◆ SpookStack

JOURNAL OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE / September 1986 Standard data collection forms were used. The forms not only provided guidelines for interviewing subjects but also established a system of recording and coding relevant data to permit computer analysis and retrieval. Informa- tion was requested about the offender and his background, about the offense, about the victim, and about the crime scene. Subjects were asked questions about childhood, adolescent, and adult behaviors or experiences that might be related to violence. In this article, we present a motivational model of sexual homicide based on (1) quantitative analysis of background data, and (2) qualitative analysis of interview data from murderers. This was an exploratory descriptive study of a smallavailable sample of 36 sexual murderers. Because of the limitations of the study design, we present critical variables not for generalization purposes, but as hypotheses for exam- ination in subsequent research of sexual and “‘motiveless” murders. We have no data on a comparable control group; thus these findings should not be interpreted as showing a predictive role for certain childhood or adolescent experiences. Instead, we use the data in developing a motivational matrix for sexual murder. FINDINGS The Murderers The 36 men in the study began their lives with certain advantages. Most of them grew up in the 1940s and 1950s, a period when attitudes in the United States favored oldest, white male children; all subjects were male, the major- ity (33) were white, and many were eldest sons (4 were only children, and 4 were adopted). They were of good intelligence, with 29% classified in the average range, 36% in the bright normal and superior range, and 15% in the very superior range. These attributes fostered in the offenders a certain sense of privilege and entitlement. Initially, the majority of the men began life in two-parent homes. Half of the mothers were homemakers; three-quarters of the fathers earned stable salaries. Over 80% of the offenders described their family socioeconomic levels as average (self-sufficient) or better. Thus mothers were in the home raising the children; fathers were earning stable incomes; poverty was nota factor in the financial status of families. Although the families initially appeared to be functional with both par- ents present, problems were noted within the parents’ backgrounds. Families had criminal (50.0%), psychiatric (53.3%), alcohol abuse (69.0%), drug abuse (33.3%), or sexual (46.2%) problems in their histories. It appears that parents of these men were often absorbed in their own problems. Thus, while being offered little guidance because of their parents’ preoccupation with SER SS gS ma a ETERS TSRESNESA SS