crimeculture

 

Introduction

The US media’s focus on violent crimes often depicts African-Americans as vicious criminals—murderers, drug dealers, perpetrators of assault and theft—yet resists portraying them as serial killers, a term legally defined by the FBI [1] as three or more murders separated by a cooling-off period. This article suggests several factors that have converged to allow the anonymity of African-American serial killers to exist and thrive. It is crucial to note that legal and cultural assumptions about black serial predation may result in this group remaining undetected by law enforcement. Historical racial bias, stereotypical media portrayals of African-Americans, and the FBI’s promotion of static ethnocentric criminal profiling have all contributed to this invisibility, despite the group’s participation in personal violent crimes and overrepresentation within the US prison population. Walsh’s (2005) identifies 90 black serial murderers in the US, beginning in 1945 (pp. 279-280.) [2] , which predates the FBI’s initial gathering of serial killer data in 1979; this research compiled a list of 151 black serial killers (Fig. 1). While it is understood that this research’s illumination of African-American participation in serial murders risks compounding existing negative images of that group as homicidal predators, the existence of this particular blind spot deserves attention—why, despite unrelenting media coverage of black crime, is this particular form of predation ignored?

         US media depictions of serial murderers as almost supernatural predatory beings—apprehendable only by extraordinary means—have produced layers of fictions (Jenkins, 1994). The inconsistency of associating African-American men with violent crime, yet excluding them from serial murder, betrays a set of perceptions worthy of examination. The mainstream media’s impetus is to broadcast and publish violent crime stories, deemed newsworthy for their commercial viability (Hall et al, 1978). African-American serial killers are not, however, publicized or portrayed in a manner similar to their white counterparts; there remains a paradoxical dearth of information regarding them.

         The media’s focus on violence as newsworthy, and the public’s resultant fascination with violent crime, have a long history, traceable to Britain’s Newgate Calendar (circa 1760) and to American yellow journalism’s [3] emphasis on predatory criminality since the 1890s (Surette 1994). Although African-Americans have been historically associated with violent criminality and portrayed negatively as “folk devils” (Cohen, 1980), a group stereotyped and scapegoated as “the” problem within American society, they are still not readily accepted as serial murderers. Jenkins (1993) notes that “…the very failure to draw attention to Black serial killers might in itself arise from a form of bias within the media and law enforcement…” (p. 58).

            This study suggests that slavery’s impact has influenced the type of negative portrayals African-American criminals bear. They are typically viewed as individuals capable only of low-level disorganized crimes, rather than reaching the perceived criminal summit of organized serial killing. [4] Historic portrayals across many media—cartoons, advertisements, newspaper and television news stories, films, television dramas, novels, and true crime books—have consistently perpetuated this image, creating what Baudrillard (1981, trans. 1994) describes as a simulacrum, a hyper or false reality whereby layers upon layers of fiction replace the real with a false reality. In this simulacrum, African-Americans can be buffoons or perpetrators of random, violent, senseless crimes, but not intelligent predators.

         Historical negative depictions and stereotypes attributed to African-Americans are examined within this research through media images, popular culture, and criminological theory. Current images of African-Americans as drug dealers, junkies, thugs, street hoodlums, and predatory violent males abound on American television, in the cinema, and within hip-hop culture, especially in music videos and fashion advertisements. The popular series television series The Wire (HBO), the movie Get Rich or Die Trying (Sheridan, 2005), and song lyrics too numerous to mention exemplify extensive media reinforcement and depiction of black male’ criminality, antisocial behavior, and involvement in low level street crime. It is suggested that law enforcement and the public’s perception that African-Americans do not engage in serial homicides occurs because neither is immune to media and cultural stereotypes, nor to the negative race-based perceptions that enter our collective psyche and become common currency.

         This work analyzes how the media and law enforcement, specifically the FBI, have colluded in the creation of this false reality. A case study, that of recent black serial murderers John Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo, aka the DC Snipers, is examined in conjunction with this premise. This case provides an exceptional opportunity to examine race-based misconceptions regarding the perpetrators and their media coverage. Additionally, it exposes the dangers of law enforcement’s continuing promotion of race-based profiles.  It is suggested that the DC Sniper case, which garnered more international attention than any other serial murder investigation, revealed the falsity of the myth that blacks do not engage in serial murder and the assumption that the predations of Wayne Williams an African-American, who, in 1982, was found guilty of the serial murders of young black children between 1979-1981 in Atlanta, Georgia was an aberration.

         This study, although focused on African-Americans as serial killers, may have wider implications for other stereotyped groups that are not part of a majority culture, both within the US and without. There do not appear to be, as of this writing, any studies regarding other specific minority groups’ (e.g., Asian-Americans, Latinos et al) participation in serial murder. This research suggests, however, that in a similar societal paradigm, the multiple methodologies employed here—historical, media, and cultural analysis—might render parallel findings, if replicated within a similar context of historic social exclusion. [5]

         The following section will examine how the history of slavery in the US and the presence of African-Americans in prisons contribute to and reinforce negative imagery associated with that group and readily accepted by the American public.

From slavery to prison

         Even before transatlantic slavery began, Westerners verbally associated blackness with negative qualities, and these attached themselves to complexion. Linnaeus characterized dark-skinned African peoples as slovenly, negligent, slow, and sexually primitive in his Systema Naturae (circa 1735), a description that reinforced a “natural order”, doing little to dissuade the enslavement of “lower beings”.

         US laws regarding slavery led to the systematic disintegration of families, lack of legal recourse regarding individual freedoms and inheritance rights, and ethnic dislocation. So brutal was the system that de Tocqueville declared it “…the most formidable of all the ills that threatened America…” (cited in Adams and Sanders, 2003, p. 22). US slavery and post-emancipation policy was unique in its aim to disrupt cultural continuity, impose segregation through laws which prohibited interpersonal contact between blacks and whites, other than in work situations, ban interracial marriages, and limit access to education and employment. In effect, the system required the dominant (white) culture to view blacks negatively in order to perpetuate its own validity. Whites saw blacks as lazy, shiftless, prone to steal, and sexually promiscuous, describing them as less than human (e.g., niggers, coons, etc.). This aided the cognitive dissonance of their white subjugators, helping to justify any brutalization deemed necessary. Slaves were an integral part of the agrarian economy, which was maintained by local, state, and federal laws sanctioning terrorism, such as lynchings and castrations. Garland (2005) argues:

Whatever these lynchings were—aggressive displays of racial control, political theaters of white supremacy, communal rituals of sovereign power—they were not simple vigilantism (p. 352).

 

Responding to this phenomenon, W.E.B. DuBois notes that for whites there existed an “all pervading desire to inculcate disdain for everything black” (cited in Asim, 2007, p. 2). After slavery was abolished, the Black Codes (1800-1866) were replaced by “Jim Crow” [6] laws that ensured even stricter measures of control. These policies, as well as systematic efforts to restrict access to education, propagated the negative status associated with being black in America.

         The continued societal exclusion of blacks from “Reconstruction” (the 1863-1877 post-Civil War period) until the civil rights movement of the 1950s/60s was fortified not only by by restrictive voting regulations but also by the media.  For example, in the late 19^th /early 20^th centuries, the American magazine Harpers Weekly consistently published negative cartoons of blacks, as did the humor journal Puck. These publications, as well as sheet music covers from the same period, utilized visual and verbal stereotypes that suggested blacks were child-like, low-class, criminal people. After the abolition of slavery, whites continued to promote negative stereotypes of blacks. D.W. Griffith’s’ popular 1915 film, Birth of a Nation, portrayed blacks as sub-human, sexual beasts, and thieves. Even civil rights movement participants protesting intolerant American racist policies were cast in a negative light. Television images during the 1960s showed blacks clashing with police, respected law enforcement agents attempting to control the despised “others”. The historic portrayal of blacks as social predators has been chronicled from the “Scottsboro Boys” case in the 1930s, to the 1989 Central Park Jogger case in NYC, and O. J. Simpson’s 1994 murder trial. The media, in these instances, used public fear [7] and racial prejudice to portray African-Americans (Chancer, 2005). Hundreds of years of subjugation, combined with continual economic hardship, laws designed to create a separate and inferior America, along with widespread stereotypes, produced two societies.

         Some researchers (e.g,. Anderson, 1999; McWhorter, 2000/2005 et al) theorize that black criminality is fueled by poverty, segregation, disenfranchisement, and alienation—all factors linked to a history of discrimination in the US. Anderson’s (1999) examination of life in contemporary urban ghettos describes behaviours that Cleckley (1941/1988) and Hare (1999) define as psychopathic; that is behaviours by “social predators who charm, manipulate and ruthlessly plow their way through life…psychopaths show a stunning lack of concern for the devastating effects their actions have on others” (pp. xi-40). Hare also argues that these behaviours are characterized by a lack of moral conscience and the violation of social norms. This is not to suggest that all who reside in black urban environments are imbued with an innate criminality, but rather that the social norms of urban ghettos reflect a sub-culture whose modes of behavior are often in keeping with Sutherland’s (1947) Differential Association theory which proposes that a person becomes delinquent because of an “excess” of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law.

         Within this sub-culture there are few incentives to maintain the “status quo” or deterrents to anti-social behaviours. African-Americans comprise approximately 12-13% of the general population, but account for over 40% of the overall prison population. Reviews of FBI crime statistics from 2005-2008 reflect a pattern whereby African Americans are incarcerated at a higher percentage than whites. Research associating violent crime in black neighborhoods with joblessness, family disruption and neighborhood poverty buttress these statistics that show overrepresentation of blacks within the penal system (Crutchfield and Pitchford, 1997; Messner et al, 2001; LaFree and Drass, 1996; Morenoff et al, 2001). Current data indicates that African-American males are also overrepresented in every aspect of personal violent crime (i.e., aggravated assaults and murder). [8] Anderson’s (1999) work provides insight into the violent ghetto life of some African-Americans that can lead to remorseless criminality. He noted these behaviours are often encouraged and celebrated as survival strategies in urban environments. In his work regarding the meshing of ghetto and prison life, Wacquant (2001) suggests that these behaviours are also mirrored in penal complexes. Wacquant (ibid) further notes that these behaviours, characterized by a violent oppositional stance, are key to survival in both prison and black urban life.

         The behaviours of the antisocial personality have also been linked by FBI profilers and social researchers to individuals who engage in serial murder (Ressler et al, 1992; Hickey, 2002; Holmes and Holmes, 1996/ 2002). Ghetto life and prisons represent reinforcing environments of psychopathic behaviours. McWhorter (2005) explains this oppositional lifestyle of posturing and violent demeanor as “therapeutic alienation” (pp. 6-9). He elaborates, suggesting that blacks, conditioned by years of social exclusion, engage in self-sabotage by intentionally placing themselves on society’s periphery, their antisocial acts reflecting anger, frustration, and despair (ibid).

         Young (2002) in part supports this notion of self-imposed social exclusion:

Firstly, it is multi-dimensional: social exclusion can involve not only social but economic, political, and spatial exclusion, as well as lack of access to specific desiderata such as information, medical provision, housing, policing, security, etc. . . . [It has also been noted that] These dimensions are seen to interrelate and reinforce each other: overall they involve exclusion in what are seen as the “normal” areas of participation of full citizenship (p. 457).

         Whatever the causation, black criminality has perpetuated negative associations of the African-American male with criminality. The debate regarding the reasons for African-Americans’ overrepresentation within the US criminal justice system ranges from genetics (Herrnstein and Murray, 1994; Walsh, 2004 et al) to the results of intergenerational poverty and trauma (Degruy-Leary, 2005). Others point to a carceral system designed to utilize a cheap labor force (Davis, 1998) or to be used as a “…substitutive apparatus for keeping (unskilled) African-Americans in their place” (Wacquant, 2001, p. 97). In the US, Donziger (1996) reports that more than a third of African-American males in their twenties are incarcerated, on probation, or in parole status. Garland (2001) and Welch (2005) suggest that black mass imprisonment is in part due to politicized policies that utilize images and archetypes, playing on the public’s anxieties through inflammatory language (e.g. "super predators" [9] ). Garland (2001) further notes the shaping effect of media biases and the contribution of crime control policies touted by reductionist theorists (i.e. Wilson and Herrnstein’s [1985] Crime and Human Nature), who suggest offenders are born into a dependency culture, lacking work skills and moral values. Garland (2001) also proposes that whole communities are anathematized and their mode of life is seen as alien and threatening.

         What should be retained from this overview of African-American history are the negative media images, criminality, and the aforementioned behaviours associated with blacks in urban environments and prisons, behaviours linked to the personality types described by social researchers and FBI in their serial murder research.

         The following section further examines the media and law enforcement’s portrayal of the serial murderer as an exclusively white male iconic figure.

Image making: The serial killer in popular culture

         The singular treatment of the American serial killer as a white male has become a sustained theme in literature, film, and the news media. This consistent reinforcement appears to have produced a reluctance, even among law enforcement, to acknowledge the existence of African-American serial killers and afford them qualities readily attributed to their white counterparts.  

Despite an overrepresentation of blacks who engage in homicides, which would seem to warrant media focus, media reticence persists in relation to the most shocking and serious type of homicide.

         The significant impact of media imagery and its ability to create dramatic and false representations is noted in Fiddler’s (2007) examination of the film The Shawshank Redemption. He suggests that media portrayals, however false, impact on the public’s understanding of a carceral system, thereby limiting public perceptions. Similarly, the media’s depiction of serial killers via a plethora of broadcast and published works, films, and television shows, creates a false reality. The perception that African-American criminals only engage in primitive, random, and disorganized crime is unsupported (Griffin, 2005; Welch, 2007 et al) yet enduring. Jewkes (2004) is direct in her query of Media and Crime:

Why do only certain criminal events become thrust into the public sphere with sufficient emotional intensity to shape public fears of victimization? Why do some crimes invoke a public reaction so forceful that they become embedded in the cultural fabric of society, while other almost identical, incidents fail almost to register on the media radar, still less capture the collective imagination? Why do some very serious crimes cast a much longer shadow than others and some offenders become iconic representations of pure evil while others fade into quiet obscurity? (p. 200).

 

         Schmid (2005) and Seltzer’s (1998) research suggests that serial murderers have become iconic figures within US popular culture. Through its self-appointed role as the premier agency adept at serial murder investigation, the FBI, in conjunction with the media, is responsible for this iconicisation. This research suggests that the singular luminary status afforded white serial killers enabled the creation of the industries of serial killer trading cards, movies, books, television shows, murderabilia, and thanatourism, the tourism that seeks to explore (or even promote) grief sites such as public executions, battlefields, crematoria, graves, or murder sites. The serial killer mystique permeates American popular culture, from t-shirts to fan clubs, all derived from positioning the serial murderer as a celebrity. Schmid (2005) states:

In a culture defined by celebrity, serial killers like Bundy, Dahmer, and Gacey are among the biggest stars of all, instantly recognized by the vast majority of Americans (p. 1).

In what Seltzer (1998) calls a “wound culture”, where murder and death spellbind the general public, the violence and unpredictability of serial murder is especially newsworthy. Greer (2007) argues that:

…violence endures as a core news value, its newsworthiness can be intensified considerably when focused through the lenses of celebrity, childhood, sex and race… (p. 28).

         If the majority of US media outlets are commercial enterprises where increased revenue and audience ratings sustain their existence (Jewkes, 2004), why is so little reported regarding the activities of African-American serial killers? The historical portrayal and negative images of African-American males have excluded this group from the current serial killer matrix. The issue is not a lack of initial reporting of their crimes, but a subsequent veiling of events. There appears to be no sustained shelf-life for black serial killer stories. Researchers have noted the crucial role that mass media play in the social construction of crime, for they are the major sources of public information and perceptions about crime and criminality (Jerin and Fields, 2005). Morrissey (2003) argues that there is a close relationship between the media and law enforcement: “the two function together and their representations…mostly lend themselves to a single analysis” (p. 4). Jewkes (2004) further notes:  

Critics argue that the media continue to provide homogenized versions of reality that avoid controversy and preserve the status quo. Consequently ignorance among audiences is perpetuated, and the labeling, stereotyping and criminalization of certain groups (often along lines of class, race and gender) persists (p. 23).

American media and law enforcement (i.e., FBI) together have constructed a mythical version of serial killers that is not associated with African-Americans.

         An understanding of this collaboration between media and law enforcement and the historically racist treatment of African-American males in the US demonstrates why black involvement in serial murder is rarely depicted. In identically titled reference works—The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers—authors Lane and Gregg (1992) and Newton (2000) both misrepresent these predators, for they lack true representations of African-Americans who fall into this category. Hinch (1998) suggests that:

 …accounts of serial murder, some fictional, some about real killers, fuel an insatiable public appetite for tales of gruesome murder. In the process the media often create a distorted image of serial murder and serial murderers… (p. 2).

 

         The scant media depictions of African-Americans as serial killers is mirrored by the dearth of literature and films about them. Numerous works about serial killers, fictional and non-fictional, have become bestsellers. They include Caleb Carr's The Alienist (1995), Thomas Harris’s Silence of the Lambs (1988), FBI profiler John Douglas’ Mindhunter (1995), and Ann Rule’s The Stranger Beside Me (updated in 2008, 20th anniversary edition). The latter, about Ted Bundy, is currently the one of the longest selling serial killer titles in the US, and remains one of the top five most bestsellers on serial killers in print. In these popular works, all the perpetrators are white males. A utilization of combined sources—Google, Books in Print (a literature database), Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com, and Bowker’s Global Books in Print—reveal over a thousand serial killer books in print [10] as of  23^rd of December 2009. Only a miniscule portion focuses on African-Americans. From the plethora of true crime literature and fiction devoted to the serial killer genre, only eight books were discovered that specifically feature black serial killers. Sterling’s (1999) The Cookie Cutter is a fictional account of a bi-racial serial killer, motivated by his mixed white and black heritage. Moseley’s [11] (2004) Little Scarlet, also fictional, features a black serial killer whom the public and law enforcement assume to be white. Jack Olsen’s (1994) true crime book Charmer focuses on George Russell, Jr., while Mitchell’s (2006) non-fiction title Evil Eyes chronicles the murders of Coral Watts in Houston and Michigan, Stanley’s (2006) An Invisible Man and Mustafa’s (2006) I’ve been Watching You: The South Louisiana Serial Killer, both non-fiction, describe the murders and investigation of Derek Todd Lee. Rosen’s (2002) Body Dump is the story of Kendall Francois, who killed woman in Poughkeepsie, New York, while Beware of the Cable Guy by Middleton (2009) is the story of an African-American serial killer who was a former police officer. Three of these works were published in 2006; prior to Sterling’s 1999 novel, there were no published fictional works discovered during this research featuring a black serial killer.

         Though not exhaustive, Table 1 is an at-a-glance comparison of the limited publications of the only black serial killer books discovered during this research and their rankings based on sales at Amazon.com. Although several non-fiction books have been published about Wayne Williams, [12] “the Atlanta child murderer” (e.g., Baldwin, 1985; Bambara, 1999; Jones, 2003 et al), and the DC Snipers (e.g., Cannon, 2003; Moose and Fleming, 2003; Horwitz and Ruane, 2003 et al), the published works about them were excluded from the table because their actions were of such magnitude that a plethora of books about them might be expected; they were newsworthy exceptions rather the rule. What the table demonstrates is that the relatively high number of 151 known black serial killers underscores the dearth of fiction and non-fiction published about them.

         Jenkins (1994) argues against those who suggest that serial murderers’ celebrity and popularity are based on the savagery of the attack or number of victims. Regarding black serial killers Coral Watts and Milton Johnson, Jenkins (ibid) notes that they posed a far greater social threat than the vast majority of white serial killers written about in true-crime books. They remain, however, underrepresented in the literature. Table 1 compares book sales rankings, contrasting the only two fictional accounts of black serial killers discovered during this research with two fictional accounts of white serial killers, as well as opposing the six non-fictional accounts of black serial killers to six non-fictional accounts of their white counterparts. The table is recognized as unscientific, for there are too many factors that mitigate against direct comparison. [13] Efforts were made, however, to equate relative popularity of contrasted authors and relative name familiarity of contrasted killers. The lack of black serial killer books (fiction and non-fiction) does not permit a balanced comparison based on popularity and sales; race-based marketing strategies by publishers may be a significant sales factor. [14]  

Table 1     Amazon.com popularity rankings as of May 13, 2010.

White killer fiction             sales rankings	Black killer fiction              sales rankings
The Broken Hearts Club           1,041,350th (1999)	Cookie Cutter (1999)                2,234,256th
Darkly Dreaming Dexter (2004)        248th	Little Scarlet (2004)                     263,284th
White killer non-fiction	Black killer non-fiction
Silent Rage (1994)                       418,977th	Charmer (1994/95pb)                      752,441th
Body Count (2002)                      501,083th	Body Dump (2002)                      406,359th
The Goodbye Door (2006)           512,791th	An Invisible Man (2006)             465,850th
Postcard Killer (2006)                  71,775th	Evil Eyes (2006)                          213,290th
To Die For (2006)                       366,348th	I’ve been Watching You (2006)   663,877th
A Sudden Shot: The Phoenix        231,440th  Serial Shooter (2009)	Beware the Cable Guy (2009)     690,835th

Despite the more recent publication dates of the black serial murder non-fictional accounts, the older works about similarly chosen white serial murderers maintained a higher ranking in popularity; this disparity underlines the former’s briefer shelf life of newsworthiness. Jenkins (1993) notes that African-American cases have not been featured extensively in criminological literature, fiction writing or films:

This gap can partly be explained by the general neglect of Blacks and Black themes in popular fiction of this era. African-Americans were not portrayed as serial killers in mainstream movies, but equally they rarely received serious treatment in any role whatever... (p. 53).

         An analysis of the extensive number of films and books regarding white serial murderers compared to black serial killers in each category revealed that the depiction of blacks constitute less than 1% of the existing works discovered during this research. A comprehensive list of serial killer films generally [15] is too extensive to present here, but this examination reveals that, despite the participation of 151 African-Americans in serial murder since 1915, they are barely represented within films and books. Only one fictional movie—Switchback (1997) — depicts an African-American serial killer, and one contemporary docudrama, 23 Days in October (2003). There have been several portrayals of Wayne Williams, “the Atlanta Child murderer” and the DC Snipers, which might be anticipated due to the notoriety of their crimes, further rendering them invisible within popular culture. Furthermore, while the at-a-glance comparison table reflects an overall rankings of white serial killer books as higher in popularity than those of their counterparts, the effectiveness of marketing practices and advertising strategies must and cannot be overlooked.  

 

The significance of the DC Snipers 

         The DC Sniper investigation should be revelatory for law enforcement agencies, as it illuminated the dangers of race-based perceptions. As serial killers, they were organized, intelligent, and dramatically violent, all newsworthy attributes. The DC Snipers investigation illustrates how black serial killers can initially be ignored and be undetected by law enforcement.

         During the investigation in 2002, the collaboration between police and the media, who both fell back on ‘natural’ assumptions about the racial profile of the offenders, led to the dissemination of an incorrect profile of a white male perpetrator(s). The investigation failed for months to identify two organized, mobile, African-American serial killers, as they were eventually classified by the FBI (Douglas et al, 2006). The scope of the Snipers’ actions was by definition newsworthy and their media coverage intensive. Surette (1998) suggests that public opinions and public perceptions regarding crime are derived from the media, and concedes the media exercise considerable influence on popular culture and vice versa—including law enforcement. If not for the narcissistic traits common to many serial killers (Knight, 2006; Black, 1999), the Snipers might have avoided apprehension altogether, but they exhibited a need to engage the attention of law enforcement through notes (e.g., on a tarot card left at a crime scene, Muhammad wrote “…call me God...” ) and phone calls, aiding their arrest.

         After their capture, much biographical information about the Snipers was obtained.  John Allen Williams, aka John Muhammad, was born in New Orleans December 31, 1960. His mother died when he was young, and his father abandoned him to be raised by his grandfather and aunt. After converting to Islam in October 2001, he changed his name to John Allen Muhammad. He enlisted in the US Army National Guard, where he received military training and achieved “expert” marksman status. By some accounts, his demeanor was that of a disgruntled individual. He had been disciplined for assaulting a fellow officer and dropping an incendiary device near soldiers. He divorced twice and became homeless, moving out of the US in 1999 to spend time in Antigua, where he eventually met Lee Malvo.

         Malvo, born in Jamaica on February 18, 1985, was often parted from his mother in early childhood. His unmarried parents separated early in his life. [16] Youthful Malvo stayed at numerous homes, eventually gravitating toward homeless shelters. Malvo and his mother eventually moved to Antigua when he was 14, and he met John Muhammad. Malvo moved to the US in 2001 to be with his mother, a move facilitated via a forged passport arranged by Muhammad. After reuniting with Malvo in the US, Muhammad posed as the youth’s father. Prior to apprehension on October 24, 2002, both men resided in a homeless shelter in Bellingham, Washington (Cannon, 2003; Horwitz and Ruane, 2003; Moose and Fleming, 2003). Was there a need for Lee Boyd Malvo to please his disgruntled pseudo-father John Muhammad? Based on their similar deprivation of a familial structure and patriarchal bonding, was their need to belong achieved through a common purpose? Their history reveals early traumatic childhood events that may have been causal factors for their predation. The impact of the behavioral antecedents and sociological factors on their transformation into serial killers are beyond the scope of this work, but it should be noted that the repeated themes of childhood trauma, lack of patriarchal bonding, and narcissistic tendencies appear to be common traits identified by the FBI and social scientists researching serial murder (Douglas et al, 2006; Egger, 2002; Hickey, 2002; Holmes and Holmes, 1996/2002; Knight, 2006; Ressler et al, 1992). Furthermore, these psychological themes and sociological factors within the context of antisocial behavior are not uncommon within urban African-American society.

         John Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo were not identified for some time in part because it was apparently inconceivable that these perpetrators could be black. Surette’s (1998) survey of police recruits in 1994 highlighted a significant relationship between their beliefs about crime and police work as presented by the media, even when those beliefs were not factually based. The main assumption by Sniper task force investigators was that the perpetrators were white, including the African-American police chief. Chief Moose stated:

Our two principal suspects were both African American. In American criminal history, serial killers are rarely black. The profilers had missed this entirely. No one expected the sniper suspects not to be white men… (Moose and Fleming, 2003, p. 292).

 

The New York Daily News (Oct 14 2002) reported that the FBI, aware of the unique methodology employed by the Snipers, requested a Pentagon search for records of discharged soldiers with sniper training. The Boston Globe noted the:

…inexact science of serial-killer profiling, which in this case pointed police in the wrong direction, to a white man, acting alone in a white van, who wasn’t motivated by money…. [17]

 

         An interview with Harvard University-based African-American psychiatrist Alvin Poussaint supports a key supposition of this research. Dr. Poussaint, aware of similar psychological and sociological factors shared by the Snipers and black communities, addressed his students’ disbelief that the DC Snipers were black. Poussaint stated:

A lot of students around here were saying, “Oh no he can’t be black.” This is the crazy thing we get hung up on the nature of racism. He continued, “I don’t know why, if we’re shooting up people in ghettoes at astronomical rates, [why] we can’t do this? (Fears and Avis, 2002). 

 

The initial mischaracterisation of the DC Snipers as white also raised questions about possible failings by law enforcement agencies in other criminal investigations. This research suggests that the DC Sniper case was a “shot over the bow” of American law enforcement, warning of the pitfalls of static criminal profiling and media stereotypes.          

            The DC Snipers’ actions and law enforcement’s response demonstrated a crisis of awareness regarding the existence of black serial killers in America. When the media and law enforcement rendered a profile of a white male perpetrator, it was familiar to the American public. One should ask—in the aftermath of the DC Sniper murders, how many lives might have been saved had law enforcement been more flexible in their assessment of potential suspects during their investigations? Few murder investigations in the 20^th or 21st century involving African-Americans, save the previously mentioned Atlanta child murders or O.J. Simpson murder trial, have garnered as much worldwide attention as the DC Sniper serial murders. John Muhammad’s death sentence did not defy media, criminal justice, and academic treatments of black criminals, but the scope, manner, and impact of his predations for a moment altered the images associated with the serial murderer in America. News publications initially supported this altered image. The New York Times [18] noted that the DC Snipers were a rare category among serial killers—team killers who also murdered outside their race. The Associated Press referred to John Muhammad as a “mastermind”, [19] a designation very rare among media mentions of black serial murderers.

 

The notoriety of the white male “serial killer” is owed in part to extensive media coverage of their predations, yet the widespread coverage of the DC Sniper case did not signal a paradigm shift regarding African-Americans involvement with serial murder. Despite the FBI’s designation of the Snipers as serial killers (Douglas et al, 2006), Schmid (2005) notes that they have not consistently been portrayed as such by the media, who in retrospect appear to have placed these criminals within an as yet undefined phenomenological category of predators. Further elaborating this issue, Schmid suggests a reason for public reluctance to acknowledge them as serial killers years after the events:

…the problem seems to be that Muhammad and Malvo disturb the logic that organizes the pantheon of celebrity serial killers by refusing kinship with any of the notorious killers of yesteryear. To use a literary analogy, the D.C. Sniper case seems to be a canonical text that explodes the idea of the canon… (ibid, p. 253).

         This attempted revisionism by the media, some years after the events, underscores the continued reluctance to place black serial killers in the “exalted” realm of white serial killers, while Muhammed and Malvo’s long invisibility suggests the need for a change of perspective by law enforcement and the public.

The FBI’s role in serial killer profiling

         Few US law enforcement agencies have contributed as much to the image of serial murderers, criminal profiling, and their mystique in US popular culture (e.g., television shows such as Criminal Minds or Profiler) as the FBI. Its agents are arguably the foremost practitioners of criminal profiling associated with serial murder within American popular culture. Despite its lofty self promotion and media portrayals as profilers, Jenkins (2002) notes that the FBI cannot account for the capture of a single serial murderer based on their profiling techniques. Furthermore, the initial serial killer research conducted by the FBI did not include African-Americans or examine race as a factor (Burgess et al, 1986; Ressler et al, 1992). Instead, the FBI established a static ethnocentric model for serial murder investigations, despite the involvement of African-Americans in that type of predation since 1915.

         Criminal profiling history predates the FBI. The early work of Lombroso (circa 1880) suggested that phenotypes indicated criminal activities. A more contemporary approach utilized psychology as a basis. Dr. Thomas Bond in 1888 constructed a profile of “Jack the Ripper” (Canter et al, 2004), and, in the US during WWII, an offender profile was established for Adolph Hitler (Langer, 1973). Captain Ellis M. Zacharias (1946) also created a profile for the commander of the Japanese Navy. In 1957, New York City’s "Mad Bomber," George Metesky, was apprehended based on a similar profiling technique employed by psychologist Dr. James Brussel. It was a culmination of these techniques that became the model for the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit. These techniques were taught to the FBI’s National Academy classes, which included representatives from law enforcement agencies worldwide (DeNevi and Campbell, 2004). Turvey (1998) notes that FBI profilers trained numerous American law enforcement agencies as well. Many US police departments require criminal profiling, as taught by the FBI, as part of their yearly certification testing.

         At this juncture it is reasonable to query: did the FBI, in their capacity as DC Sniper task force members, adhere to the concept that organized serial killers are more intelligent than those who are disorganized? How might those perceptions of black criminality have contributed to the delayed apprehension of John Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo?

         Social researchers have questioned the FBI’s profiling methods and their expertise in the area of serial murder investigations. It has been argued that many agents lack the rigorous academic training needed to create accurate psychological profiles of offenders (Coupe, 2003). The agency’s subsequent publications included data derived from that seminal work (published as Sexual Homicide Patterns and Motives), and are little more than a repetition of the same statistics.

         The literature among social researchers exposes a continuing disconnect between law enforcement investigators (i.e., the FBI) and trained mental health professionals. Canter (2004) notes that the FBI’s approach was based on intuition rather than research, calling into issue data integrity. Comparing Canter’s profile model with the FBI model, Egger (2002) notes:

A primary difference between the profiling developed by David Canter and that done by the FBI is that Canter is continually building an empirical base from which to operate whereas the FBI model is based totally on intuition of the profiler and his or her experience in profiling previous crimes… (p. 282).

Egger’s statement suggests a rote methodology disconnected from the findings of researchers such as Hickey (2002), Jenkins (2002), Walsh (2005) et al. Currently, FBI researcher Beasley (2004) notes in his case study of seven serial murderers—five white, two black—that the FBI’s initial study occurred “nearly 20 years ago”, implying the FBI data and methodology are outdated. Turvey has argued that a deductive approach to criminal profiling, aka behaviour evidence analysis, is more appropriate than the FBI’s inductive methodology, since it focuses on a specific individual(s) and crime scenes, as opposed to a preconceived theory ( as cited in Petherick, 2006). Canter (2006) suggests that:

 …stereotypes exist today in racial prejudice that assumes certain actions are typical of people with a particular skin color. The blossoming of biology, medicine, and psychology in the last century challenged such superficial views that a person's appearance could be correlated in any way with expected behaviours… (p. 12).

 

Canter’s statement supports the idea that the FBI’s profile of serial murderers may be ethnocentric. Furthermore, Jenkins (2002) suggested that FBI testimony before the US Congress in 1984 was an act of self-promotion that also helped to define serial murder for public consumption. This act of self-promotion is significant because the FBI agents’ involvement in the majority of serial murder investigations are as advisors (Douglas et al, 1992), further advancing their sphere of influence and concepts regarding criminal profiling throughout other law enforcement agencies. The agency depicted serial killers as extraordinary predators who were almost supernatural beings (Jenkins, 2002) utilizing fear of a seemingly new phenomenon, despite the fact that this type of predation has existed for centuries. [20]

         Simultaneously, the agency promoted itself as the only law enforcement agency capable of apprehending these killers, making them the de facto reigning authority regarding serial murder investigations. Through their testimony before Congress and the words “serial murders,” reported extensively by the media, they created something approaching moral panic (Jenkins, 1994). Serial murderers gained an almost iconic status. After the congressional testimony, the concept of highly-organized, extremely clever killers, stoppable only by extraordinary law enforcement means, emerged, creating the image of a new breed of criminal. It was supported by the media, motivated by a newsworthy story. The creation of a societal nemesis with frighteningly high intelligence was all too newsworthy, but the negative perceptions of African-Americans—despite their participation in violent crime—automatically excluded them from this category. While their questionable methodology and issues of data integrity, inter-agency training by the FBI provides opportunities for law enforcement agents to become further entrenched in a false reality.

Conclusions

         This article examines why—in a culture where violence is considered newsworthy—the media and law enforcement have overlooked African-American involvement in serial murder, and points out the inherent dangers in such assumptions. This oversight leads to odd inequities: while white serial killers have achieved an almost iconic status, their African-American counterparts remain invisible to the public and law enforcement alike. While examining the history of slavery, it became clear that laws that led to social exclusion created a cultural stereotype of African-Americans as deviant, brutish, and lacking intellect; they also contributed to the inability of blacks to assimilate fully into American society. At the same time a carceral system evolved to control blacks seen as incorrigible, perpetuating racial stereotypes that became acceptable to African-Americans themselves (Garland, 2001; Wacquant, 2001). Given their historic status of “other” and assumptions of lowly criminal behaviours, the African-American male could not fit the description of the perpetrator in what the FBI would describe in the 1980s as a new type of crime committed by a mythically adept predator: serial murder.

         In their development of a profiling technique to identify serial murderers, the FBI effectively excluded African-Americans and misrepresented their participation in serial murder. It has been estimated that black males represent 22% of all known serial killers in the US (Hickey, 2002), a statistic that indicates their overrepresentation among serial killers.  Moreover, the behavioural antecedents that the FBI attributes to individuals capable of serial murder, such as early childhood trauma, accord with the findings of social scientists. However, the FBI failed to make the connection that these same antecedents exist in urban black communities, despite the suggestive evidence of overrepresentation of blacks within the US prison population and homicides. If in popular culture the serial murderer is predominantly portrayed as an intelligent (intellectual, even), socially adept white male, this depiction counters the stereotypical image of a criminal black male.        

The consequence of this false depiction that African-Americans do not engage in serial murder became most evident during the DC Sniper investigation in 2002. The danger posed by the FBI’s and police’s lack of awareness is that the skewed portrayals of serial killers allowed the Snipers to remain unapprehended and victimization continued unnecessarily. The DC Snipers’ victims varied in age, race and gender; they did not appear to discriminate, contrary to a popular notion that suggests serial killers only kill within their own race. This article does not suggest that race is the sole factor for the exclusion of African-Americans from the serial killer matrix, but strongly proposes it is the key factor. Future research regarding the personality constructs that engage in serial murder (e.g. psychopathy, narcissism, etc) and their association by law enforcement with a perpetrator’s level of intelligence may illuminate reasons for varying media coverage. This research theorizes that the US media’s historic promotion of negative African-American images has contributed considerably to the assumed exclusion of this group’s involvement in serial murder by both the public and law enforcement. Relevant criminological and psychological data suggest this is not only a dangerous belief, but one that continued social pressure may invert. The invisible may become the dominant, and awareness is necessary to limit faulty reasoning and lost lives, as occurred during the DC Sniper killings, and open both media and law enforcement minds to realities.

Fig. 1 Known African-American Serial Killers as of April 15, 2010 

References

Adams, F. D., Sanders, B. (2003). Alienable Rights, The Exclusion of African-Americans in a White Man’s Land, 1619-2000. New York: Harper Collins.

Alia, V. and Bull, S. (2005). Media and Ethnic Minorities. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the Street. New York: Norton.

Asim, J. (2007). The N Word. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Baldwin, J. (1985). The Evidence of Things Not Seen. New York: Holt, Rhinehart and Winston.

Baudrillard, J. (1981). Simulacra and Simulation. trans. 1994.  Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Beasley, J.O. (2004). “Serial Murder in America: Case Studies of Seven Offenders. “ Behavioral Sciences and the Law. (22) 395-414. 

Black, D. W. (1999). Bad Boys, Bad Men. New York: Oxford University Press.

Burgess, A.W., Hartman, C. R., Ressler, R. K., Douglas, J.E. and McCormack, A. (1986). “Sexual Homicide, A Motivational Model.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 1 (3) 251-272.

Cannon, A. (2003). 23 Days of Terror: The Compelling True Story of the Hunt and Capture of the Beltway Snipers. New York: Pocket Books.

Canter, D. (2006). Criminal Shadows. New York: Dorsett.

Canter, D. (2004). Offender Profiling and Investigative Psychology. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling. 1, 1-15.

Canter, D. Alison, L. J., Alison, J. and Wentinck, N. (2004). “The Organized/Disorganized typology of Serial Murder, Myth or Model?” Psychology, Public Policy and Law.10 (3) 293-320.

Chancer, L. (2005). “Before and after the Central Park jogger: when legal cases become social causes.” The American Sociological Association. 4 (3) 38-42.

Cleckley, H. (1941/1988). The Mask of Sanity, An Attempt to Clarify Some Issues About the So-Called Psychopathic Personality. St. Louis, MO: Mosby. 

Cohen, S. (1980). Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of Mods and Rockers, 2^nd ed. Oxford: Martin Robertson.

Coupe, J. III. (2003). “A Clinical Approach To Deductive Behavioural Profiling.” Proquest Information and Learning Company (UMI No. 3188302).

Davis, A. (1998). in Lubiano, W. (ed.). The House That Race Built. New York: Vantage Books.

Degruy-Leary, J. (2005). Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome. Oregon: Uptone Press.

DeNevi, D., Campbell, J.H. (2004). Into the Minds of Madmen, How the FBI’s Behavioural Science Unit Revolutionized Crime Investigation. New York: Prometheus Books.

Douglas, J., Burgess, A.W., Burgess, A.G. and Ressler, R.K. (1992). Crimes Classification Manual A Standard System for Investigating and Classifying Violent Crimes. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Douglas, J., Burgess, A.W., Burgess, A.G. and Ressler, R.K. (2006). Crimes Classification Manual,” A Standard System for Investigating and Classifying Violent Crimes, 2^nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Donziger, S. (1996). The Real War on Crime. New York: Basic Books.

Egger, S. A. (2002). The Killers among Us, 2^nd ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Fears, D. and Avis, T. (2002, October 26). “Blacks Express Shock At Supect’s Identity; Most Say They Expect a Serial Killer to Be White.” The Washington Post, p. A17.

Fiddler, M. (2007). “Projecting the prison: The depiction of the uncanny in The Shawshank Redemption.” Crime, Media, Culture, 3 (2), 192-206.

Fleming, T. (2007). “The History of Violence: Mega Cases of Serial Murder, Self Propelling Narratives, and Reader Engagement.” Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 14 (3) 277-291.

Garland, D. (2001). The Culture of Control. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Garland, D. (2005). “Penal excess and surplus meaning: Public torture lynchings in 20^th century America.” Law and Society Review 39 (4) 793-833.

Greer, C. (2007). “News, Media, Victims and Crime.” Davies, P.M,  Francis, P. and Greer, C.  eds. Victims, Crime and Society (20-49). London: SAGE.

Griffin, S.P. (2005). Black Brothers Inc. The Violent Rise and Fall of Philadelphia’s Black Mafia. Preston, UK: Milo Books.

Hall, S., Critcher, C., Jefferson, T. Clarke, J. and Roberts, B., eds. (1978). Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State and Law and Order. London: MacMillan.

Hare, R. D. (1999). Without Conscience, The Disturbing World of The Psychopaths Among Us. New York: Guilford Press.

Herrnstein, R.J. and Murray, C. (1994). The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York: Free Press.

Hickey, E.R. (2002). Serial Murderers and Their Victims. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomas Learning.

Hinch, R. (1998). “Researching Serial Murder: Methodological and Definitional Problems.” Electronic Journal of Sociology. Retrieved December 1, 2008 from http://www.sociology.org/content/vol003.002/hinch.html

Holmes, R.M. and Holmes, S.T. (1996/2002). Profiling Violent Crimes, An Investigative Tool. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Horwitz, S. and Ruane, M.E. (2003). Inside the Hunt for the Killers Who Terrorized the Nation. New York: Random House.

Jenkins, P. (2002). “Catch Me Before I Kill More: Seriality as Modern Monstrosity.” Cultural Analysis, 3, n.p. Retrieved April 2004, from http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~caforum/volume3/vol3_article1.html

Jenkins, P. (1994). Using Murder: The Social Construction of Serial Homicide. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Jenkins, P. (1993). “African-Americans and Serial Homicide.” The American Journal of Criminal Justice, 17 (2) 47-60.

Jerin, R. and Fields, C. (2005). “Murder and mayhem in the media.” R. Muraskin and A. Roberts, eds. Visions for change: Crime and Justice in the 21^st century (75-87). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 

Jewkes, Y. (2004). Media and Crime. London: SAGE.

Knight, Z.G. (2006). “Some thoughts on the Psychological Roots of the Behaviour of Serial Killers as Narcissists: An Object Relations Perspective.” Social Behaviour and Personality, 34 (10) 1189-1206.

Lane, B. and Gregg, W. (1992). The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers. New York: Berkley Books.

Langer, W.C. (1973). The Mind of Adolph Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report. New York: Basic Books.

Liebert, J. (1985). “Contributions to psychiatric consultation in the   investigation of serial murder.” International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 29,187-200.

McWhorter, J. (2000). Losing the Race, Self Sabotage in Black America. New York: Simon & Schuster.

McWhorter, J. (2005). Winning the Race, Beyond the Crisis in Black America. New York: Gotham Books.

Monteith, M. J.  and Spicer, C.V. (2000). “Contents and Correlates of Whites’ and Blacks’ Racial Attitudes.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 36, 125–154.

Moose, C. A. and Fleming, C. (2003). Three Weeks In October, The Manhunt for the Serial Sniper. New York: Penguin Books.

Moran, P. (1999). Antisocial Personality disorder, an epidemiological perspective. London: The Royal College of Psychiatrists.

Morrissey, B. (2003). When Women Kill: Questions of Agency and Subjectivity. London: Routledge.

Newton, M. (2000). The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers. New York: Checkmark Books.

Petherick, W. (2006). Serial Crime: Theoretical and Practical Issues in Behavioural Profiling. Burlington, MA: Elsevier/Academic Press.

Ressler, R. K., Burgess, A.W. and Douglas, J. (1992). Sexual Homicide, Patterns and Motives. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Schmid, D. (2005). Natural Born Celebrities, Serial Killers in American. Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Seltzer, M. (1998). Death and Life in America’s Wound Culture. New York: Routledge.

Smith, S., M. Stinson, V. and Prosser, M. A. (2004). “Do They All Look Alike? An Exploration of Decision-Making Strategies in cross-Race Facial Identifications.” Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 36 (2) 146-154.

Surette, R. (1994). “Predator Criminals as Media Icons”.  G. Barak, ed. Media, Process and the Social Construction of Crime (131-158).  New York: Garland.

Surette, R. (1998). Media, Crime, and Criminal Justice: Images and Realities, 2^nd ed. New York: Wadsworth Publishing.

Toufexis, A. (1994). “Dances with Werewolves, America’s fascination with serial killers is reaching an all-time high and may be fueling their deadly deeds.” Time. Monday, April 4. Retrieved August 28, 2006 from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,980425,00.html

Turvey, B. (1998). “Deductive Criminal Profiling: Comparing Applied Methodologies Between Inductive and Deductive Criminal Profiling Techniques.” Retrieved March 13, 2008 from http://www.corpus-delicti.com/Profiling_law.html

Walsh, A. (2004). Race and Crime: A Biosocial Analysis. New York: Nova Science.

Walsh, A. (2005). “African-Americans and Serial Killing in the Media.” Homicide Studies. 9, 271-291.

Wacquant, L. (2001). “Deadly Symbiosis: When Ghetto and Prison Meet and Mesh.” Punishment and Society. 3 (1) 95-134.

Welch, M. (2005). Ironies of Imprisonment. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Welch, K. (2007). “Black Criminal Stereotypes and Racial Profiling.” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice. 23 (3) 276-288.

Young, J. (2002). “Crime and Social Exclusion.” The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, 3^rd ed., (457-490). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zacharias. E. (1946). Secret Missions, The Story of An Intelligence Officer. Annapolis: US Naval Institute.

---