blonde teenager from a suburban middle class family the pressure would have been much greater much sooner to catch the perpetrator.

What I do find interesting as well, is that according to most crime states, the number of them peaked in 1980 and has been in fairly steady decline ever since.

oh, I remember only one Serial Killer in my life time and that's the Craig's list one. I was born in 85 and don't remember any news stories about any of the ones during this years.

I think the problem is that society basically writes drug addicts and prostitutes off because they are leading a risky and illegal life. Run Away's get nearly the same treatment because they aren't conforming and based on the age of the run away the police won't take it seriously at all. I guess it must also depend on what state you live in. I live in a state where suicide is taken very seriously and when a friend of my sisters made a fake report that my sister was thinking about doing it, we got the cops and the ambulance and it was just a nightmare to deal with. I had to do it because of reasons. So yeah. I suppose it just depends on where one lives.

Well. From what I've seen on documentaries, most sk's are caught because their tail light was out or something. Ted Bundy was like the seventh name on the police's suspect list when he got pulled over and the cop arrested him for something and then they figured out he was their sk.

The FBI says that there are at least 12 working in every major city and only the smart one's get away with it because bodies are found and either the police think they're separate crimes or, back in the day - 60's maybe??- if the murders were committed in different counties the police wouldn't know because they didn't communicated with each other.
 

briannasealock

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
273
Reaction score
13
I think it's a good thing I started this thread. I'm gonna ret-con my plot and throw out the sk idea. I just need something good to take it's place. :)
 

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
It's hard to catch them partly because of the complete lack of relationship they have with the victim.

Absolutely. A good friend of mine was a homicide investigator for more than 20 years. He said in many (if not most) murder cases they know who did it, but what you know and what you can prove are two very different things.

The exception to this is serial killers and contract hits. Because the murderer has little to no connection with the victim, the investigators have to catch a lucky break with a convergence of luck, or a mistake on the part of the killer.
 

briannasealock

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
273
Reaction score
13
Absolutely. A good friend of mine was a homicide investigator for more than 20 years. He said in many (if not most) murder cases they know who did it, but what you know and what you can prove are two very different things.

The exception to this is serial killers and contract hits. Because the murderer has little to no connection with the victim, the investigators have to catch a lucky break with a convergence of luck, or a mistake on the part of the killer.

hence why you look at the victims and what connection is between them because sometimes Sk's do have patterns. not all the time. But most of the time.
 

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
Sadly, most of those patterns aren't mapped until the killer has finally been caught and forensically examined.
 

Lillith1991

The Hobbit-Vulcan hybrid
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 12, 2014
Messages
5,313
Reaction score
569
Location
MA
Website
eclecticlittledork.wordpress.com
I'm actually writing a novel that combines horror, thriller, and romance dealing with a couple instead of the normal single sk. Or well, I will be starting the novel once Camp NaNo starts. The first 15K is my NaNo project for camp in July. I have always been fascinated by the dynamic between serial killer pair. One is normally more in charge and inteligent than the other, and romantic attachments are just as common as friendship and warped family bonds in that subset of serial killers from what I've been able to gather.

I think you can do new things with them, for my novel romance is a big part of the dynamic in the killers relationship to each other. The two women it centers around use killing as a form of courtship, as a way to set up dates and other romance related things too. The closer they get and the more invested they become in each other the more the idea of killing together interest them. It becomes an impulse that they have to act on, which in turn brings them to the attention of the FBI when they kill the wrong person. They're smart but not Hannibal level smart, smart enough to of not been caught before they met and for the police to genuinely not suspect either of them. Their lives before meeting are normal except for being serial killers, and the first meeting between them takes place when one stumbles upon the other on the process of killing.

Everything is tied together in the novel by the decidedly bloody romance between these two already corrupted women. Their impulse to kill is already firmly entrenched in each of them and put to use, the fact that they're a female pairing just adds a dimenson. Personally I like serial killers in fiction, and watch a lot of documentaries about them. But people have to bring new and plausible spins on them to the table. I want to see more couples, more rare kinds of serial killers being used. More stuff from the point of view of these characters instead of law enforcement. I'm loving reading Red Dragon at the moment because Will Grahm isn't like most law enforcement types I've read in my life. He understands the killers and Hannibal, he can get into their minds. This weighs on him quite a bit, and is unlike other FBI agents or police in the other books I've read featuring serial killers. It's the exception to the "through the eyes of a cop" trope for me.
 
Last edited:

jeseymour

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
1,098
Reaction score
127
Age
61
Location
seacoast New Hampshire
Website
jeseymour.com
I'd suggest Hannibal, we, the audience, knows that Hannibal is an SK it's just everyone else who doesn't and the second season got done...a month ago...or something. I dunno, if you can handle cannibalism I guess you could try it out. It's very different.

I don't like serial killers. I am really not interested in Hannibal. I've seen Silence of the Lambs, and didn't care for that either. :tongue
 

jeseymour

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
1,098
Reaction score
127
Age
61
Location
seacoast New Hampshire
Website
jeseymour.com
I'm actually writing a novel that combines horror, thriller, and romance dealing with a couple instead of the normal single sk. (snip) I have always been fascinated by the dynamic between serial killer pair. One is normally more in charge and inteligent than the other, and romantic attachments are just as common as friendship and warped family bonds in that subset of serial killers from what I've been able to gather.

I think you can do new things with them, for my novel romance is a big part of the dynamic in the killers relationship to each other. The two women it centers around use killing as a form of courtship, as a way to set up dates and other romance related things too. The closer they get and the more invested they become in each other the more the idea of killing together interest them. It becomes an impulse that they have to act on, which in turn brings them to the attention of the FBI when they kill the wrong person. (snip)

Everything is tied together in the novel by the decidedly bloody romance between these two already corrupted women. Their impulse to kill is already firmly entrenched in each of them and put to use, the fact that they're a female pairing just adds a dimenson. Personally I like serial killers in fiction, and watch a lot of documentaries about them. But people have to bring new and plausible spins on them to the table. I want to see more couples, more rare kinds of serial killers being used. More stuff from the point of view of these characters instead of law enforcement.(snip)

Sounds like the movie "Monster" based on serial killer Aileen Wuornos.
 

Lillith1991

The Hobbit-Vulcan hybrid
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 12, 2014
Messages
5,313
Reaction score
569
Location
MA
Website
eclecticlittledork.wordpress.com
Sounds like the movie "Monster" based on serial killer Aileen Wuornos.

It is similar to that, though the women actually live normal lives. Neither of them has ever had to sell their bodies. But the premise of a bloody romance is certainly something the movie and my book share. The only thing it shares with mine truthfully.
 

heyjude

Making my own sunshine
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
19,740
Reaction score
6,192
Location
Gulf coast of FL
I'll vote love 'em. The thing I'm incredibly sick of, though, and won't read any more of, is the trope of "the lead detective on the case must catch the killer before he catches her, and she must confront this demon in her own past that mingles and matches perfectly with the plot and comes to a stupidly streamlined climax!" Enough of that.
 

briannasealock

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
273
Reaction score
13
I don't like serial killers. I am really not interested in Hannibal. I've seen Silence of the Lambs, and didn't care for that either. :tongue

lol. :) my mom doesn't like shows like that either. cool beans.
 

briannasealock

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
273
Reaction score
13
I'm actually writing a novel that combines horror, thriller, and romance dealing with a couple instead of the normal single sk. Or well, I will be starting the novel once Camp NaNo starts. The first 15K is my NaNo project for camp in July. I have always been fascinated by the dynamic between serial killer pair. One is normally more in charge and inteligent than the other, and romantic attachments are just as common as friendship and warped family bonds in that subset of serial killers from what I've been able to gather.

I think you can do new things with them, for my novel romance is a big part of the dynamic in the killers relationship to each other. The two women it centers around use killing as a form of courtship, as a way to set up dates and other romance related things too. The closer they get and the more invested they become in each other the more the idea of killing together interest them. It becomes an impulse that they have to act on, which in turn brings them to the attention of the FBI when they kill the wrong person. They're smart but not Hannibal level smart, smart enough to of not been caught before they met and for the police to genuinely not suspect either of them. Their lives before meeting are normal except for being serial killers, and the first meeting between them takes place when one stumbles upon the other on the process of killing.

Everything is tied together in the novel by the decidedly bloody romance between these two already corrupted women. Their impulse to kill is already firmly entrenched in each of them and put to use, the fact that they're a female pairing just adds a dimenson. Personally I like serial killers in fiction, and watch a lot of documentaries about them. But people have to bring new and plausible spins on them to the table. I want to see more couples, more rare kinds of serial killers being used. More stuff from the point of view of these characters instead of law enforcement. I'm loving reading Red Dragon at the moment because Will Grahm isn't like most law enforcement types I've read in my life. He understands the killers and Hannibal, he can get into their minds. This weighs on him quite a bit, and is unlike other FBI agents or police in the other books I've read featuring serial killers. It's the exception to the "through the eyes of a cop" trope for me.

That sounds really interesting.
 

cornflake

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
16,171
Reaction score
3,734
That they're super-intelligent.

I've read enough real-life cases of turf wars and bungled investigations, as well as the number who prey on vulnerable segments like runaways, prostitutes or completely random victims that it isn't usually their own sharp wits that stop them from being caught quickly.

I wouldn't say I love or hate them, but did go through a phase where I was a bit morbidly fascinated by them. The most interesting ones for me were those who seemed to maintain relatively normal lives otherwise, but then I wonder how much media myth-making goes into that. For example, people who knew Karla Homolka before she hooked up with Bernardo thought she was a complete whackjob already. Some people were fooled by Ted Bundy (including Ann Rule at the time that she knew him), yet others pegged him as a creep almost immediately.

I always thought people's varied perceptions of a serial killer in their midst would be interesting to explore.

Oh so very much this. The weird romanticism and revisionism of some serial killers, and odd assumptions even law enforcement (many of whom just aren't educated in some areas) make, is irksome as hell. Homolka is one of the more unbelievable real-life examples. At least some intrepid reporter seems to go ferret her out every few years, but that that freak is running free is not a merit badge for society.

The 'serial killers are brilliant, scheming, suave, cool guys' thing is not helpful to anything either.

Hmmmmm. That is something I am going to look at. I've heard that some professionals in the field think that the SK's who are caught are the stupid ones. They're far too interested in the public knowing about it.

The good SK's are the one's who get away with it for years. I heard a radio show about a SK who got away with killing for 66 years.

Plenty of serial killers spend a long time operating before they're caught - that's how they become serial killers. They're not stupid if they get caught, or interested in the public knowing (I don't know where that comes from except extrapolating very particular people like BTK or Zodiac [who wouldn't help that argument]). They may be stupid, as serial killers aren't, television aside, by definition, smarter than the average bear. There are several things at work as to why they get caught - but there are plenty out there not.

I'm at the point where I won't even pick up a novel about a serial killer unless it comes highly recommended by someone whose opinion I trust. The stories are often wildly unrealistic and are becoming even more so as writers try to bring something new to the trope. Unfortunately, too many writers think 'something new' = even more violence, mostly against women, described in gruesome detail. (NB: Among the books I've read. I'm sure I've missed some excellent stories.)

I might pick up another SK novel if it were realistic. That is, showed a plausible SK and something approaching a proper police investigation. It would also have to be written very, very well.

This, except it's the wrongness that puts me off. Same as I can't watch the CSI or endless other similar procedurals that are just ridiculous. The serial killers in fiction are way too often fictitious, created by people whose knowledge comes entirely from other fiction.

oh, I remember only one Serial Killer in my life time and that's the Craig's list one. I was born in 85 and don't remember any news stories about any of the ones during this years.

I think the problem is that society basically writes drug addicts and prostitutes off because they are leading a risky and illegal life. Run Away's get nearly the same treatment because they aren't conforming and based on the age of the run away the police won't take it seriously at all. I guess it must also depend on what state you live in. I live in a state where suicide is taken very seriously and when a friend of my sisters made a fake report that my sister was thinking about doing it, we got the cops and the ambulance and it was just a nightmare to deal with. I had to do it because of reasons. So yeah. I suppose it just depends on where one lives.

Well. From what I've seen on documentaries, most sk's are caught because their tail light was out or something. Ted Bundy was like the seventh name on the police's suspect list when he got pulled over and the cop arrested him for something and then they figured out he was their sk.

The FBI says that there are at least 12 working in every major city and only the smart one's get away with it because bodies are found and either the police think they're separate crimes or, back in the day - 60's maybe??- if the murders were committed in different counties the police wouldn't know because they didn't communicated with each other.

Off the top of my head, I think I can name at least three nationally-famous serial killers who were caught in the past, I dunno, 20 years? I think Dahmer may be just outside that cutoff, but his fame is such that I can't imagine anyone even remotely interested in the topic missing him.

I have no idea where you're from, but that's not in any way a state-by-state thing. Every police department in the land takes suicide seriously.

Runaways aren't not taken seriously - there just are few resources police can put into tracking people close to adulthood who voluntarily take off and could be god knows where. They do what they can. Young kids who run away get more resources thrown at them.

hence why you look at the victims and what connection is between them because sometimes Sk's do have patterns. not all the time. But most of the time.

They have patterns all the time. The patterns are not necessarily about or visible in the victims or victim pool, or to outsiders.
 

briannasealock

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
273
Reaction score
13
Oh so very much this. The weird romanticism and revisionism of some serial killers, and odd assumptions even law enforcement (many of whom just aren't educated in some areas) make, is irksome as hell. Homolka is one of the more unbelievable real-life examples. At least some intrepid reporter seems to go ferret her out every few years, but that that freak is running free is not a merit badge for society.

The 'serial killers are brilliant, scheming, suave, cool guys' thing is not helpful to anything either.



Plenty of serial killers spend a long time operating before they're caught - that's how they become serial killers. They're not stupid if they get caught, or interested in the public knowing (I don't know where that comes from except extrapolating very particular people like BTK or Zodiac [who wouldn't help that argument]). They may be stupid, as serial killers aren't, television aside, by definition, smarter than the average bear. There are several things at work as to why they get caught - but there are plenty out there not.



This, except it's the wrongness that puts me off. Same as I can't watch the CSI or endless other similar procedurals that are just ridiculous. The serial killers in fiction are way too often fictitious, created by people whose knowledge comes entirely from other fiction.



Off the top of my head, I think I can name at least three nationally-famous serial killers who were caught in the past, I dunno, 20 years? I think Dahmer may be just outside that cutoff, but his fame is such that I can't imagine anyone even remotely interested in the topic missing him.

I have no idea where you're from, but that's not in any way a state-by-state thing. Every police department in the land takes suicide seriously.

Runaways aren't not taken seriously - there just are few resources police can put into tracking people close to adulthood who voluntarily take off and could be god knows where. They do what they can. Young kids who run away get more resources thrown at them.



They have patterns all the time. The patterns are not necessarily about or visible in the victims or victim pool, or to outsiders.

You're good. :) I liked reading all of your responses.