Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Research on murder
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Research on murder
Andrei Romanovich Chikatilo seemed to be just like a regular man. He had a wife, two kids, was a teacher in Russian literature, an engineer, and a proud soviet party member. No one would have ever guessed he was one of the world’s most notorious serial killers. By day, he was your average Joe literature teacher, but by night he took upon a darker passion that involved rape and murder. He would lure his victims into decollate locations with sadistic intent unknown to them. Chikatilo managed see out his sick secrets for over a decade with little suspicion. His evil desires stemmed from his childhood.
Andrei Romanvich Chikatilo was born on October 16th, 1936, in Yablochnoye, Ukraine. He had a younger sister and supposedly an older brother that was cannibalized before he was born from what his mother always told him. At the time he was born, famine was spread throughout a vast amount of Ukraine, and his early childhood was consumed by poverty. His situation worsened when the USSR entered World War II against Germany, causing constant bombing raids on Ukraine. On top of Chikatilo starving and hiding from the German soldiers, he is believed to have suffered from a condition referred to as “water on the brain” at birth. This caused him to have genital-urinary tract problems later in life, including bed-wetting in his pre-teens and the inability to sustain an erection the older he got, although he was able to ejaculate (A+E Networks). Another possibility for his inability could be the fact that he watched his mother get raped by a German soldier during the war (Bio Movie) Chikatilo’s father only made his life worse. He was drafted into the fight against Germany, let himself get captured and held prisoner. When his father finally return...
... middle of paper ...
... drove him to a form of insanity that he could not control. It caused his anger and frustration to grow which lead him on a murderous rampage of sexual pleasure. He knew it was wrong when he murdered the first time, but overwhelming urges kept him from ignoring these dark desires. People knew he did not want to be that way. That all he wanted was to be like everyone else, but the Soviet Union’s system let him go too far for too long.
Works Cited
"Andrei Chikatilo Biography." Bio.com. A&E Networks Television, n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2013.
Lourie, Richard. Hunting the Devil. New York: HarperCollinsPublishers, 1993. Print.
Cullen, Robert. The Killer Department. London: Orion, 1993. Print
Beast of Ukraine. N.d. Television
Krivich, Mikhail, and Olʹgert Olʹgin. Comrade Chikatilo: The Psychopathology of Russia's Notorious Serial Killer. Fort Lee, NJ: Barricade, 1993. Print.
Ivan Milat was born Ivan Robert Marko Milat, also referred to as "The Backpacker Murderer”, was born on December 27, 1944, in Guildford, Australia.
One of the most gruesome serial killers of all time was Andrei Chikatilo. He was born on October 16, 1936 in Yablochnoye, a Ukrainian farming village. One of his clearest memories of his youth was that of his mother telling him his older brother had been stolen and eaten by neighbors during a great famine. This thought remained with him always and he later disclosed he often imagined the torturous ending his brother must have had.
Gennaro Santangelo’s criticism of Crime and Punishment fully inspects the motives behind Raskolnikov’s murder, the driving influence on the plot of the book, but he only partially probes the resultant ramifications that emerge in the forms of choices that Raskolnikov makes that resolve the failures of his original goals. Overall, in the context of the paper’s subject, the information Santangelo chooses to include and omit make sense, but the crucial results, or how Raskolnikov eventually reverses his original motivations, are insufficiently appraised. Santangelo’s essay, however fascinating, seems like it does not tell the complete story, that it needs a complementary work to fulfill its purpose. That work, should it have properly met its goal, is beginning to
Vronsky, Peter. Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters. New York: Berkley, 2004. Print.
Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment incorporates the significance of murder into the novel through a multitude of levels. The act of killing is not only used to further the plot point of the novel, but also offers insight to the reader of Raskolnikov’s ideology and psyche. This is portrayed through both his initial logic and reasoning behind the plotting of the crime, as well as through his immediate and long term reactions after killing Alyona Ivanovna. The emotional and physical responses instilled in Raskolnikov after killing Alyona Ivanovna as well as his justification for doing so helps illustrate his utilitarianism by offering accurate insight into the character’s moral values. These reactions also serve to show the instability of Raskolnikov’s character due to his changing emotions from being completely justified as the ubermensch to showing a sense of great regret. By including the act of killing, Dostoevsky further develops Raskolnikov’s character, and provides another level of detail to readers concerning his ideology and beliefs prior to his actions.
Simon, Robert I. "Serial Killers, Evil, And Us." National Forum 80.4 (2000): 23. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 10 Mar. 2014.
Mass Murderers and Serial Killers are nothing new to today’s society. These vicious killers are all violent, brutal monsters and have an abnormal urge to kill. What gives people these urges to kill? What motivates them to keep killing? Do these killers get satisfaction from killing? Is there a difference between mass murderers and serial killers or are they the same. How do they choose their victims and what are some of their characteristics? These questions and many more are reasons why I was eager to write my paper on mass murderers and serial killers. However, the most interesting and sought after questions are the ones that have always been controversial. One example is; what goes on inside the mind of a killer? In this paper I will try to develop a better understanding of these driven killers and their motives.
Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment begins with Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov living in poverty and isolation in St. Petersburg. The reader soon learns that he was, until somewhat recently, a successful student at the local university. His character at that point was not uncommon. However, the environment of the grim and individualistic city eventually encourages Raskolnikov’s undeveloped detachment and sense of superiority to its current state of desperation. This state is worsening when Raskolnikov visits an old pawnbroker to sell a watch. During the visit, the reader slowly realizes that Raskolnikov plans to murder the woman with his superiority as a justification. After the Raskolnikov commits the murder, the novel deeply explores his psychology, yet it also touches on countless other topics including nihilism, the idea of a “superman,” and the value of human life. In this way, the greatness of Crime and Punishment comes not just from its examination of the main topic of the psychology of isolation and murder, but the variety topics which naturally arise in the discussion.
Schechter, H. and Everitt, D. The A-Z Encyclopedia of Serial Killers. Pocket Books. N.Y. 1996
Before and following Raskolnikov’s murder, he lives a life of anxiety and pride. Raskolnikov has no concern for anyone. But gradually Raskolnikov changes his attitude and actions. This alteration then leads him to confess and recognize his crime. This positive change is all thanks to Sonia. Throughout Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov meets with Sonia and at each meeting Raskolnikov advances in recovering his lost emotions. Sonia was necessary for Raskolnikov’s growth because without her Raskolnikov would have remained a prideful, miserable, man. Sonia’s actions and thoughts for Raskolnikov influence and move him. Yet Raskolnikov is the one who truly changes himself. But this transformation is only possible by Sonia. So she is a positive and
David Berkowitz, otherwise known as the “Son of Sam”, was notorious for his crimes committed between 1976 and 1977 that ended the lives of six innocent victims and wounded several others in New York (“David Berkowitz Biography”, n.d.). At first, police did not make a connection between the murders because there was nothing unusual about them; all the victims were shot with a 40 caliber gun, not fairly unusual during this time or place especially since the killings were over an extended period of time. Police finally made the connection when Berkowitz began to live behind notes that were meant to tantalize authorities since they had yet to catch him (“David Berkowitz| Son of Sam Killer,” 2015). Often times, the psychological structure of a human
After his name came up linked to a crime in 1984, he was placed on surveillance. On November 20th he was arrested, but refused to confess to authorities about the killings when he was caught. It wasn’t until the police decided to set him up with a psychiatrist, where he finally opened up about (and described) the 56 murders he committed. The information was used to prove where some of the bodies were located. Andrei confessed to 56 murders. Andrei Chikatilo was found guilty of 52 counts of murder, and sentenced to death for each of the murders (Blanco, Murderpedia). This is equivalent to 52 death sentences. Evidence used in the trial included a grey hair found on one of the victims, AB blood type found from a semen sample, eyewitness reports of what he looked like around train stations, and most sufficient: a bitemark on Andrei’s finger that matched a 16 year old victim. Another piece of evidence used was knives found in his briefcase when he was taken into custody. Andrei Chikatilo died on February 14th, 1994, by a gunshot to the back of his neck since he was faced with the death
The beauty of Crime and Punishment is that there are no absolutes. It is a 19th century murder mystery, with the identity of the murderer clear, but the murderer's reasons far from being so. Although each chapter was replete with uncertainty, no other facet of the novel caused greater vexation both during the reading and even after its conclusion than what drove Raskol'nikov to commit the murder. That is not to say that he committed murder without purpose or reason, that he was just a cookie cutter villain with no purpose; instead, he is a multi-faceted character that is both likable and a scoundrel at once. The protagonist himself is unsure why he plans and carries out what he does. As he went to bury what he had stolen, he asked himself: "If it all has really been done deliberately and not idiotically, if I really had a certain and definite object, how is it I did not even glance into the purse and don't know what I had there, for what I have undergone these agonies and have deliberately undertaken this base, filthy, degrading business?" (Part II, Ch. 2, pgs. 92-93). The reader is not left completely in the dark, however, as motives were established. The caveat being that motive is plural, and motive is usually a mutually exclusive term. The first motive to be presented, and the strongest in the novel during Raskol'nikov's planning stages, was the issue of poverty. He was destitute, living in squalor, and in need of money to crawl out of his grave-like flat. After the murder was committed and Raskol'nikov came under suspicion, he came face to face with the inspector general, Porfiry Petrovich. Their discussion made the cut-and-dried appearance of the motive tu...
The majority of Raskolnikov’s theory seems logical until the reader arrives at its single essential flaw. Raskolnikov’s idea that “the enactment of a crime is invariably accompanied by illness”(311) was one aspect of the theory which, through its accuracy in Raskolnikov’s crime, seemed to lend validity to the entirety of the theory; several brief experiences with “faintness” on the character Raskolnikov’s behalf, insinuate the veracity of his ideas.