# data[].attributes.body
Enjoy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BEAUTIFUL MINDS OF SERIAL KILLERS SLIDES

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Many serial killings seem to be completely devoid of meaning or motivation on the part of the criminal. In actuality, however, there is great diversity in the needs and desires of serial killers that lead them to extinguish the lives of others. Sometimes, the act or process of murder can be an end in itself for them.

One aspect of popularly held beliefs and media stereotypes that often holds true is that most serial killers derive great satisfaction from the act of killing. The gratification they receive from the act of murder differentiates them from one-time murderers who kill incidentally-that is, to help commit or conceal another crime. Stated differently, serial killers have a chronic and overwhelming need to commit murder that distinguishes them from those who kill one time because it serves other criminal interests.

It may seem to be counterintuitive on the surface but many serial killers are actually insecure individuals who are compelled to kill due to a morbid fear of rejection. In many cases, the fear of rejection seems to result from having been abandoned by their mother in early childhood.

Infamous serial killers who were rejected or abandoned by their birth mothers include David Berkowitz, Ted Bundy and Joel Rifkin. Some serial killers such as Edmund Kemper are tormented, abused and even tortured by their birth mothers.

A neophyte serial killer who was traumatized as a child will seek to avoid painful relationships with other human beings as an adult. He will particularly seek to avoid painful relationships with those he desires or covets. Such fear of rejection may compel a fledgling serial killer to want to eliminate any objects of his affections. He may come to believe that by destroying the person he desires prior to entering into a relationship with them, he can eliminate the frightening possibility of being abandoned, humiliated or otherwise hurt by someone he loves, as he was in childhood.

As explained by the FBI in a 2005 report on serial homicide, a serial killer selects victims based on availability, vulnerability and desirability (1).

Availability is primarily determined by the lifestyle of the victim or circumstances in which he/she is involved that may provide the offender access for an attack. For example, a single female who regularly spends her evenings alone at home is available for a break-in attack by a serial predator.

Vulnerability is defined as the extent to which the victim is at-risk or susceptible to attack by the offender. A single female walking down the street at night is less vulnerable to attack if she is accompanied by a large dog.

Desirability is highly subjective and is described as the attractiveness or appeal of the victim to the offender. Victim desirability involves numerous factors related to the motivation of the offender and may include characteristics such as race, ethnicity, gender, age, body type or other specific criteria established by the serial killer.

At a symposium on serial homicide in 2005, the FBI and other experts in criminology and forensic psychology had an in-depth discussion about the motivations of serial killers. The attendees made a number of observations and recommendations for serial homicide investigations that are related to the motivations of the killer.

As presented by the FBI in Serial Murder: Multi-Disciplinary Perspectives for Investigators, the specific observations made by attendees at the symposium are outlined below (1).

The motive can be very difficult to determine in a serial murder investigation.

A serial murderer can have multiple motives for committing his/her crimes.

A serial killer's motive(s) can evolve both within a single murder and throughout the series of murders.

The classification of motivations should be limited to observable behavior and conditions at the scenes of the murders.

Even if a motive can be identified, it may not be helpful in identifying a serial murderer.

Utilizing investigative resources to discern the motive instead of identifying the offender can derail or bog down an investigation.

Investigators should not necessarily equate a serial murderer's motivation(s) with the level of injury.

Finally, regardless of the specific motive(s), most serial killers commit their crimes because they want to. The exception to this would be those few serial killers suffering from a severe mental illness for whom no coherent motive exists.

The attendees of the 2005 FBI symposium on serial murder suggested that broad, non-inclusive categories of motivation be utilized as guidelines for criminal investigation. They argued that such categories can assist law enforcement authorities in narrowing the pool of suspects in a serial homicide case. The attendees at the symposium identified seven general categories of motivation to be used as guidelines for investigative purposes.

The categories are not intended to be a complete measure of serial offenders, nor are they intended to comprise a theory of their motivation. As concisely reported by the FBI in 2005, they are listed below.

Anger is a powerful motivation in which the offender displays rage or hostility toward either a certain subgroup of the population such as the homeless or society as a whole.

Criminal enterprise is a motivation in which the offender benefits in status or monetary reward by committing murder that is drug, gang or organized crime-related. For example, murder may be perpetrated by a drug gang in order to eliminate its competition.

Financial gain is a motivation in which the offender benefits monetarily from killing that is not drug, gang or organized crime-related. A few examples of these types of crimes are comfort/gain killings, robbery-homicide or multiple killings involving insurance or welfare fraud.

Ideology is a motivation to commit murder in order to further the goals and ideas of a specific individual or group. Examples of these include terrorist groups or an individual(s) who attacks a specific racial, gender or ethnic group out of sheer hatred for the group.

Power/thrill is a motivation in which the offender feels empowered and/or exhilarated when he kills his victims. The act of killing is an end in itself.

Psychosis is a rare situation in which the offender is suffering from a severe mental illness and is killing specifically because of that illness. The condition may include auditory and/or visual hallucinations and paranoid, grandiose or bizarre delusions.

Sexually-based is a motivation driven by the sexual needs or desires of the offender. There may or may not be evidence of sexual contact present at the crime scene.

It is important to remember that regardless of the specific motive(s), serial killers are compelled to commit murder-that is, they do it because they want to and need to.
Dr. Scott Bonn is a criminologist, professor, and media expert.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Understanding What Drives Serial Killers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many serial killings seem to be completely devoid of meaning or motivation on the part of the criminal. In actuality, however, there is great diversity in the needs and desires of serial killers that lead them to extinguish the lives of others. Sometimes, the act or process of murder can be an end in itself for them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
January 20, 2020

The legal basis for firearm possession in the US is enshrined in the Second Amendment of the Constitution. But how are guns regulated? DW looks at who can buy and sell them - and how one loophole undermines gun control.

Gun control is one of the most divisive issues in American politics. With each mass shooting - defined as four or more victims having been killed indiscriminately - antagonism grows between both sides of the gun control argument.

Proponents of stricter gun regulations fear for their safety in a country where there is an average of 88 guns per 100 people, according to the 2011 Small Arms Survey. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence estimates that around 114,994 people are shot each year in the US. This includes murders, assaults, accidents, police intervention, suicide attempts and suicides.

Opponents of regulatory arguments, however, also fear a loss of safety. They argue that restricting the right to bear arms would leave citizens unable to protect themselves in their daily lives or, in a worst-case scenario, from a government turned against the people.

Though regulations vary from state to state, there are a few key conditions for obtaining guns in the US.
1. Is there a minimum age?
The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), which regulates firearms at the federal level, requires that citizens and legal residents must be at least 18 years of age to purchase shotguns or rifles and ammunition. All other firearms - handguns, for example - can only be sold to people 21 and older.

State or local officials may implement higher age restrictions but are not allowed to lower the federal minimum.

Read more: US gun control: 'Conservatives must say enough is enough'
2. Who's restricted from purchasing or possessing firearms?
Fugitives, people deemed a danger to society and patients involuntarily committed to mental institutions are among those who may not purchase firearms. People with prior felony convictions that include a prison sentence exceeding one year, or misdemeanors carrying sentences of more than two years, are also prohibited from purchasing firearms.

Federal law also blocks the sale of guns to people who have been found guilty of unlawfully possessing or using controlled substances within the past year. This includes marijuana, which, though legalized in many US states, remains illegal under federal law.

Other restrictions apply to people who have been issued restraining orders by courts to prevent harassment, stalking or threatening; people who have renounced their citizenship; dishonorably discharged military personnel; unauthorized migrants; and people temporarily visiting the US on nonimmigrant visas, for example as tourists.
3. Does the federal or state government regulate firearms?
The Second Amendment serves as the legal basis for the "right of the people to keep and bear arms."

Read more: German weapons firms find lucrative market in United States

Though state and local governments regulate whether residents may, for example, carry guns in public, laws regulating who may receive or possess guns are set out at the federal level.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), a division of the Department of Justice, administers the GCA. The ATF also regulates the standards for issuing licenses to gun vendors.

Shotguns, rifles, machine guns, firearm mufflers and silencers are regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934. The purchase of semi-automatic weapons is legal in most states, as are automatic weapons made before 1986.

Read more: NRA ad sparks uproar with call to 'fight' Trump opponents
4. Who may sell firearms?
Like handgun owners, dealers interested in obtaining a Federal Firearms License (FFL) must be at least 21 years of age. They must have premises for conducting business and must alert a local law enforcement official at the time of submitting their applications to the federal bureau that regulates firearms. Just like gun owners, they must fulfill the same criteria regarding their history of prior convictions and mental state. The license fee costs $200 (€170) for an initial three-year period and $90 for each subsequent three-year-long renewal.

Selling firearms online also falls under these regulations. Although the purchase may be paid for online, the gun itself must be shipped to a registered FFL holder, who then conducts the necessary background check before handing the firearm over to its owner.

However, the law is unclear on what constitutes selling guns for profit. Any individual may sell firearms without a license if his or her motive isn't to make profit for livelihood through repeated and regular sales.
5. Is a background check required to purchase a firearm?
Yes. The amendment to the 1968 Gun Control Act - known as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 - requires holders of FFLs to conduct a background check. Potential firearm purchasers fill out a federal form known as the ATF 4473, which checks for prior convictions and other red flags. FFL holders then use the information provided on the form in the background check.

States may decide whether the background check is carried out solely by the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) or a combination of the NICS and state agency information. Roughly 30 states rely solely on the NICS.

Estimated to take under 10 minutes by phone or online, the check gives the FFL holder an immediate answer: approve, delay or deny. A delay indicates the need for further research for three business days, after which point FFL holders can act at their own discretion if the research proves inconclusive.

The Brady law, however, does not apply to someone who is obtaining a firearm from an individual without an FFL.
6. Do states require permits to purchase firearms?
Only a dozen of the US's 50 states require purchase permits for handguns. Of those states, only three - California, Connecticut and Hawaii - require permits for the purchase of rifles and shotguns.
Read more: Las Vegas shooter converted guns to automatics with gadget 7. Do states require permits to carry firearms?
California, for example, requires applicants to pass a written test and enroll in a gun safety class to obtain purchase permits. States with this requirement do not recognize the "concealed carry reciprocity" policies of some states, which allow gun owners licensed in one state to bring their weapons to another.

Most states require permits to carry handguns. Concealed carry and open carry vary by state. Some states allow residents to carry handguns without permits.
8. What is the 'gunshow loophole'?
By contrast, virtually no state requires a permit to carry rifles and shotguns. Massachusetts and New Jersey require people carrying rifles and shotguns to bring along a form of ID or a firearms identification.

The law on selling, receiving and possessing firearms is clear. Yet not every individual providing the gun in a transfer requires an FFL, which in turn means that not every buyer is legally subject to a background check. This potentially enables guns to fall into the hands of users who might otherwise not be allowed to own a firearm.

According to the ATF, anyone can sell a gun without an FFL from their home, online, at a flea market or at a gun show as long as he or she is not conducting the sale as part of regular business activity. One example would be someone who sells a firearm from his or her personal collection. Others who are exempt include those giving guns as gifts. Only individuals whose "principal motive" is to make a profit via sale must obtain an FFL.

Commonly referred to as the "gunshow loophole," this ambiguity also explains how a purchase can occur without a background check - and without breaking the law. A 2017 survey by Harvard and Northeastern universities estimates that roughly one in five transactions occur without a background check.

A gun may also be purchased on behalf of a third party as long as it is a gift and as long as the recipient does not violate federal restrictions on gun ownership to the best of the gift giver's knowledge. The same applies to the general transfer of guns. Children younger than 18 may possess guns that were given to them by parents or guardians as gifts provided that they have written permission.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 facts about gun control in the US - DW - 01/20/2020

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The legal basis for firearm possession in the US is enshrined in the Second Amendment of the Constitution. But how are guns regulated? DW looks at who can buy and sell them - and how one loophole undermines gun control.

# data[].attributes.body
Article 8 - Pie Chart 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I recently came across some very interesting data on serial killings ... but it was in tabular/text form. This seemed like an invitation for me to create some graphs that make it easier to understand the data.

It seems many people have a morbid curiosity about serial killers. For example, some of the most popular shows on TV (such as Dexter, and Criminal Minds) focus on them. So when I found this data table on serial killings, I thought it would be interesting to 'bring it to life' with a graphical analysis.

Let's start with something simple - the number of victims per year, since 1900:

It was an interesting graph, but I was a bit suspicious about the number of victims appearing to increase since 1970. Of course, we know that the US population was much higher in the last 1/4 of the century than in the first part, so all other things equal, it makes sense that as population increases the number of serial killings would also increase. So I found some population data, and combined it with the serial killings data, and came up with the victims per capita. And that graph pretty much follows the same trends as the previous graph (which I found a bit surprising!).

Next, I thought it would be interesting to see how the victims were killed. I know that a lot of people like to 'bash' pie charts, but I think a pie chart is a fairly intuitive graphic to show this data in a way people can quickly understand. Looks like shoot, strangle, and stab (in that order) are the preferred methods of serial killers.

And what about some demographics of the victims? ... Were males or females more frequently victims, and does this vary by race? How about some more pie charts!

What about the ages of the victims? I think a histogram shows this very well:

And the geographical distribution? ... How about a map showing the number of victims in each state:

And, of course, it makes sense that states with larger populations (such as NY, FL, CA, TX) have larger number of serial killer victims ... so let's combine this with some population data and show the per capita victims in each state. This map provides quite a different picture, eh?!?

Question: Could we use this data to calculate the likelihood of being a victim of a serial killer, based on age/race/sex/location? What other factors might need to be considered?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I recently came across some very interesting data on serial killings ... but it was in tabular/text form. This seemed like an invitation for me to create some graphs that make it easier to understand the data. It seems many people have a morbid curiosity about serial killers.

# data[].attributes.body
Article 7 - Bar Chart 2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Back in the early 1990s, Dr. Mike Aamodt, then a forensic psychology professor at Radford University, started to collect and code data on serial killers. At the time, "there wasn't much out there," he says. "I wanted to change that."

Over a 25-year period, Aamodt and his students went through public records of serial murderer cases around the globe, collecting granular data on nearly 3,000 US serial killers and 10,000 victims. The cases, ranging in data from 1900 to present, each contain hundreds of variables, shedding eerie light on serial killers' motives and methodologies and giving us a specific idea of whom they most frequently target.

First, we'll explore why and how serial killers kill (according to public records); then we'll take a look at who the victims have historically been and where they tend to live. Ultimately, though, as we'll show, there isn't much to fear: Serial killers have declined by 85 percent over the past three decades.

Why do serial killers kill?

When we think of the serial killer in popular culture, figures like Ed Gein or John Wayne Gacy come to mind - troubled, often psychotic individuals who go on massive killing sprees dressed as clowns or eat their victims' flesh.

But the Serial Killer Database uses the FBI's official definition of serial killing (which is also the most common): "the unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender, in separate events." This includes not just typical folkloric serial killers like Charles Manson, but also gang members and organized criminals - people who frequently commit repeat murders without much publicity.

Aamodt and his researchers compiled and analyzed publicly available information - news clips, court reports, books - for thousands of these serial killers. Whenever a motive was specifically defined (through interrogation, investigation, or admission), they recorded it.

What they found is that the majority of serial killers simply kill for enjoyment.

Gang activity only accounts for 6.3 percent of all serial murders - though gang members often don't reveal their affiliation in interrogations or post-trial psychological evaluations. It is possible that many of them provided the more general response that they did it for money.

How do serial killers kill their victims?

Serial killers are often reputed to have repulsive killing techniques. For instance, Jeffrey Dahmer, who killed 17 young men in the 1970s and '80s, would drill holes in his victims' heads and inject them with acid before strangling them.

But historically, most serial killers have preferred "easier" methods. A review of 9,915 US serial killer victims reveals that nearly half were shot to death. Following this, 21.7 percent were strangled, 14.8 percent were stabbed, and 9.2 percent were bludgeoned with blunt objects. Less commonly, 145 victims were axed to death, 94 were drowned by force, and 63 were burned alive.

Interestingly, there is a correlation between a serial killer's murder method and what he or she scores on an IQ test. Murderers frequently use an insanity plea in court to avoid the death sentence, and are, at times, given IQ tests to gauge their mental capacity. Using IQs from these records, we can see a differentiation by murder method.

An IQ of between 85 and 100 is considered average in America. In general, criminals score half a standard deviation below that. But serial killers who concoct bombs average 140 - well into the realm of what is considered "superior."

Generally, the messier and more direct the murder method, the lower the IQ score.

Who are the victims?

Looking deeper into the Serial Killer Database data, we're also able to get a better idea of who these 9,915 victims are.

Gender-wise, victims are essentially split down the middle, with a slight lean toward women. (Note: There are naturally more women than men in the general US population, and this is only slightly more than proportional.)

Across race lines, two-thirds of serial killer victims are white. But when gauged with US Census figures of the general population, black people are by far the most overrepresented: They account for 13.3 percent of the US population but a whopping 24 percent of all victims.

Serial killers also prefer younger victims: About 18 percent of all victims fall under the age of 18, while just over 10 percent are over the age of 60.

After peaking at age 29, the chances of being murdered by a serial killer dramatically decrease in one's 30s, 40s, and 50s.

Of course, where you live also impacts your chances of being a serial killer victim: Certain states have much higher rates of repeat killings than others. The map below isn't perfect - the serial killer data spans from 1900 to present, and we used population data from the 2015 census - but it still gives us an idea as to where killers have most frequently struck historically.

Washington, DC, has, by far, the highest rate of victims, at 25 per 100,000. Distantly trailing - but still shockingly high - are Alaska (6.9) and Louisiana (6.4).

California has the most total victims (1,628), but it also has the largest population of any US state. South Dakota has the least, with just seven deaths in 116 years.

While the outer reaches of Alaska seem ripe for serial killers, America's other offshore state, Hawaii, is the safest place in the country with a per-100,000 figure of 0.7. New Hampshire is equally killer-free.

Good news: Serial killers are on the decline

There is a silver lining to all of this, which is that serial killers are not as potent as they once were.

Charting out the data over time, by decade, we see that instances of serial killers - that is, people who kill two or more people on two or more separate occasions - have been on the decline since the 1980s.

When looking at that massive rise from 1900 to 1960 above, keep in mind that the data is likely skewed, as serial murders were less frequently reported in the olden days, and older case files are harder to find. What's more shocking here is the massive drop in serial murders over the past four decades. Dr. Aamodt, who spearheaded the collection of this data, offers a few theories for this.

"One of the keys here is a change in parole laws - longer sentences, things like the three strikes rule," he says. "If you take a look at serial killers in our database prior to 1980, 22 percent had killed someone, gone to prison, been released, then killed again when they got out. You get a big reduction in that after 1980."

Aamodt also cites improved forensic science ("We're getting better at catching criminals after one murder instead of three or four," he says"), as well as a culture that generally engages in less risk-taking. It used to be acceptable to hitchhike or let a child ride her bicycle alone in a park; today, it is more difficult for serial killers to find vulnerable victims like this.

Breaking down serial killers by their number of total kills, we also see a tremendous decrease in "prolific" killers - or those who kill five or more victims.

Just 40 years ago, nearly one-third of all serial killers in the US got away with five or more murders before getting caught. Today, that figure is down to 13 percent - and nearly half get caught after two killings.

As Aamodt says, "That's good news any way you slice it."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What data on 3,000 murderers and 10,000 victims tells us about serial killers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Back in the early 1990s, Dr. Mike Aamodt, then a forensic psychology professor at Radford University, started to collect and code data on serial killers. At the time, "there wasn't much out there," he says. "I wanted to change that."

# data[].attributes.body
WORK IN PROGRESS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Deceitful and manipulative

John Wayne Gacy refused to take responsibility for the 28 boys buried beneath his house, even though he also once said that clowns can get away with murder. " I think after 14 years under truth serum had I committed the crime I would have known it," said the man the neighbors all claimed to like. "There's got to be something that would... would click in my mind. I've had photos of 21 of the victims and I've looked at them all over the years here and I've never recognized anyone of them."

Adult antisocial behavior

Gary Ridgeway pleaded guilty to killing 48 women, mostly prostitutes, who were easy prey and were rarely reported missing - at least not immediately. " I don't believe in man, God nor Devil. I hate the whole damned human race, including myself... I preyed upon the weak, the harmless and the unsuspecting. This lesson I was taught by others: Might makes right. "

Sign up to get INSIDER's favorite stories straight to your inbox.

Disclosure: Axel Springer is Business Insider's parent company.

More: Contributor People Contributor The Big Book of Serial Killers True Crime

Chevron icon
It indicates an expandable section or menu, or sometimes previous / next navigation options.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
An expert reveals the 12 key traits common in serial killers, and some of them might surprise you

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You may be comforted to learn that a lot of serial killers have characteristics that can help separate them from the rest of the public. While not all people who exhibit these traits are serial killers, most serial killers have these traits in common.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
anadian police have announced the discovery of more human remains on a property frequented by Bruce McArthur, an alleged serial killer believed to have murdered at least eight men in Toronto's gay community. A self-employed landscaper, McArthur allegedly buried the remains of some victims in flower planters. Most of his victims, all gay men, were recent immigrants of south Asian or Middle Eastern background. LGBT activists have accused the Toronto police of failing to take seriously years of reports of disappearances in the Toronto gay village.

The Guardian spoke with Peter Vronsky, a historian and journalist based in Toronto and the author of several books studying the history and psychopathology of serial killers. His latest, Sons of Cain: A History of Serial Killers from the Stone Age to the Present, will be released 14 August in the US and Canada and 16 August in the UK.

The book explores how our understandings of serial killers - called "monsters" before the advent of modern psychology - have changed over time, and considers answers to a difficult question: what, exactly, "makes" a serial killer?

John Wayne Gacy, who was responsible for 33 murders. Photograph: Tim Boyle/Getty Images

One of the oldest questions in criminology - and, for that matter, philosophy, law, theology - is whether criminals are born or made. Are serial killers a product of nature (genetics) or nurture (environmental factors)?
We don't quite know. Nothing has been isolated.

My basic argument is that it is intrinsic to the human survival mechanism that we have this capacity to repeatedly kill. Killers are anachronisms whose primal instincts are not being moderated by the more intellectual parts of our brain.

Perhaps it's not that serial killers are made, but that the majority of us are unmade, by good parenting and socialization. What remains behind is these un-fully-socialized beings with this capacity to attack and kill. And often that capacity is grafted onto a sexual impulse - aggression sexualized at puberty.

Many serial killers are survivors of early childhood trauma of some kind - physical or sexual abuse, family dysfunction, emotionally distant or absent parents. Trauma is the single recurring theme in the biographies of most killers.
Are there any cases of serial killers who had well-adjusted childhoods?
Most serial killer biographies are self-reported, so you are relying on what they tell you. That being said, there do seem to be some examples. Ted Bundy is a classic one. No one has really found any evidence of "trauma" in his childhood, in the dramatic, traditional sense. He did, however, grow up believing that his mother was his sister.

Mugshot of murder suspect Ted Bundy, 1980. Photograph: AP

We had a killer here in Canada who was the commander of an air force base. He was flying the equivalent of Air Force One - flying around the prime minister, visiting dignitaries - then suddenly in his 40s, a colonel, he commits two sexual homicides. He is a mystery. There is nothing in his childhood to explain his behavior. There is also the strangeness of the late age at which he started.

I am currently studying a serial killer called Richard Cottingham. I talked to him in prison last month. He comes from a nuclear family ... the father was there, the mother was there, and there is no clear history of trauma or abuse. It could be that there is something but he doesn't want to admit it. I really don't know.

But there is nothing in his past that obviously parallels the early lives of, say, Charles Manson or Henry Lee Lucas. When you read these killers' biographies it is no surprise they turned into what they did.
If killers are the products of childhood trauma, or underdeveloped brains, are they still "responsible" for their actions?
It's true that almost all serial killers suffered childhood trauma. But here's the problem: if 100 kids grow up in an abusive foster home, and one turns out to be a serial killer - what about the other 99? They grew up to be, well, maybe not all well-adjusted citizens, but certainly not serial killers. What is the missing X factor?

My sense is responsibility falls on the offender here. Serial killers choose to act on their compulsions.

During the first big wave of celebrity serial killers in the 1960s and 1970s, some defense lawyers tried to argue in court that serial killers are not guilty by reason of insanity, because an irresistible compulsion to kill is a form of temporary insanity. The legal definition of insanity is an inability to distinguish right from wrong and an inability to understand the consequences of an action. But serial killers are very aware of what they're doing. That's why they disguise themselves, hide evidence, leave the scene of the crime.

One can make the argument that serial killers suffer from psychopathy, that because they are psychopaths they have no sense of remorse or empathy and their decision-making process is faulty. Interestingly, however, not all serial killers are psychopaths, according to the Hare test, a psychiatric diagnostic - or at least don't test as such.
What exactly is psychopathy?
The number one trait of a psychopath is a lack of empathy. Others are a tendency to lie, a need for thrills - psychopaths become bored very quickly - and narcissism. But the lack of empathy is the biggest thing.

One common explanation is that psychopaths experience some kind of trauma in early childhood - perhaps as early as their infant state - and as a consequence suppress their emotional response. They never learn the appropriate responses to trauma, and never develop other emotions, which is why they find it difficult to empathize with others.

They grow up not knowing how to "feel", and learn instead how to manifest what they think are emotions or the correct appearances of emotion. They know the "mask" they should wear.
What do you make of Bruce McArthur, the alleged Toronto gay village killer arrested earlier this year?
In the case of serial killers, that's why there are individuals who can raise a family, be what most people would consider a good spouse and parent, and at the same time have secret second lives where they go out and kill strangers. They can compartmentalize.

Bruce McArthur is interesting because he was apprehended at such a late age. He is way beyond the statistical norm for when serial killers first kill - so either he has been killing for decades, and we have not yet identified his earlier victims, or he is some kind of new breed of serial killer; an evolution in that phenomenon - someone who kills very late in their life when most serial killers have already begun "retiring" because their testosterone is declining.
How common are same-sex serial killers?
If McArthur has been committing crimes since the 1970s or 1980s then this is going to be an extremely difficult investigation. Currently law enforcement are looking at his dating apps for evidence and to link him to more possible victims. But they didn't have that kind of stuff then.

There have been dozens of gay serial killers. Probably the most notorious were John Wayne Gacy and Jeffrey Dahmer. So that alone is not unusual.

There is obviously a lot less stigma about being gay today than there was in the 1960s or 1970s or even 1980s. Then, gay serial killers were sometimes more effective because both they and their victims were living a secret double life. They were already kind of acclimatized to surreptitious behavior - covering up what they are.
What about female serial killers?
Closeted people are still particularly susceptible to victimization by predators. If there are no witnesses or confidantes - family members and so on - able to link your disappearance to the killer, that gives the killer an advantage.

Roughly one in every five to six serial killers are female. There are significant differences in their psychopathology from male killers.

Aileen Wuornos at her trial in Florida, 1992. Photograph: Sipa Press/REX/Shutterstock

Research on female serial killers is difficult because they are fewer and harder to catch. Female serial killers have less tendency to leave bodies behind. They are quiet killers; they have longer killing careers. They are much better at it.

There is a less sadistic tendency. They tend not to torture their victim and they are less interested in mutilation. But the motivation is similar - the need for control over their victim. It's not sex, it's control, though they may assert it through sexual acts.

Aileen Wuornos is the classic example - a female serial killer in Florida. She worked as a prostitute and would kill her clients. A couple of documentaries have been made about her, and a feature film (Monster, with Charlize Theron). Here was a serial killer motivated by pure rage.
Is it true, as some have suggested, that serial killing is now on the decline? Or is it just less reported in the media?
The types of predation in which female serial killers engage are often an extension or perversion of gender roles. For example, the expectation that women are in nurturing roles, caring roles. You have a category of female serial killers with Munchausen syndrome by proxy - mothers killing children, nurses killing patients.

You know, it appears that we're arresting and apprehending less serial killers, and when we do apprehend them they have a much smaller victim list, per killer. So yes, there seems to be a decline in American serial killing. Either there are less serial killers or we have gotten better at catching them earlier.
Do you know of any examples of serial killers who have expressed remorse?
We have had huge breakthroughs in forensic technology, especially DNA science. Many of the serial killers who were arrested in the 1990s and 2000s were arrested for crimes committed earlier.
It seems like the more research there is on serial killers, the more we realize how little we know.
Sort of. They may reach an age where they think "I should be making amends". They may not feel it, but they think that they "ought" to. I know of an example of a guy who in several decades had only given one interview. He was approached by the daughter of one of his victims, and he completely opened up to her.

We are floundering. We are floundering in masses of information but very little knowledge coming out of that information. We seem to know less about serial killers now than we thought we did 20 years ago. We are only now realizing how little we know. That's partly because the more serial killer case studies we aggregate, the less clear the patterns become. We are starting to see all these anomalies.
This transcript has been edited and condensed for clarity.
As we as a society become more scientific and less philosophical it becomes more difficult for us to explain this kind of abnormal behavior. All that is left is the very human definition: evil. But what is that? It is not a term that can be tested or duplicated in the scientific sphere. It was easier when we just thought of them as monsters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
anadian police have announced the discovery of more human remains on a property frequented by Bruce McArthur, an alleged serial killer believed to have murdered at least eight men in Toronto's gay community. A self-employed landscaper, McArthur allegedly buried the remains of some victims in flower planters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There have been 220,000 unsolved murders in the U.S. since 1980. Are serial killers to blame? Here's everything you need to know:
How many serial killers are there?
Since 1900, there have been 3,000 identified American serial killers who've collectively killed nearly 10,000 people, says Dr. Michael Aamodt, who oversees the Radford University/Florida Gulf Coast University Serial Killer Database. The FBI defines a serial killer as someone who kills two or more people in separate events. About 32 percent of these killers, Aamodt says, did so for enjoyment (thrills, lust, and power); 30 percent for financial reward; 18 percent in anger; 6.3 percent to advance a criminal enterprise; and fewer than 1 percent because a cult put them up to it. Their favorite murder weapon was a gun (42 percent), although 6 percent preferred poison and 2 percent axes. About 52 percent were white, 40 percent black, and 6.7 percent Hispanic. Men outnumber women by a factor of 10. Samuel Little, a transient former boxer and career criminal serving time for two murders, was recently identified by the FBI as the most prolific serial killer in U.S. history, after he confessed to 93 killings between 1970 and 2005.

What makes a serial killer?
Probably a combination of genetics and experience. Research shows that certain genes can predispose people to violence. (One gene, particularly, the so-called warrior gene, is present in about 30 percent of the population and has been linked to increased aggression.) Many serial killers also experienced childhood trauma or early separation from their mothers. As a consequence of that trauma or separation, scientists believe, they learned to suppress empathy or suffered damage to the areas of the brain that control emotional impulses. Serial killers often are loners who fear all relationships and seek to control, to destroy other people to eliminate the possibility of another humiliating rejection. Prolific arsonist Robert Dale Segee, who is believed to have killed 168 and injured hundreds more by setting a fire at a Connecticut circus in 1944, grew up with a dad who punished him by holding his fingers over a candle flame. Jeffrey Dahmer, who killed, dismembered, and partially ate 17 boys and young men beginning in 1978, said he did so "not because I hated them, but to keep them with me." Gerald Stano, who killed at least 22 women beginning in the 1970s, compared killing people to "stepping on a cockroach." Little said he got sexual pleasure from strangling women with his bare hands, and that by taking their lives, he came to "own" them.

What role does society play?
The teeming, impersonal nature of the modern world is fertile soil for creating serial killers, experts say. Five hundred years ago, the average citizen lived in a small community, traveled rarely if at all, and might have come into contact with 100 "strangers" over the course of his lifetime. By comparison, modern urban dwellers live amid "a sea of strangers," providing the consistent, impersonal interactions and anonymity that are almost preconditions for serial killing. Those who've studied serial killers believe that many are at least partly motivated by the attention and fame that mass media can provide mass murderers. As Dennis Rader, the self-proclaimed "BTK killer" ("Bind them, torture them, kill them"), put it in a letter to a TV station, "How many people do I have to kill before I get a name in the paper or some national attention?" He murdered 10 people during the 1970s and '80s in Kansas.

How do they choose targets?
Serial killers often prey on the most marginalized members of society. Little, for one, managed to evade detection for so long by preying on prostitutes, drug addicts, and homeless women. As he told New York Times reporter Jillian Lauren, "I never killed no senators or governors or fancy New York journalists. Nothing like that. I killed you, it'd be all over the news the next day. I stayed in the ghettos." Earlier this year, Bruce McArthur pleaded guilty to murdering eight men in Toronto's Gay Village - many of them immigrants from South Asia or the Middle East who were not "out" to their families. Generally speaking, the majority of victims of serial killers are women (51.4 percent). African-American victims are over-represented (24 percent) relative to their proportion of the U.S. population (13 percent).

How many are active?
Data suggest that American serial killing peaked in the 1980s and has declined since then. The FBI says only 1 percent of murders today are committed by serial killers, and that it's harder for them to go undetected, because of DNA evidence, public cameras, stricter parole laws, and the use of databases. But Michael Arntfield, a retired police detective and author of a dozen books on serial killing, contends that the number of repeat killers active today is more likely between 3,000 and 4,000. He notes that the police "solve rate" for murders dropped from 91 percent in 1965 to only 61.6 percent in 2017, partly because mass killers are more sophisticated. Thomas Hargrove, who has created the nation's largest database of killings, also puts the number of active serial killers at greater than 2,000. "There are more than 222,000 unsolved murders since 1980," he said. "I'll say almost every major American city has multiple serial killers and multiple uncaught serial killers."

The century of mass killings
Many factors are credited with the growth in the number of serial killers during the 20th century. Some have cited the creation of the interstate highway system, which gave predators greater mobility and a vulnerable pool of victims - hitchhikers. Historian Peter Vronsky says the growth of cities and surge in suburbs "led to a lot of transience, a lot of mobility, a lot of broken families, which is where many of these people came from." But Vronsky also says the savagery of World Wars I and II might have contributed as well. He says there was a bump in active serial killers in the years immediately after the First World War and an even greater one after the Second. The wars, he said, were "far more vicious and primitive than we have been able to acknowledge." Vronsky believes traumatized soldiers who had been desensitized to taking lives either became killers themselves or had a hand in raising them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There have been 220,000 unsolved murders in the U.S. since 1980. Are serial killers to blame? Here's everything you need to know: How many serial killers are there? Since 1900, there have been 3,000 identified American serial killers who've collectively killed nearly 10,000 people, says Dr. Michael Aamodt, who oversees the Radford University/Florida Gulf Coast University Serial Killer Database.

# data[].attributes.body
Article 2 - Revealing The Topic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ted Bundy --> <--Jeffrey Dahmer

The term 'serial killer' strikes fear deep into the hearts of most. However it is often thought that fear is what drives some curiosities, thus finding it appropriate to understand why serial killers commit horrific acts of violence repetitively. It has been found that many serial killers encompass similar emotional development issues. They also tend to be above-average intelligence wise, and in some ways it is as if killing acts as a drug for some of these men. Many theories of crime and deviance correlate to the actions of serial killers. Studies of known serial killers have unveiled similarities between them as early as infancy. Infancy, childhood and relationships with one's mother are often among the key parallels of serial killers (Vronsky 2004).

Infancy is one of the most significant stages in the development of the human. Emotionally, infancy is crucial to the proper development of the adult personality (Vronsky 2004). The first twelve months are especially critical to the development of emotions such as remorse and affection. If a child does not receive adequate attention and physical touch during this time period they may suffer substantial personality disorders in the future (Canter 2005). In fact, there may be signs that the child has a psychopathic personality by the age of 2 (Vronsky 2004). The infant develops a sense of only itself. This is indicated by the absence of a range of emotions such as sympathy, remorse, and affection (Leyton 1987). Keeping in mind the idea that infant bonding is imperative to personality development, it is no surprise that a common characteristic of serial killers is that they were adopted (Leyton 1987). This may imply that as infants serial killers such as, David Berkowitz, Joel Rifkin, and Kenneth Bianchi did not receive proper attention as they were given up by their biological mothers for adoption during a vital period in their lives.

As does infancy, early childhood is key to the formation of a serial killer. Commonly, serial killers were isolated from their peers as children (Vronsky 2004). Many serial killers suffered from weight problems, stutters and learning problems such as dyslexia (Moesch 1998). Due to bullying, many of these serial killers began harboring "secret aggressive fantasies" (Vronsky 2004). As stated by David Berkowitz also known as the Son of Sam, "It was a mysterious force working against me. I felt bothered and tormented, 'Die Schmutz' [Yiddish for 'the dirty one']." (Vronsky 2004). It is clear that aggression begins in early childhood. Loneliness, as illustrated, may lead to the evolution of fantasies as these 'serial killers in- the- making' are frequently alone.

Another common characteristic among serial killers is their relationship with their mother. The mothers of these 'monsters' tend to breed men that hate females (Moesch 1998). The mothers may be over controlling, overprotective, physically abusive and emotionally abusive (Moesch 1998). According to one psychologist, Sigmund Freud, males try to reach autonomy with their mother. If the child is unsuccessful this will result in rage (Moesch 1998). Many feminists disdain the idea of the mother assisting in the creation of a serial killer. Feminists argue that it is just another way for men to blame women for their downfalls, somewhat of a 'blame it on the mother" scenario (Moesch 1998). This notion is empirically supported to an extent however as 66% of known serial killers were raised with the mother as the dominant figure (Moesch 1998).

Childhood trauma has also been linked to serial killers. Studies have revealed a number of significant statistics supporting the idea that mental and physical trauma may have long lasting effects upon an individual (Aynesworth 1999). 42% of convicted serial killers suffered from physical abuse as children 74% suffered from psychological abuse (Aynesworth 1999). Sexual abuse also seemed to be a prominent characteristic among serial killers as 35% witnessed sexual abuse and 43% were sexually abused themselves (Aynesworth 1999). Another form of physical trauma linked to serial killers is head trauma. 29% of serial killers were found to be 'accident prone children' (Aynesworth 1999). The compilation of these factors leads many sociologists to view psychopathic behavior as the brain's defense mechanism (Aynesworth 1999).

The emphasis upon infancy and early childhood may align serial killers with the Biological Trait Theories. These theories focus upon biological conditions that may control human behaviors. Neurophysiology is the study of brain function. It has uncovered neurological and physical abnormalities that may begin as early as the prenatal stage in some humans. There have been links between the impairment of executive brain function and aggression through such research (Aynesworth 1999). Many of the serial killers discussed have been labeled with some sort of neurological disorder. Thus, these repetitive serial killers may just be reacting to chemicals and hereditary factors in their brains rather than on pure evil.

Another Criminological theory that may apply to serial killers is the Psychodynamic theory. According to Sigmund Freud the development of the unconscious personality early in childhood will influence behavior for the rest of one's life. In short, negative experiences act as" residue" from early childhood. Freud believes that the human develops, early in life, three aspects of their personality. These include the id, the ego and the superego (Seltzer 1995). The id is considered to be primitive, supplying unconscious drives for food and sex. The ego is formed as sort of a guide to remain aligned with societies norms. Finally the superego develops incorporating values and morals. Thus, serial killers seem to be overwhelmed by their id. This would explain why people such as David Berkowitz would become a serial killer. He did not receive proper care as an infant and child, most likely due to his adoption, thus he was negatively affected into adulthood. According to the psychodynamic theory crime occurs when a person displays a weak ego. In short, serial killers seem to be manifesting their feelings of oppression from childhood in the form of brutal murders.

There is another theory in regards to serial killers receiving much attention in the criminological world. The Organized/Disorganized Typology of serial killers was developed by special agents of the FBI (Canter 2004). This dichotomy was developed in somewhat of an academic version of the diffusion of benefits, as the agents were examining lust and sexual sadistic murders (Canter 2004). The theory suggests that serial killers will fall into one of two subsets: organized or disorganized offenders. Through the evaluation of the crime scene, victims and forensic evidence it is possible to conclude personality and behavioral characteristics (Canter 2004).

According to this theory the organized offender is thought of as leading an organized, average life. He is also thought to have average to above average intelligence, skilled employment and he is socially competent. These characteristics are deciphered from the crime scene left by an "organized offender". The crime scene of such an offender suggests that the killer planned his attack, bringing a weapon with him as well as bringing it with him when he leaves. The organized serial killer is also careful not to leave blood and finger prints behind. The organized serial killer is thought to be killing as some sort of reaction to a stressful event (Canter 2004).

In contrast to the organized serial killer there is the disorganized serial killer according to this theory. The disorganized killer leaves the crime scene just as the name suggests; in disarray. The disorganized offender is likely to leave blood, fingerprints and the murder weapon behind (Canter 2004). The killing is thought to be opportunistic and often occurs close to where the offender lives (Canter 2004). Characteristically, the disorganized killer is thought to be socially inadequate and have below-average intelligence. They are believed to struggle with maintaining social relationships (Canter 2004). This aspect of the organized/disorganized theory is somewhat similar to the idea of the social control theory. This theory also states that limited stakes in conventional society may lead to criminal behavior.

The psychology of the serial killer is intriguing yet frightening. The decay of these offenders' personalities begins at infancy for many and continues through childhood and into adulthood. The serial killer tends to be neglected during significant stages of infancy, where in which the development of the human personality begins. As these offenders enter childhood they are still at a disadvantage socially, often as a result of abuse and parental issues. Serial killers often lack self control, as well as other critical characteristics of a law abiding citizen. It seems as if socialization plays a large roll in the formation of these monsters. A number of other criminological theories can be applied to the serial killer in some form, however there are still anomalies. The Biological Trait Theories, Psychodynamic theory, and the Organized/Disorganized theory all attempt to explain the inexplicable actions of serial killers. The biological trait theories apply as there is great emphasis on infancy and childhood emotional growth. The psychodynamic theory applies as well as these men display actions that seem to be driven by their id personality. Lastly, the organized/disorganized theory attempts to conclude personality and behavioral characteristics from crime scene investigation.

There is no concrete theory to explain neither the psychology nor the actions of serial killers, however there are a great deal of criminologists researching the topic. These researchers are attempting to better understand and deter such crime. The phenomenon of Serial killings date back to persons such as Jack the Ripper in 1887 and have continued into the present with such offenders as Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, and David Berkowitz. Through criminological and sociological research perhaps a better understanding of serial killers will develop, thus producing a way to deter such criminal actions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ted Bundy --> <--Jeffrey Dahmer The term 'serial killer' strikes fear deep into the hearts of most. However it is often thought that fear is what drives some curiosities, thus finding it appropriate to understand why serial killers commit horrific acts of violence repetitively.

# data[].attributes.body
Article 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The world has known many serial killers. The list of such people who have committed inhumane crimes is endless. But then there are some who have actually stolen the spotlight for the hideous crimes committed against humanity. Here are 20 most evil and notorious serial killers the world has ever seen:

1. The Zodiac Killer

The killer fashioned this name for himself in taunting letters he sent to the Bay Area Press. He left ciphers to be decoded and out of the four he sent, only one was definitely solved. The killer operated in California in the late 1960s and early 1970s. His last letter said: Me- 37 and SFPD (San Francisco Police Dept.)- 0. He claimed to have killed 37 victims but the newspapers confirmed only 7. The case file is still open.

2. Donald Henry Gaskins: The Hitchhikers' Killer

Gaskins has claimed to have killed between 80 to 90 people by torturing and mutilating them. He started killing in 1969, picking up hitchhikers on the coastal highways of the American South. A criminal associate witnessed him killing two young men and confessed to the police. He was sentenced to death which was later turned to life imprisonment without any parole. Gaskins added another murder to his name and became the only man to have ever killed an inmate on death row.

3. Tsutomu Miyazaki: The Human Dracula

He got more names due to his hideous acts. Some of them were The Otaku Murderer, The Little Girl Murderer or Dracula Miyazaki. The reason for this being that he abducted little girls, killed them and indulged in sexual activities with their corpses. On one occasion, he not only drank the victim's blood but ate her hand as well. He also preserved body parts as trophies and sent postcards to the families describing the murder. His father committed suicide and Miyazaki was hanged in 2008, aged 45.

4. Ted Bundy: The Crazy Necrophile

Ted Bundy was an American serial killer, kidnapper, rapist, and necrophile. He operated in various states in the USA and confessed to killing 30 women. He revisited crime scenes and indulged in sexual acts with the corpses. Bundy decapitated at least 12 victims and kept their heads as trophies in his apartment. Aged 42, Bundy died on the electric chair in 1989. His own defence attorney said, "Ted, was the very definition of heartless evil."

5. Jack the Ripper aka Whitechapel Murder

The real killers or killer were never identified. The name came into being because the victims had organs missing and judging by procedure the killer seemed to have surgical experience. Jack the Ripper who was later believed to be a single person killed female prostitutes in the slums of London between 1888-91.

6. Luis Garavito: The Beast

Also dubbed by the media as the Le Bestia (The Beast), the Colombian is probably one of the world's worst serial killers. He confessed to the torture, rape and murder of 147 young boys. But the number is believed to be over 300. He was found guilty on 139 counts, which should amount to 1,853 years in prison. But Columbian law limits it to 30, which is what he was sentenced to in 1999. He may be released earlier for cooperation and good behaviour.

7. Ahmad Suradji: The Sorcerer

The cattle-breeder from Indonesia admitted to killing 42 girls and women between 1986 to 1997. As a part of his ritual, he used to bury them waist deep. Bodies were found in a sugarcane field with their heads facing his house, which he believed would give him more power. Suradji was sentenced to death by a firing squad in 2008.

8. Alexander Pichushkin: The Chessboard Killer

He was also known as the 'Chessboard Killer' and the 'Bitsa Park Maniac'. His targets were homeless men whom he lured to his house with vodka. He is believed to have killed 49 people, most of them with repeated hammer blows to their heads and inserted a vodka bottle into the gaping skull wound. He initially said he wanted to complete the number of squares on a chessboard and kill 64 people. Also, it is believed that he was in competition with another Russian serial killer, Andrei Chikatilo, who was convicted in 1992 for 53 killings. It was the very same year Alexander started killing.

9. Andrei Chikatilo: The Butcher

Andrei, the Butcher of Rostov, said, "When I used my knife, it brought psychological relief. I know I have to be destroyed. I was a mistake of nature." He was responsible for sexually assaulting, killing and mutilating 53 women and children between 1978 and 1990 in Russia. After being captured in 1992, he was ordered to be killed by a firing squad in 1994.

10. Charles Edmund Cullen: The Angel Of Death

Cullen worked as a nurse in many hospitals but kept switching jobs as he was fired for suspicious behaviour from many of them. He confessed to murdering 40 elderly patients in New Jersey from 1984 to 2003. He did this by poisoning his patients to death with unprescribed medication. He stated that he wanted to relieve the patients from their suffering much like an angel would. Experts say he had more than 300 victims. Cullen has been imprisoned for life.

11. Patrick Wayne Kearney: The Trash Bag Killer

Also called the Trash Bag Killer, he operated between 1975 -1977. Kearney had a high IQ but once captured, he confessed to 32 murders of homosexual men. Kearney would dump their bodies along California highways and wrapped them in trash bags thus earning the name. He was convicted of 21 murders, but was sentenced to life because of his confession.

12. Dennis Raider: BTK Murderer

Between 1974 and 1991, Dennis Raider murdered 10 people in Wichita, Kansas. He even sent letters to police taunting them under his alias name BTK which stood for 'Bind, Torture, Kill'. His technique was to stalk his victims before breaking into their homes, binding their limbs and finally strangling them. He disappeared in 1988, but remerged in around 2005 when he sent a floppy disc to the press which helped in tracing him. Rader confessed to his crimes and is serving 10 consecutive life sentences with the earliest release date possible on February 26, 2180.

13. John George Haigh: Acid Bath Murderer

John George Haigh was also known as the 'Acid Bath Murderer' and operated during the 1940s. He was convicted for the murders of 6 people, although he claimed to have killed 9. He was a professional conman, who lured wealthy people by charm and deceit, into to a warehouse where he shot them. Later he would dissolve their bodies in sulphuric acid then forge papers to sell their possessions and collect their life savings. He was sentenced to death and hanged in 1949.

14. Paul Knowles: The Casanova Killer

Also known as the Casanova Killer, Knowles used his charm into making victims believe him and later killed them. He killed a total of 18 people, although the count might be more. His victims included men, women and children. The man from Florida was eventually killed by an FBI agent in 1974 when he was trying to escape.

15. William Bonin: The Freeway Killer

Bonin was also known as the 'Freeway Killer'. Between 1979 and 1980, he raped, tortured and murdered at least 21 young men. Bonin would dump their bodies along freeways in South California. After being convicted for 14 of his killings, he was executed by lethal injection in 1996. His sadistic side was still seen during his prison sentence where he corresponded with many of his victims' families about how their children reacted to his torture.

16. Aileen Wuornos: The Monster

Her story allowed Charlize Theron to win an Academy Award. She played Aileen in the 2003 movie, 'Monster'. While working as a prostitute, Aileen killed seven men in Florida for their money and confessed to shooting them, claiming all of them had either raped or attempted to rape her. She died in 1992 by lethal injection.

17. Jeffrey Dahmer: The Milwaukee Cannibal

Jeffrey Dahmer was responsible for dismembering 17 men and boys between 1978 and 1991. Dahmer also indulged in necrophilia and cooking body parts of his victim, then eating them. He was eventually caught after a prospective victim managed to overpower him. Dahmer was sentenced to 15 terms of life imprisonment in 1992. But he was beaten to death by a fellow prisoner at the Columbia Correctional Institution two years later.

18. John Wayne Gacy: The Burial King

Gacy operated between 1972 and 1978 in Chicago, Illinois. He sexually assaulted and murdered 33 teenage boys and young men. Gacy would lure his victims to his home with the promise of work or money before murdering them by strangulation using a tourniquet. He buried 26 of his victims in the crawl space under his house and later disposed the bodies off in the Des Plaines River. Convicted of 33 murders, Gacy was sentenced to death and spent 14 years on death row before he was executed by lethal injection on May 10, 1994.

19. Tommy Lynn Sells: The Brutal Texan

Tommy Lynn Sells is perhaps the most dangerous Texan in history. He claimed to have killed at least 70 people. He brutally murdered people between 1985 and 1999 including stabbing a 13-year-old girl 16 times. Sells broke into the bedroom of a 10-year-old girl, stabbing her and left her to die. But despite her injures, she managed to survive and gave a detailed description of Sells to the police. He was sentenced to death & remains on death row in a high security prison in Texas.

20. Pedro Rodriguez Filho: The Brazilian Maniac

Arrested in 1973, Pedro was later convicted in 2003 for the murder of at least 71 people and was then sentenced to 128 years imprisonment. He was only 14 when he committed his first killing. He wreaked havoc on local drug dealers, in revenge for his girlfriend's killing while he was imprisoned. In prison, he even executed his own father, who was also serving time for murder. Filho went onto kill at least 47 inmates while imprisoned. His continued killings have led to his sentence to be increased to 400 years imprisonment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
20 Of The Most Notorious Serial Killers The World Has Ever Seen

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The world has known many serial killers. The list of such people who have committed inhumane crimes is endless. But then there are some who have actually stolen the spotlight for the hideous crimes committed against humanity. Here are 20 most evil and notorious serial killers the world has ever seen: 1.