A British serial killer has been convicted of attempting to repeat Jack the Ripper’s infamy in modern-day Whitechapel. Yep, you read that right - he picked his victims up in 21st Century Whitechapel.
But he’s not the first;
Colin Ireland - killed 5 gay men in London so that he could be a famous serial killer, selected gays because they were easy targets (1993)
Daniel Gonzalez- mental patient who killed four people in Southend in a bid to be a notorious killer (2004)
Mark Martin - strangled three prostitutes in order to be known as Nottingham’s first serial killer (2004)
Derek Brown - killed two women in Whitechapel to achieve fame as a serial killer like Jack the Ripper.
While serial killers have been accepted as acting on a sexually-fuelled urge to kill, or in an attempt to assert control to compensate for their own inadequacies, this new breed simply wishes to be famous as a serial killer. They read true crime books all about serial killers and plot the best way to achieve their aims.
Stupidity? It sounds like they are only thinking of the goal, not the consequences. Fame for a positive thing has its price. Fame for a negative one has an even worse toll. These killers are not thinking with all four burners turned on.
Part of this issue is some kind of mental instability no doubt, coupled with environmental input that may put murder in a different better light; as in, not only jail/death penalty, but eternal fame.
I’m kinda awaiting a “Dexter” serial killer copy-cat. Its a very popular show, and people mimic all sorts of things like scenes from GTA4. (like shooting a cab driver in the back of the head to re-create a scene or whatever)
Acts which are given some sort of significance through art, will be emulated. Art resembles reality, and reality emulates art. Art is the means by which we pass on our social mores from generation to generation, and more generally speaking from one to another. The story of Odysseus, for example, is a conservative story. It tells of the decisions of a man who is tempted by one paradise after another at the cost of his duties to as a father, husband, and king, who in the end comes to embrace his duties and reject his temptations. People reading it back then, and even now, value the way in which Odysseus acts, and when in a similar situation might end up acting Oddysseusly. This, I think, describes us well: In any given situation, the way in which we can react is limited to the ways we’ve acting others acting; either directly or through art.
You seem to think that people will just copy environmental influences, or that such influences will determinately direct behaviour - a computer game does not inspire crime or cause the individual to commit crimes. Individuals have agency over their lives and most importantly, their environments. Plus, only a minority commit crimes which could be linked, tenuously, to such influences. If they have such a strong impact, why aren’t more people doing it?
Derek Brown plotted to achieve fame by committing serial murder. One influence I concede may have catalyzed this is the 2006 hunt for the Suffolk Strangler in Ipswich. No doubt he had been plotting his killing spree before then, but the lure of fame which seemed to prove itself with the Strangler murders - because of the media saturation - may have simply reinforced his belief, although not his motivation, for committing the crimes. He had seen the fame he could achieve and it cemented his beliefs.
It is likely that the same inadequacy which drives the serial killer to murder, has in later years also created the lust for fame.
Inadequacy is felt by certain naturally dominant individuals, and those individuals feel that they should assert their power in a form of “compensatory justice” - often it is abuse of some form, or just lack of good luck, which can cause someone to remain bottom of the social or economic ladder, and they will feel that they should stop being victims by victimizing others - they were abused, ignored, discarded, maltreated by society, so “normal” people are going to pay for it, people who don’t in themselves deserve it. So they target innocent people to compansate for their own mistreatment and deep-seated feelings of inadequacy, hatred of society (or a part of it) and damaged self-esteem.
So where does this inadequacy complex relate to Derek Brown?
Brown, and the other serial killers who committed “fame murders” as listed in the OP, seek to become folk devils, infamous figures of anti-social evil. The opposite of socially acceptable role models, if you will. Figures of hatred and evil - yet ones, they know, will be written about and spoken about for decades to come. They target the innocent, get famous and win a position of power in their eyes. Power by their logic, power by their definition, and society’s viewpoint of them is irrelevant as long as it’s negative.
Uh, no I don’t. What I said was that I was waiting for a serial killer based on Dexter, because if people are killing based off GTA4, one would think, right? I never said I thought these environmental influences somehow caused the violence, no i’m sure that a very twisted personal biology, mixed with bad environmental influences, can create an unstable individual, who can, because they’re insane, base their crimes off of things like popular games or tv shows.
People do not kill “based off GTA4.” That’s a media invention.
I’m waiting for a similar scenario to unfold similar to Dexter but not because of the TV show.
Plus, most serial killers are not insane. The UK has had only one (arguably, two, but that’s nitpicking) insane serial killer, the Stockwell Strangler.
No one kills for fame, but for infamy. The world says we are small, some of us forget about proving they are large, and prove they are inhuman. It is based upon a false understanding of reality. It is unreasonable to expect that all life gives meaning to -will hold meaning after life is gone. Or it could be that some people simply cannot connect with human kind and they feel life as one feels a severed limb.
Empty,
This is tangential to the OP but I’m curious. Do you discount the studies suggesting that violent games can inspire violent crime? I know there are studies to support both sides of this issue, and there really isn’t any conclusive answer right now, but I just can’t help but think people who spend hours on games that reward murder and mayhem have to become at least somewhat desensitized. I don’t think video games would lead a psychologically healthy person to commit crimes, but someone who was already unbalanced… maybe. I guess I don’t think you can summarily dismiss the possibility.
This was written about the 2006 Montreal shootings:
This by itself doesn’t definitively answer the question, but there are other examples like this that seem to lend support to the idea that video games can encourage crime.
Just like smoking can cause cancer, or sweets can cause hyperactivity. It’s all down to the individual. As a general rule, video games are not about violence - they are about tasks, about problem solving. When I play GTA4 I’m thinking about accomplishing goals, not “how many hos can I stab the shit out of today? Hell, I think I’ll go out and do it for real!”
Violent games are often no different to the player than non-violent games - players do not think about the games in terms of violence but in terms of problem solving. Placing the bricks in Tetris is no different to taking out a cadre of drug dealers in GTA. In both cases, the context is largely irrelevant, it is the task at hand which the players focuses on. Players are not being “programmed with violence and sex” like learning theorists would have you think, they are being exercised in problem-solving. If individuals appear influenced by a game to commit crimes, such as the case you noted, it’s probably a reverse situation. The guy’s comment that life is a computer game is taken totally out of context - it is useless on it’s own. Post the entire peice containing that line, or if it’s a blog, every single entry, and that’s a more open-minded way to go about it. It’s likely he bought the game because it was violent - it did not influence him further, rather, he bought it in a kind of role-affirmation. He’s violent, so he plays violent games and watches horror movies. Think about gangsters - most black youths in the UK speak with the same accent because they practice it for their “role” as “gangsters.”