The very mention of the term "serial killer" evokes a spine chilling reaction in most people. It is something we do not quite want to think about, yet at the same time we can’t get enough of. The mainstream popularity of the movie "Silence of the Lambs" is testimony to the public’s fascination with "torn and open bodies", and the macabre. Yet we reel with the shock at the heinous acts committed by Paul Denyer, the Frankston killer and call for the death penalty. What is it about this form of homicide that horrifies, yet fascinates at the same time. It is the purpose of this paper to illustrate the relevance of the topic of serial killing to the subject reader. This will be achieved by highlighting facts about the topic and attempting to show why this topic should be integrated into a reader on homicide.

Statistically, serial murder is a relatively rare occurrence (Hickey, 1997). So why then does it warrant consideration as a viable topic for study in a University reader? Is it because of the sadistic, depraved nature of most of the crimes and the implication for the innocent people in society, who may be targeted as victims? Often referred to as "stranger killing", serial murder is an apparent random act in that there is no obvious motive such as financial gain, honour or provocation. Not in the most obvious sense anyway. Often the reasons for serial murder go disturbingly deeper but it is not the intention of this paper to delve into the reasons for serial murder but to highlight its worthiness as a topic for further research.

The reader presents a gender-based analysis of homicide focusing on both genders portrayed as victims and offenders, also including children. It offers a comprehensive collection of literature with the underlying theme being gender and masculinity. It is noted that the reader does not include the topic of serial killers, which does differ somewhat as a form of homicide. Hence, there is a gap in the subject reader, which could be filled by the inclusion of a section on serial killers. This paper is going to analyse serial killing with particular reference to gender. For the purpose of this paper the term serial killer, serial murder and serial crime will be used as interchangeable terms.

The term serial killer maybe a recent one that has only come into practice over the last 20 years, (Hazelwood and Douglas, 1980) yet the crime of serial murder certainly is not a new phenomenon. Serial killing is a frightening phenomenon in that it is apparently motiveless and the victims are predominately strangers who are either preyed upon or plucked from suburban streets. This is what separates this form of murder from all other forms of homicide. In general women kill in self-defense or after years of battering by a husband or partner, (Mann, 1996) whereas men tend to kill out of jealousy or as a matter of honour. (Polk, 1999) In terms of motivation most serial killers do not kill for obvious items such as money, love or revenge (Fox & Levine, 1999 cited in Smith & Zahn) or self defense which seems to be the most obvious reasons for other types of homicide such as male on male killing or women killing men. Instead according to Fox and Levine (1994), like Andre Chikatilo they enjoy the thrill, the sexual gratification, or the dominance that they achieve over the lives of their victims. There need be no motives of hatred, rage, fear, jealousy or greed…the victim need not have taunted threatened or abused the killer. (Seltzer, 1998)

Although the definition of a serial killer differs between authors, the most emphasis is placed on the time between the murders (Egger, 1984). It is generally accepted that there are no relationships between the victim and offender, the murders are usually committed at different times and there are no direct connections between the murders. The murders will also often occur at different locations. In most cases the reason for serial crime is unlike most other forms of homicide where there is usually passion, personal gain or profit tendencies; in serial killing it is usually a compulsive act. It is generally agreed upon that a serial murderer must kill at least two victims in unrelated events, and that a cooling off period ranging from a few hours to years will occur between the events. There are indeed considerable arguments as to how many people need to be murdered in order for the offender to be classed as a serial killer. The FBI stipulates three or more separate incidents whereas Dietz (1986) argues that a minimum of 5 victims constitutes a serial killer. Hickey (1991), Holmes and Holmes (1998), and Egger (1997) all define serial murder as the killing of three or more people over a period of time. Fox and Levine (1999 cited in Smith & Zahn) indicate that there needs to be 4 or more murders to be called a serial crime. For the purpose of this study a serial murder will be defined as a specific type of homicide involving the murder of two or more persons in separate incidents with an interval of time between the homicides. The interval can be several hours, days, weeks months or even years. The main point when defining a serial murder is that the series of murders do not share in the events surrounding one another

Given the nature of serial murder there is a need for law enforcement agencies to approach this area differently to other forms of homicide. This type of crime creates much fear and panic within society and therefore it is crucial that prompt and well-coordinated measures be taken by law enforcement agencies to assist in the tracking of serial murderers. There are a number of significant problems in the investigation of serial killers. The most significant being linkage blindness that is the inability of investigators to connect two or more related crimes. (Egger, 1984) This is a problem specific to serial murder. It remains a huge problem for investigators and police departments in the United States due to the fact that the police departments are very much decenralised and thus the link between crimes are often left unrecognized. In Australia this is not as great a problem due to the fact that our police stations are more centralized as well as the existence of the the National Coronial Information System which is constantly updated. This provides more readily accessible information about homicides. In order for the police departments to carry out a cohesive investigative analysis of serial murder the communication channels between departments although adequate in Australia require even greater and more effective interaction. Although this seems a basic notion it must be remembered that time is of the essence in such an investigation, and it is important to remember that each victim has left behind a family filled with grief.

Criminal profiling invented by the FBI to aid in the detection of serial killers is used, albeit dubiously due to the lack of empirical evidence to suggest that this is a successful method of investigation. (Wilson, Lincon & Kocsis, 1997) It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss the positive and negative aspects of criminal profiling however suffice to say it is an exhaustive process that does not always yield positive results. In Australia particularly, we have only one trained criminal profiler. The lack of training in this area is due to the small occurrence of serial murder.

It is noted by Fox and Levine (1999 cited in Smith and Zahn) that most serial killers tend to kill close to home, in other words they do not usually stray far from their home environment to commit their crimes. Ted Bundy was an exception to this. He traveled wide and far from Idaho, California, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Vermont. Some murders were committed as ‘day trips’ with Bundy jetting into a city, selecting his victim, killing her and flying home. The reason most serial killers kill close by is the fact that they are comfortable to kill in areas that that they know well rather than straying into unknown territory and having to often dispose of a body. According to Hickey (1997) one third of serial killers cross state lines to commit their killings. Andre Chikatilo for example, was a former schoolteacher, a family man who was happily married. He mainly hung around bus stops and railway stations close to home in order to stalk possible victims on buses and trains or simply target them on the streets or out walking. Another example is John Wayne Gacy who killed all his victims at his own home. Hickey (1991) also states that 71% of serial killers operated in a specific location or area rather than traveling wide distances to commit their crimes.

In serial killing as in any other form of homicide gender and dominance play an important role. Violent offenders in Australia are overwhelmingly male, primarily between the ages of 18 and 30 and predominantly from blue-collar backgrounds. (Chappell, 1995) When men kill it is usually for reasons such as the notion of honour contests, (Polk, 1999) or out of jealousy. (Greenwood, 1996) Still others, according to Caputi (1987), kill out of a need to dominate. She states that the fact that sex offenders including rapist, child molesters and serial killers are almost without exception male derives primarily from their greater need to dominate. According to Prentky, Burgess & Rokous, (1989) the basis for the serial killers pursuit is their detailed fantasies of domination. We can infer from Paul Denyer’s childhood that he did feel empowered to take the life of someone else due to the fact that he needed to avenge the sexual abuse metered out to him as a child by his brother. The urge to kill had surfaced at the age of 14 and finally materialized at the age of 21.Whilst his method of killing was mainly psychopathic he still enjoyed the dominance he had over his female victims and he enjoyed knowing that their fate was in his hands. It was revealed during interviews with Denyer that he was an unpopular person devoid of friends and in a very straight-faced manner admitted to detectives "I’m a killer!" (Petraitis, 1995) According to Fox and Levine (1994) a specific profile of the typical serial killer is that of a white male in his late 20’s or 30’s who targets strangers. According to Hickey (1991), 88% of serial killers were male, 85% were Caucasian, and the average age when they claimed their first victim was 28.5.

The portrayal of a serial killer is often seen as an "unusual freak" that looks and sounds visibly different to the "norm" and is generally male. Although some serial killers possess low intelligence, the typical serial killer is quite charming and attractive, and some of above intelligence. (Fox and Levine, 1999 cited in Smith and Zahn) Ted Bundy for example was the all American boy. As a young boy he was a scout, he did a paper round and he started his own lawn mowing business. A high school athlete and then a graduate of the University of Washington, the handsome young man was never short of a date. He was a campaign worker for the Crime Commission in Washington State. He also became a counselor at a Seattle rape crisis center after being screened for his maturity and balance. (Blundell, 1996) Fox and Levine (1999 cited in Smith and Zahn) state that part of the secret of a serial killers’ success is that they do not stand out in a crowd or attractive negative attention to themselves. According to Blundell, (1996) Jeffrey Dahmer was everybody’s nightmare, yet he was an ordinary insignificant man, the kind that blends into any background, melds into any crowd. No one passing him in the street would have looked at him twice. (Blundell, 1996)

Many serial killers are happily married and possess full time jobs. Andre Chikatilo to his family was a mild mannered grandfather but in reality he tortured, murdered, mutilated and ate as many as 53 victims. (Blundell, 1996) It is a misconception that serial killers spend most of their days hunting for their next victim. As stated by the notorious Henry Lee Lucan who confessed to 157 murders, "If I wanted a victim I’d just go out and get one". (Blundell, 1996). It is the secretive nature of the serial crime that renders it difficult to investigate. Usually a body is found and then an investigation of whatever clues are available follows. It is not always obvious who may have committed the crime, and a list of suspects will usually not exist as in other forms of homicide.

It is important to note that there are variations to the typical profile of a serial killer. The notion of women as killers seems to go against the grain of their nurturing instinct. (Greenwood, 1996) Silverman and Kennedy, (1993) report that women mostly kill for self-defense. Women will generally kill to escape a negative life situation but it is of interest to ascertain why female serial killers exist. According to Kellerher and Kellerher (1998) while the short, lethal careers of serial killers such as Jeffrey Dahmer and Andrew Cunanan terrorize the public and provide morbid inspiration for the entertainment industry, few people realize that it is the female serial killer, seldom heard of, who deserves most to be feared. In their book entitled "Murder Most Rare" they provide startling information about the female serial murderer, who is shown to be far more deadly and determined, difficult to apprehend, and complexly motivated than her male counterpart. While serial murder by women is relatively rare, a surprising number of female serial killers are identified. For example Sussex (1996, cited in Greenwood) sites examples of female serial killers from Australian history beginning with Francis Knorr the notorious "baby farmer" and killer who was hung in the 19^th century. Wendy Lang dubbed "The Black Widow" was a Queensland woman who entrapped several men with her beauty and charm and then murdered them supposedly for their money. (Easteal, 1996 cited in Greenwood) After a thought-provoking exploration of the cultural biases that have caused us historically to dismiss and ignore the criminal potential of women, Kelleher and Kelleher (1998) divides female serial murders for the first time into seven categories: Black Widow, Angel of Death, Sexual Predator, Revenge, Profit or Crime, Team Killer and Question of Sanity. These seven types vary widely in motivation, choice of victims, weapons and methods. The authors reveal patterns that occur within the types, but stress that the complicated nature of these women's crimes makes criminal profiling almost impossible-a fact that causes the jobs of homicide investigators to be difficult, indeed, sometimes impossible. Therefore whilst women make up a small percentage of serial killers, the significance may have increased over the years sufficiently to warrant this publication and classification devoted solely to the phenomenon of the female serial killer.

It is important when studying serial crime that we gain some insight into the differing classifications offered. Serial murder is divided into a number of different typologies. The FBI classifies serial killers into two separate types. The disorganised killer and the organised killer. The disorganised killer is one that is psychotic, having lost touch with reality. They often believe that "voices" have instructed them to kill. The organised killer is a psychopathic offender. They have no conscious, they recognize right from wrong and understand the pain of their actions but this does not affect them from continuing their plight. In this scheme laid out by the Behavioural Science unit of the FBI (1985), killers are classed as disorganised when the offender is likely to leave evidence and weapons at a scene, try to depersonalise the victim and not use a vehicle. The organised killer tend to be far more violent than their counterparts, is likely to use restraints (to gain power and control over their victim), commit sexual acts with live victims and most likely uses a vehicle. The problem with the FBI’s two classifications is that there is no room for a mix between the two types and often serial killers do not snuggly fit into either one category or the other.

Holmes and Holmes (1996) classify serial killers into very different groups from that of the FBI. They classify them as, the missionary oriented, visionary, hedonistic and power/control-oriented. The missionary oriented killer try to rid the world of evil, they feel the need to eradicate a group of people such as prostitutes or blacks. The visionary killer feels compelled to kill by the devil or God. They are actively psychotic. The third group are hedonistic they gain pleasure from the actual killing. There are three subtypes under this heading. They are lust, thrill and comfort killers. The first two subtypes are similar in that they both have an integral connection between personal violence and sexual gratification. What distinguishes the thrill killer is that even though sexual abuse may take place, sexual gratification is not the main motivation - but rather to experience a high or a buzz through the act of murder. The comfort killer displays the rare motive of materialistic gains such as money, business or other financial considerations. (Fox and Levine, 1994) The final group is the power/control (fantasy) oriented they receive sexual gratification from complete dominance over their victims.

Although these classifications seem more comprehensive than the FBI’s definitions, and are clearly defined there is a large degree of overlap between the criteria’s which then poses problems and confusion and can render the definitions partially useless for investigators. Yet it is important to be able to have guidelines in which to work so that investigators know how to best use the available evidence at the scene of the crime. These classifications are used worldwide in an attempt to gain insight into the type of offender they are searching for. It is obvious the difference between other forms of homicide and serial murder is that the normal domestic type homicide is emotionally driven. Whereas the serial murderer is operating more through a mixture of fantasy, lust, power and psychological imbalance.

In the study of such a contentious area of homicide it is important for us to try and gain some background into similarities between serial killers behavioural make up. According to Cook & Hindman, (1999) serial killers grow up in dysfunctional families, often have a history of abuse and neglect that is either physical, psychological or sexual. Sears (1991) states that serial killers grow up surrounded by poverty and unemployment, a preoccupation with fantasy and murder and learned associations between violence and pleasure. According to Megargee, (1993) combinations of these factors lead to some persons engaging in serial murder. The important point here is that not all people who display such behaviour will end up as serial killers or any type of killer. It is also imperative to draw parallels with the domestic violence offender, who as it has been well documented may have suffered abuse as a child. (Fox & Levine, 1994) If a child is brought up in an abusive household then they are more likely to respond to stress with violence which can sometimes lead to homicide. Several researches such as Ressler, Burgess, and Douglas (1988), Norris (1988), Fox and Levine (1985 cited in McKenzie) and Wilson and Seaman (1990 cited in McKenzie) offer empirical data that link serial killers behaviourally. However most have only hinted at the possibility that certain factors in the childhood environment act as an incubator and exaggerate childhood behaviours and basic personality tendencies so that when adulthood is reached in the presence of specific disinhibitors, these already exaggerated tendencies run amok. (Mc Kenzie,1995) Another important factor mentioned by Ressler et al is the fact that many serial killers seem to have problems with relationships. That is their relationships to their families were often strained and sometimes non-existent, and many were not taught how to deal with other people. According to Ressler et al (1998) the early life attachments translate into a map of how the child will perceive situations outside the family. Therefore if the child is not taught to value one self and ones family they will therefore find it difficult to value the life of others. In other forms of homicide, childhood factors and early life attachments especially where power and violence are concerned can be linked to murderous behaviour latter in life. (Ressler et al, 1988)

Enforcing and maintaining the dominant form of masculinity is not only achieved through violence toward women but violence toward subordinates and marginalized groups. (Gregory & Lees, 1999) According to Hickey (1997) in terms of victim selection 62% of serial killers in his study targeted strangers exclusively and another 22% killed at least one stranger. One of the most brutal acts of serial murder is that it usually involves the killing of one person by another who is a stranger. (Seltzer, 1998) In homicide in general most victim offender relationships exist whereas in serial killing they most usually do not. While almost anyone is at risk of being a victim of a serial killer it is often the plain fact of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, yet they tend to prey on the most vulnerable in society such as prostitutes, drug users, skid row alcoholics, homeless vagrants, hitchhikers, runaways, children, women and elderly. Part of the vulnerability concerns the ease at which these individuals can be abducted or overtaken. (Fox & Levine, 1994). Children are obvious victims due to their naivety and their small size. Prostitutes are an obvious target due to their accessibility, and also due to the fact that they often will not be missed for days or weeks if they are missed at all. Another group classed as easy victims is that of women. It obviously is much easier to overpower women than men hence the much higher rate of female victims of serial crime. Again the underlying theme of power and control by men is prevalent. Although generally serial killers kill strangers there are those that know their victims. In 1832 Mary Ann Cotton knew all her victims in fact all of them were members of her immediate family. It is therefore important to recognize that apprehension is made all the more difficult due to the fact that not all serial killers follow the one pattern and although generally victims are selected from oppressed minority groups this is not always the case. It may be more appropriate to say that serial killers tend to hunt people who they believe they can easily control and take power over.

Since 1960 Australia has recorded nine known serial killers (Kidd, 1999) and this does not include others that have escaped apprehension. In a ten-year period according to the NHMP (National Homicide Monitoring Program) between the 1^st July 1989 and the 30^th June 1999 there have been three serial murders- these are Paul Denyer (The Frankston Serial Killer), Ivan Milat (The Backpacker Serial Killer) and the Snowtown serial murders. According to Kidd (1999), it is claimed that the number of serial murders in Australia for this time period is in fact three- Rodney Francis Cameron (The Lonely Hearts Killer), Paul Denyer and Ivan Milat. With these contrasting views it is therefore interesting to note that Egger (1997) and Kiger (1990) state that it is virtually impossible to measure with any degree of precision the prevalence of serial murder today and even less so to trace its long term trends. Jenkins (1996, cited in Conklin) concludes that the problem of serial crime is definitely nowhere near epidemic proportions. He suggests that the FBI has a vested interest in making the serial killer problem look worse than it actually is. He notes that the FBI claim intellectual ownership of the concept. This quite possibly is due to the fact that if this area is their area of expertise then such funding will be made available due to their "expert" knowledge. With such lack of agreement amongst academics, law enforcement agencies and government departments as to the prevalence of serial crime it is imperative and obviously necessary that more work be conducted between multidisciplinary teams responsible for analyzing this type of crime and to extend the limited amount of empirical research available.

Although in Australia serial murder is a statistically rare act of homicide it is a worrying factor for modern society. With the discovery of the eight bodies in a bank vault in Snowtown South Australia in 1999, public and media interest in serial murder in Australia has been refueled. There is a lack of comprehensive information about serial killing worldwide due to the fact that there is limited knowledge about the motives, methods and general mindset of serial killers. It is a very long process by the time a killer is apprehended, intensively interviewed, put on trial and sentenced and then the formal reporting completed. Add to this the dubious nature of self-report by the serial murderer especially with the capricious nature of such offenders and it becomes imperative that we focus energy on understanding and further researching the factors that attribute to the phenomenon of the serial killer.

The topic of serial murder has been misunderstood and glamorised by the media to an extent that makes it difficult to understand how we reduce its instance. The reader has omitted an important and intriguing topic in criminology and there is room for a section on serial killers that would create a more balanced approach to the topic of homicide and gender. Inclusion will raise awareness amongst potential criminologists of the myths surrounding serial killers and their demeanor. Even considering its rare occurrence the topic of serial killing would broaden the context of homicide and the factors mentioned throughout including dominance and gender, the background and typologies of serial killers and the need for a multidisciplinary approach. As stated by Douglas & Olshaker (1995), The journey into the mind of the violent offender remains an ongoing quest of discovery. Serial killers are, by definition "successful" killers who learn from their experience. We’ve just got to make sure we keep learning faster than they do.

Blundell, N. (1996). Encyclopedia of Serial Killers. London: PRC Kiln House.
Caputi, J. (1987). The Age of Sex Crime. London: The Womens Press.
Chappel, D. (1995). "How Violent is Australian Society?" In D.Chappell & S.Egger, (Eds.), Australian Violence: Contemporary Perspectives II. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology pp13-29.
Cook, P.E., & Hinman, D.L. (1999). Serial Murder in Lethal Violence: A Sourcebook on Fatal Domestic, Acquaintance Violence. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Dietz, M.L. (1986). "Killing Sequentially: Expanding the Parameters of the Conceptualisation of Serial and Mass Killers". In T.O’Reilley-Flemming, (Ed.), Serial and Mass Murder: Theory Research and Policy. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press.
Douglas, J., & Olshaker, M. (1995). Mindhunter: Inside the FBI Elite Serial Crime Unit. London: Heinemann.
Egger, S.A. (1984). "A Working Definition of Serial Murder and the Reduction of Linkage Blindness". Journal of Police Science and Administration, 12: 348-357.
Egger, S.A. (1997). The Killers Among Us: An Examination of Serial Murder and its Investigation.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Federal Bureau Of Investigations. (1985c). "Crime Scene and Profile Characteristics of Organised and Disorganised Murderers". FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 54(8): 25-28.
Fox, J.A., & Levin, J. (1994). Overkill: Mass Murder and Serial Killing Exposed. New York: Plenum.
Fox, J.A., & Levin, J. (1999). "Serial Murder Popular Myths and Empirical Realities". In M. Smith, & M.A. Zahn, (Eds), Homicide: A Sourcebook of Social Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Greenwood, K. (1996). The Thing She Loves: Why Women Kill? Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
Gregory, J., & Lees, S. (1999). Policing Sexual Assault. London: Routledge.
Hazelwood, R.R., & Douglas, J.E. (1980). "The Lust Murderer". FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 49: 1-5.
Hickey, E.W. (1991). Serial Murderers and Their Victims. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.
Hickey, E.W. (1997). Serial Murderers and Their Victims (2^nd edn). Belmont,CA: Wadsworth.
Holmes, R.M., & Holmes, S.T. (1996). Profiling Violent Crimes: An Investigative Tool (2^nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Holmes, R.M., & Holmes, S.T. (1998). Serial Murder (2^nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Jenkins, P. (1996). "The Social Construction of Serial Homicide". In J.E.Conklin (Ed.), New Perspectives in Criminology.Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Kellerher, D. & Kellerher, C.L. (1998). Murder Most Rare: The Female Serial Killer. Westport,Conn: Praeger Trade.
Kidd, P.B. (1999). Never To Be Released (Vol 2). Sydney: Harper Collins Publishers.
Kiger, K. (1990). "The Darker Figure of Crime: The Serial Murder Enigma". In S.A. Egger (Ed.), Serial Murder: An ElusivePhenomenon. New York: Praeger.
Mann, C.R. (1996). When Women Kill. Albany: State University of New York Press.
McKenzie, C. (1995). "A Study of Serial Murder". International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 39(1): 3-9.
Megargee, E.I. (1993). "Aggression and Violence." In H.E. Adams & P.B. Sutker. (Eds.), Comprehensive Handbook of Psychopathology. (2^nd edn), New York: Plunum Press.
Mitchell, W.E. (1996). "The Aetiology of Serial Murder: Towards an Integrated Model". University of Cambridge Paper London: Trinity Hall Nightingale Scholar in Mental Health Law.
Norris, J. (1988). Serial Killers: The Growing Menace. New York: Doubleday.
Petraitis, V. (1995). The Frankston Murders: The True Story of Serial Killer Paul Denyer. Victoria: Nivar Press
Polk, K. (1999). Males and Honor Contest Violence. Homicide Studies, 3(1): 6-29.
Prentky, R.A.,Burgess, A.W., & Rokous, F. (1989). "The Presumptive Role of Fantasy in Serial Sexual Homicide". American Journal of Psychiatry, 146:887-891.
Ressler, R.K., Burgess, A.W., & Douglas, J.E. (1988). Sexual Homicide: Patterns and Motives. New York: Lexington Books.
Sears, D.J. (1991). To Kill Again. Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources Books.
Seltzer, M. (1998). Serial Killers: Death and life in Americas Wound Culture. New York: Routledge.
Silverman R. & Kennedy, L. (1993). Deadly Deeds: Murder in Canada. Canada: Nelson Canada.
Wilson, P., Lincon, R., & Kocsis, R. (1997). "Validity, Utility and Ethics of Profiling for Serial Violent and Sexual Offences". Psychiatry, Psychology and the Law, 4: 1-11.