I have chosen two theories that I believe relate to the killing cousins case. As you know Gore and Waterfield were known as the killing cousins. They were both arrested in 1983 under the charges of kidnappings, sexual batteries and murders. They were both fascinated with inflicting pain on women, especially when it comes to sexual behaviors. These men last victims were 2 teenage friends, Elliot Lyn and Ragan Martin. Elliot body was discovered in Gore’s car after he shot her in the head twice. Martin survived but claimed both cousins raped her repeatedly. From working with this story these past few weeks, the two criminology theories that stood out to me are Social learning theories and the Biology genetics and Evolution theories. I chose these theories because I believe each theory represent and explain the action of each of the cousin’s. These acts …show more content…
Waterfield was charged with less crime because he wasn’t the leader of the pursuits, murders and attacker. I believe that he deserved the life sentence that he had, because he knew what he was getting involve with from the first victims and he decided to stay and keep following his cousin. Biology, genetics, and evolution theory: Is when your body and your way of thinking affects your behavior negatively and force you to commit a crime Being mentally ill or even a poor diet can be the explanation to why someone commits a crime. It’s one of the key theories because it separates the criminals from the mental ill individuals. It also allows us to help the people with the biological defect.
For example: If I kill someone because they didn't want to give me their wallet, than I will be in jail for committing that crime vs. If I kill someone because I heard The devil told me then I would be place in an institution because I am mentally
Due to an increased surge of criminality in many cities during the 1900s, eugenicists began to focus on the role of genes in determining criminal behavior. Many lived by the motto “culture does not make the man, but man makes the culture.” This essentially stated that the less fortunate tend to create and gravitate towards poverty stricken environments. While scientists did not totally weigh out the environmental influence on criminality, they did believe the main cause of criminal behavior was defective genes.
Another theory Beaty used was that family context can be one of the causes that makes a person a serial killer. She stated ?Most killers state that they experienced psychological abuse as children and never established good relationships with the male figures in their lives?.
Nature versus nurture has been argued in attempt to understand how criminals behave. The theory of what influences psychopath and serial killers’ violent and destructive pathways has not been agreed on till this day. Criminals such as psychopaths and serial killers have been researched for the past two decades. Scientists have found that genetics is a determining factor of who becomes a serial killer. It is important to understand the determinants involved within a serial killer, because if these social and environmental causes are discovered, they can be altered and controlled to reduce crime (Lykken, 1993). With more studies, we would therefore prevent mass murders and could assist in significant reductions of crime within society.
Crime causation began to be a focus of study in the rapidly developing biological and behavioral sciences during the 19th century. Early biological theories proposed that criminal behavior is rooted in biology and based on inherited traits. Cesare Lombroso (1836-1909), an Italian army prison physician, coined the term “atavism” to describe “the nature of the criminal”...
These two men, both coming from different backgrounds, joined together and carried out a terrible choice that rendered consequences far worse than they imagined. Living under abuse, Perry Smith never obtained the necessary integrity to be able to pause and consider how his actions might affect other people. He matured into a man who acts before he thinks, all due to the suffering he endured as a child. Exposed to a violent father who did not instill basic teachings of life, Smith knew nothing but anger and misconduct as a means of responding to the world. He knew no other life. Without exposure to proper behavior or responsible conduct, he turned into a monster capable of killing an entire family without a blink of remorse. In the heat of the moment, Perry Smith slaughtered the Clutter family and barely stopped to take a breath. What could drive a man to do this in such cold blood? The answer lies within his upbringing, and how his childhood experiences shaped him to become the murderer of a small family in Holcomb, Kansas. ¨The hypothesis of unconscious motivation explains why the murderers perceived innocuous and relatively unknown victims as provocative and thereby suitable targets for aggression.¨ (Capote 191). ¨But it is Dr. Statten´s contention that only the first murder matters psychologically, and that when
The case of whether serial killers are born with the lust to kill or if they are truly victims of their environment has been a hot debated question by both psychologists and the FBI today. A serial killer is traditionally defined as one that kills 3 or more people at different times with “cooling off” periods in between kills. Both psychological abuse as a child and psychological disorders are to blame for the making of a killer. The nature vs. nurture debate is best applied to the mysterious behaviors and cases of serial killers and their upbringing and environment. Nature is the genetic and biological connections a person has, personality traits, and how genetic make-up all relates to a killer. Nurture is examining the upbringing and environment that a person is around that affects what a person becomes. In some cases however, the effects of only upbringing or only biological problems were the reasons certain serial killers committed crimes. Although there is no definitive answer to what plays the bigger role: nature or nurture, they both are contributing factors that make a serial killer. These deviants of society are afflicted with problems in either their upbringing or have psychological disorders, and are able to blend into our everyday lives with no apparent differences, yet they wreck havoc through their unremorseful killings.
The crime committed by Matt Fowler can be seen as justifiable, for there really is no greater pain than having to bury your own child, and seeing the culprit walk around seeming to have no care in the world. However, It is never right to take the law into our own hands, no matter the circumstances. In this case, once the authorities realize that Strout is missing and they find his body they will automatically look towards Fowler as the culprit, thus putting more strain and tearing his family apart even more.
Crime can be described combination between both behavior and mental factors. This will prove incredibly crucial in the definition of crime in relation to mental illness. Many of those that commit crimes are not convicted due to their illness so it is important to note, for the purpose of this analysis, that all illegal activity is considered crime, regardless of conviction (Monahan and Steadman 1983). It is evident that those with mental illnesses have an increased likelihood of committing crimes. It is important to note, however, that not all people with mental illnesses commit crimes or violent behavior so a cause is not evident.
Over the years, the theory has evolved into today’s foremost biological crime theory. The theory takes into account genetics and disorders that may be inherited. One example of a disorder that is genetic is antisocial personality disorder. This specific disorder is accompanied by a variety of side effects, some of which may result in psychopathic or sociopathic behavior. Psychopathic and sociopathic behavior specific to this example would be murder. Jeffrey Dahmer, for example, was an individual that participated in seventeen murders over a span of thirteen years. Although Dahmer was not able to plead insanity, he still had a severe mental disorder that may be partly to blame for some of his actions. Biological disorder is often difficult to back up due to the fact that many disorders are also based on nurturing
Criminal behavior can mostly be explained by the Biosocial Branch of Trait Theory. Individual traits by themselves cannot determine criminality. Outside factors such as the environment along with certain personality traits is what causes criminal behavior.
The biological approach does not explain all people, what about the people with these characteristics that do not resort to crime, or what about other people who commit crimes who do not possess any of these characteristics. I believe like many criminologists Lombroso was looking for a solution to solve criminal behavior and came up with the theory of physical traits linked to criminal behaviors based on some similarities with no real way to test the theory. I think there are many different reasons why people commit crime, such as opportunity, mental illness, family influence, low economic standing and drug dependence. Theories based on these characteristics in my opinion better describe why people resort to criminal behavior over having certain physical
In many cases the accused is sentenced to a death penalty even when innocent. Let's say that someone committed multiple crimes and at all of the areas the police just happens to see Austin and forenames that he is the criminal. Also that the court of law will determine his fate. So the court sentenced him to a death penalty.
It is a fact that criminals have a smaller brains than law abiding citizens. Often, offenders share particular physical traits such as, being young males, muscular, having lower than average IQ, and a impulsive personality. Serial offenders are usually hyperactive and difficult children If a person has a low IQ, it is proven to be directly related to their tendency to be commit impulse actions that provide an immediate payoff. For instance, a rape or a mugging would provide a criminal with an immediate payoff. It is proven that crime often runs in families. In fact, chronic criminals are proven to be three times more likely to have criminal children. However, despite this information, scientists have no basis to come to any conclusions with this data. Therefore, one must consider other possible factors that may create a criminal mind, to come to a reasonable decision as to how one is developed.
There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behaviour, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory, psychosis and brain injury theory. In the next few paragraphs examples of each will be shown.
Theories that are based on biological Factors and criminal behavior have always been slightly ludicrous to me. Biological theories place an excessive emphasis on the idea that individuals are “born badly” with little regard to the many other factors that play a part in this behavior. Criminal behavior may be learned throughout one’s life, but there is not sufficient evidence that proves crime is an inherited trait. In the Born to Be Bad article, Lanier describes the early belief of biological theories as distinctive predispositions that under particular conditions will cause an individual to commit criminal acts. (Lanier, p. 92) Biological criminologists are expected to study the “criminal” rather than the act itself. This goes as far as studying physical features, such as body type, eyes, and the shape or size of one’s head. “Since criminals were less developed, Lombroso felt they could be identified by physical stigmata, or visible physical abnormalities…characteristics as asymmetry of the face; supernumerary nipples, toes, or fingers; enormous jaws; handle-shaped or sensible ears; insensibility to pain; acute sight; and so on.” (Lanier. P. 94). It baffles me that physical features were ever considered a reliable explanation to criminal behavior. To compare one’s features to criminal behavior is not only stereotypical, but also highly unreliable.