By Victoria Hart
You only have to glance at the new titles on Netflix or any of the other streaming channels and you will have a multitude of true crime options for your viewing pleasure. True crime has become big business and us fans eagerly await the next movie or documentary. Curious to see if there is any light to be shed on the heinous acts committed by a vast array of offenders. There is some voyeurism in this field but in my experience most people are just trying to understand or comprehend the incomprehensible. We stare into the darkness trying to find answers that can help us heal our own traumas, but more than anything I believe the reason true crime is so popular for women especially is that it provides a safety manual of sorts. We try to understand so we can recognise the predators amongst us, it's our new weapon, we are arming ourselves with the knowledge we need to survive. By trying to understand the motivations of offenders we can construct our own set of rules to live by that keep us out of the lion's den.
As a writer the victims are always in the forefront of my mind. I think many people assume in the true crime world that people are fans of serial killers, however I found that to be untrue. We are fascinated with what caused their creation, but also, I think the fact they can appear so normal and compartmentalise makes us feel a sense of real unease. The fact that so called monsters are actually very human is hard to rationalise for some. Recently a young boy killed someone in a vehicular homicide and tweens took to Tiktok in his defence stating he was too beautiful to go to jail. That’s a topic in itself but our reactions to offenders differ.
People that kill child killers or molesters are celebrated, all previous crimes forgiven, yet mothers involved in the killing of their children or fathers are despised even though there are usually mental health problems. Victims are often demonised too, the undead, the victims no one cares about, the ones whose lifestyles are deemed dangerous. Recently in the UK Sarah Everard was arrested by Wayne Cousins, handcuffed and driven off to be raped and murdered. UK police officials stated she shouldn’t have got in the car. I don’t know many people that would argue with the police, we are taught to comply, yet this lone woman was expected to fight off a policeman. It’s always the victim's fault and the way victims are treated depends on the type of victim. Whilst researching my book I have come across numerous crime scene photos, Jeffery Dahmer's polaroid's being the worst. Those polaroid's of part dismembered men are truly horrific but my first thought was I hope their mums haven't seen them. No one should have to see a loved one like that, yet those photos are easily found with a google search. Where is the worry for the victims then? I completely understand why for research purposes they are incredibly useful, especially for an academic or someone working in a medical or forensic field, but why can layman's view these images? Surely that is sensationalising the crimes. In the UK Ian Brady and Myra Hindley the Moors murderers' case is sealed for one hundred years. That way when it is opened the victims' families won't be around to see it. I feel that’s a better way of dealing with this material as these photos are of people, real life people who met terribly violent ends. If you include victims in your writing your accused of profiting from their pain, if you don’t include them, you're not honouring them so it’s a very fine line to tread. One thing I do know is that I've sat up many a night, unable to sleep, trying to make sense of why some people get to leave this world surrounded by their loved ones, at peace, whilst others leave this world screaming in agony. The victims are always at the forefront of my mind, and I think that is true of most true crime enthusiasts, there are always exceptions, but the victims' stories matter to me and most other people too. So how do you navigate dealing with actual offenders? I have just started a letter campaign myself for my book, requesting artwork from various offenders and it took months to pluck up the courage to send them. So why contact them at all? In history I learned that a first-hand source is always the most useful, even if its full of inaccuracies. These inaccuracies can tell just as much of the story as the truth does in some cases. Academics and ex policemen write books about their dealings with killers because it sells, and people are genuinely interested in the analysis of the offender's behaviour. They are in turn profiting from those crimes yet that’s deemed acceptable as the source is reputable. Ian Brady wrote a book, The Gates of Janus and fought to get it published. He did not profit from the book; the proceeds went to his 90-year-old mother. It was part of the inspiration for my book as his rationalisations and ideas concerning society are pure venom spat at the reader. Why is that useful? You get small glimpses into Brady's mind and his thought patterns. That is incredibly useful in understanding how a killers mind works, even if it is one of Britain's most hated men.
Wayne Lo the school shooter read the book one of his victim's fathers wrote and reached out, he now makes art, and the proceeds go to the charity Gregory Gibson set up in his son Galen Gibson's honour. This has allowed both perpetrator and victims family to find some healing and a creative outlet that is funding further help. Of course, not all offenders are like Wayne Lo, some use their letter writing to manipulate further or feed their sense of power. They already have a platform that the media uses to make money off their crimes, I don’t ever hear of these huge media conglomerations ever helping fund services that could reduce violence, but why would they when it's such a lucrative business. Why does the offenders voice cause so much outrage when its them speaking but we are happy to lap up the same information from another source that is profiting from the work? I am not advocating that offenders should be able to profit from their crimes. But should they be able to make a living from their creative pursuits?
I don't have the answer to this question, its so complex on so many levels.
I do believe we need to learn to discuss opposing views without hatred, real discussions. Then our opinions are based on fully discussed ideas. I personally feel I am in no position to judge any offender as I have no idea of the lives they have lived, I try to focus on the person, the multifaceted person that is many things, sometimes monstrous yes but offenders come in all shapes and sizes and let's remember there are innocent people in that mix too. My main concern has always been to try and understand the whys, because if we can pin down why people become violent then we can stop it, that’s how we help victims, we stop them being created in the first place.
Jennifer Weiss has created a relationship with the killer of her Mother with the help of Peter Vronsky. This relationship has not only offered her some understanding and healing, it is currently solving other cold cases attached to Cottingham, providing answers to more families. The offenders' voices can help, and this ultimately can bring closure in the long run. Ed Kemper's candid conversations helped shape behavioural science forever, and many others have also added to this field. This knowledge is so useful to academics and doctors trying to understand the mind even when its full of lies and shouldn’t that be our focus? Instead of the pound of flesh society thinks its owed why don’t we take these opportunities to learn from the very people that know best. I believe offenders should be given a platform but not in a sensationalised way. It should serve a purpose. These interactions can provide knowledge we would never be privy to. Many people that write to offenders have established relationships and solved cases. Samuel Little is another example. Jillian Lauren established a relationship and got him to draw all his victims, providing closure to victims families who were largely forgotten about due to their lifestyles. Jillian Lauren has created a documentary that treats the victims with the honour they deserved, telling their stories, saying their names. Without the offender having a platform this would not have been achieved.
In conclusion, is this a messy sensitive subject? Definitely and people will always have their own opinions on true crime. It's one of the things I love, no one agrees, everyone has a theory. I feel the offenders' voices should be in the mix, how often do you get information straight from the horse's mouth. Should offenders be able to monetise their endeavours? Sometimes they make surprising decisions, some support their children and families, some support charities, and some buy a few extra ramens. I personally think you should allow people the opportunity to decide for themselves. Even a serial killer wants to provide for their family in some cases. If we are talking large amounts of money, there are already laws in place to stop that happening and ways victims can apply for damages. Denis Rader signed over his rights to the victims families so any profits made go directly to them. I feel in order to make researching these topics as informative as possible for all different fields the perpetrators voice should be included. Most professors who deal with violent crimes never interact with the victims as they feel it would impede their progress with the offenders. Because its academia that is accepted, not as a slight to the victims but as a necessary part of treating and understanding the complex diagnoses that many offenders have. True crime writers do something very similar. We try to treat them with respect so we can establish a relationship that allows candid conversations. Adding the preparators voice doesn’t diminish the victims. It Just adds the whole story. The victims are always in my mind, I always think about the horrors they had to endure. With every fibre of my being I want to do whatever I can to stop it from happening to someone else. Alas I don’t have the power to do that, but I can write. Through my writing I can ask those tough questions and maybe just maybe the information in my book will help someone and that’s enough for me. I am a trauma victim myself and I wish I could listen to my perpetrators try and explain why. Even if they lied and created rationalisations, that would be enough for me to finally put it to bed. Sometimes we need the perpetrators voice for closure. I sometimes think closure is a fairy story we tell ourselves to get through the worst moments of our lives, a wisp that we need to let go of because it's always just beyond our grasp. We can't drive hate out with hate, sometimes you must stroll into the darkness and bring the light yourself. True crime writers do exactly that, we take your hand and lead you into the darkness. We are your guides to the heinous acts that humans inflict on each other and together we try to answer all those whys. I think we should invite the perpetrators to stroll alongside us, maybe we would get a better sense of the why, then we could act.
Should offenders be given a platform?
0%Yes?
0%No?
Comments