Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (2009) 106–114

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Aggression and Violent Behavior

Becoming the victim: Beyond sadism in serial sexual murderers

James L. Knoll a,⁎, Robert R. Hazelwood b
a
Director of Forensic Psychiatry, SUNY Upstate Medical University, United States
b
Academy Group, Inc., Sr. Vice President, Manassas, Virginia, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The behavior and characteristics of sexually sadistic serial murderers have been described primarily in
Received 17 November 2008 relation to their paraphilic arousal to the control and torture of their victims. Sadistic sexual murderers who
Received in revised form 9 December 2008 demonstrate both sadism and masochism have been described, but less is known about this type of
Accepted 15 December 2008
offender. This article will review a number of hypotheses proposed to explain these behaviors. Next, the
Available online 8 January 2009
authors describe two cases demonstrating a separate phenomenon in which the offender assumes the
Keywords:
identity of the victim that has been tortured to enhance his sexual gratification. It is proposed that these
Sexual sadism cases represent a grandiose form of sadism in which the offender extends his control of the victim beyond
Serial murder life and death. This form of sadism will be distinguished from sadomasochism, and its possible implications
Grandiosity will be discussed.
Introjection © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Sexual sadism and sexual masochism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

1.1. Sadism, masochism and the antisocial spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
2. Omnipotence, grandiosity and control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
2.1. Omnipotence and grandiosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
2.2. Control as the core of sadism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
3. Masochism and the sexually sadistic serial murderer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
3.1. Trauma-related theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
3.2. The cognitive distortion — implicit theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
3.3. The substitute victim hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
3.4. The vicarious enhancement hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
3.5. The addictive tolerance model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
3.6. The grandiose sadism theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
4. Case examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
4.1. James M. DeBardeleben. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
4.1.1. Audiotape transcript of DeBardeleben victim “Becky” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
4.2. Discussion of DeBardeleben case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
4.3. Dennis Rader (aka “BTK”) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
4.3.1. Rader victim A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
4.3.2. Rader victim B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
4.4. Discussion of Rader case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
6. Summary points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jknoll4@earthlink.net (J.L. Knoll).

1359-1789/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.avb.2008.12.003
 J.L. Knoll, R.R. Hazelwood / Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (2009) 106–114
“The central impulse is to have complete mastery over another
person…to become the absolute ruler over her, to become her
god…” (Hazelwood & Michaud, 2001).
— James Mitchell “Mike” DeBardeleben
The sexually sadistic serial murderer (SSSM) has been described as
the most violent and cruel type of serial offender (Gratzer & Bradford,
1995). To date, most descriptive studies have focused on their
paraphilic arousal to the control and torture of their victims (Warren,
Hazelwood, & Dietz, 1996). Only relatively recent work has begun to
focus on an apparent subset of SSSMs who demonstrate both sadism
and masochism during their offenses (Hill, Habermann, Berner, &
Briken, 2006; Myers et al., 2008). This article will briefly review the
concepts of sexual sadism and sexual masochism, as they relate to the
SSSM. The cases of James Mitchell “Mike” DeBardeleben and Dennis
Rader (the “BTK” killer) will be discussed, drawing attention to specific
offense and post-offense behaviors suggesting that these men
assumed the identity of their victims for the purpose of enhancing
their psychosexual gratification. A novel hypothesis will be put forth
to explain the underlying psychological motives for this behavior. It
will be suggested that the behavior demonstrated by these men
represents a grandiose form of sadism, allowing the offender a control
of the victim that extends beyond the corporeal.
1. Sexual sadism and sexual masochism
Although poorly understood, the phenomenon of SSSMs demon-
strating sexual arousal to masochistic acts has been described long
ago. In the 1920's, the SSSM Albert Fish reported obtaining sexual
pleasure from inserting needles into his groin and scrotum (Newton,
1990). In the late 1950's, Harvey Glatman, perhaps the first serial
murderer to take pictures of his victims, enjoyed the practice of
autoerotic asphyxiation (Everitt, 1993). However, before examining
what little is known about SSSMs who enjoy sexual masochism, a brief
overview of our understanding of sexual sadism is required.
It may come as a surprise that our scientific understanding of
sexual sadism has not been dramatically enhanced since the time of
Krafft–Ebing and Freud. This is likely due to the difficulties inherent in
defining and measuring sexual sadism (Yates, Hucker, & Kingston,
2008). Definitional problems persist, with one example being the
substantial differences between the International Classification of
Diseases (ICD-10) and DSM-IV-TR definitions. The differences would
seem representative of the definitional confusion present in the
literature on sadism and masochism generally (Federoff, 2008). The
ICD-10 does not give separate definitions for sexual sadism and sexual
masochism. Rather, it provides one definition for sadomasochism: “A
preference for sexual activity that involves bondage or the infliction of
pain or humiliation. If the individual prefers to be the recipient of such
stimulation this is called masochism; if the provider, sadism. Often an
individual obtains sexual excitement from both sadistic and maso-
chistic activities,” (World Health Organization, 1992). The ICD-10
definition has been justifiably criticized as vague and not well
supported by research (Reiersol & Skeid, 2006).
In contrast, the DSM-IV-TR gives two separate definitions for
sexual sadism and sexual masochism, as noted in Table 1 (American
Psychiatric Association, 2000). Added confusion may be attributable
to a failure to clearly separate vastly different populations when
studying sexual sadism and sexual masochism (Berner, Berger, & Hill,
2003). For example, generalizations about these diagnoses that merge
data from both forensic and general psychotherapy patients are likely
to lead to confusion. Some researchers believe that the lack of clarity
and inadequate scientific standards should prompt a substantial
reform of these diagnoses (Reiersol & Skeid, 2006). While these
diagnostic issues create some confusion, it is clear that the sexual
107
Table 1
Sexual Sadism (DSM-IV-TR)
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies,
sexual urges, or behaviors involving acts (real, not simulated) in which the psychological
or physical suffering (including humiliation) of the victim is sexually exciting to the
person.
B. The person has acted on these sexual urges with a nonconsenting person, or the sexual
urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.
Sexual Masochism (DSM-IV-TR)
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies,
sexual urges, or behaviors involving the act (real, not simulated) of being humiliated,
beaten, bound, or otherwise made to suffer.
B. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or
impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.
sadism seen in serial murderers stands in distinction to the sexual
sadism between consenting adults that would not be considered
criminal.
The variant of sexual sadism seen in serial murderers is at the
extreme end of the spectrum. Such individuals may engage in torturing
victims to the point of death to obtain the “pleasure in complete
domination” over them (Dietz, Hazelwood, & Warren, 1990). This
article will focus on the sexual sadism and sexual masochism seen in
SSSMs. Describing what would be considered a forensic population,
Krafft–Ebing believed that the root motivation for sadism was a desire
for “unlimited mastery,” which may be combined with eroticism in
certain circumstances (Grubin, 1994a,b; Krafft-Ebing, 1965). In the past
several decades, studies of sexual sadists have found certain
commonalities. In a study of 20 SSSMs, it was found that they engaged
in significant planning of their offenses, kept victims in captivity, and
subjected them to bondage, torture, and a variety of painful sexual acts.
The SSSMs ultimately murdered their victims by strangulation,
gunshot, blunt force, or stabbing (Warren et al., 1996). The sexual
sadist “fantasizes about, and often engages in, the torture and
humiliation of innocent victims for his own sexual pleasure,” (Kirsch
& Becker, 2007). Thus, the presence of sexual sadism is generally
believed to enhance the sex offender's risk of recidivism (Berner et al.,
2003; Stone, 2005). The SSSM may also be further characterized by
multiple paraphilias and schizoid personality traits. When offenders
with a single sexual homicide victim were compared to those with
multiple victims, it was found that the multiple murderers more
frequently had sexual sadism, voyeurism, and schizoid personality
disorders (Hill, Habermann, Berner, & Briken, 2007).
Men who engage in both consenting sexual behaviors (e.g., with
wives and/or girlfriends) and nonconsenting criminal sexual behaviors
(e.g., with stranger victims) are an understudied population. In a study
of 20 women who were the wives or girlfriends of sexually sadistic
men, it was found that these women were subjected to chronic
physical, psychological, and sexual torture (Warren & Hazelwood,
2002). In as much as these women can be said to have “consented” to
the sexual behavior, it could not be considered criminal in the legal
sense. However, several of the sadistic men were also violent sexual
offenders outside their consensual relationships. Four of the men had
committed murder, and two of them could be classified as serial killers.
A comparison of the sexually sadistic behaviors acted out against
the consenting partners and the known murder victims suggested
that the killers had “rehearsed” the sexually sadistic behaviors on their
compliant partners.
Turning to sexual masochism, there is a similar lack of clarity and
paucity of forensic research data to draw upon. Some have taken the
view that sadism and masochism are simply different expressions of one
paraphilia. Alternatively, it has been suggested that sexual masochism
may be viewed not as a derivative of sadism, but as a means of “escaping”
from painful or stressful self-awareness (Baumeister,1988). According to
this theory, the purpose of sexual masochism may be likened to
intoxication in terms of its ability to assist the subject's escape from too
108 J.L. Knoll, R.R. Hazelwood / Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (2009) 106–114
much self-awareness, which he finds distressing and aversive. In
contrast, some may prefer the sadistic role out of a desire to experience
enhanced feelings of self-worth (Baumeister, 1989). Enhanced self-
esteem in this sense would involve the offender's powerful feelings of
potency and control, while the victim must regard him as a “formidable
individual,” (Cross & Matheson, 2006). Thus, the victim's responses act
to reinforce the sadist's sense of personal power and grandiosity.
There are very few studies examining the issue of precisely how
many sexual sadists are also sexual masochists. In a study of sex
offenders, it was found that 18% of sadists could also be classified
as masochists (Abel, Becker, Cunningham-Rathner, Mittelman, &
Rouleau, 1988). More en point, when 61 sexual murderers with sexual
sadism were compared to 105 sexual murderers without sexual
sadism, significant differences were found (Hill et al., 2006). Nine
offenders (14.8%) with sexual sadism were also diagnosed with sexual
masochism. Sexual masochism was not found at all in the non-sexual
sadism group. In addition, the sexual sadists had higher levels of
childhood physical abuse, isolation in childhood, multiple sexual
homicide, previous rape, and long duration of their homicidal acts.
Thus, it appears that SSSMs are not only a very distinct group, but also
the group may also contain within it a smaller subgroup distinguished
by sexual masochism.
1.1. Sadism, masochism and the antisocial spectrum
A high incidence of psychopathy (90%) has been found among
sexual sadists (Kirsch & Becker, 2007). When sexual sadism is co-
morbid with psychopathy, the offender's crimes may be particularly
egregious. The original concept of psychopathy was introduced by
psychiatrist Philippe Pinel at the turn of the 19th century (Pinel, 1801).
He described general characteristics of these individuals, such as
impulsive violence, that occurred in the absence of any appreciable
deficits in intellect or cognition. In 1941, psychiatrist Hervey Cleckley
published his classic text, The Mask of Sanity, which provided rich
clinical descriptions and detailed case studies of psychopathic
individuals. Older literature sometimes uses the term sociopath;
however, it would be technically incorrect to use the terms
psychopathy and sociopathy as synonyms today. The term sociopathy
gained prominence in the 1960's, and was meant to stress the
sociological factors influencing an individual's antisocial behaviors.
At the present time, psychopathy is a term referring to a research-
established clinical construct that describes a more aggressive,
predatory, and highly narcissistic form of antisocial personality
(Hare, 2003, 2006). For example, a study comparing 18 psychopathic
and 20 nonpsychopathic sexual murderers found that homicides
committed by psychopathic offenders contained a significantly higher
level of both gratuitous and sadistic violence when compared to the
nonpsychopathic offenders (Porter, Woodworth, Earle, Drugge, & Boer,
2003). While some researchers view psychopathy as a discrete
category or taxon, others make a convincing argument that psycho-
pathy is best understood as existing on a continuum (Marcus, John, &
Edens, 2004). To date, most research on psychopathy has focused on
forensic and correctional populations, and very little is understood
about psychopaths who are “successful,” functional in society, or have
superior intelligence (Oleson, 2004).
Another concerning feature of co-morbid sexual sadism and
psychopathy may be an enhanced motivation to commit sexual
homicide. It has been speculated that while psychopaths' emotional
deficits impair their ability to empathize with the victim's distress, the
psychopath with sexual sadism may actually experience victim
distress as sexually arousing (Kirsch & Becker, 2007). The difference
would be one of callous disregard of suffering (psychopathic only)
versus sexual excitement in response to suffering (co-morbid
psychopathy and sexual sadism). Put simply, the psychopath with
co-morbid sexual sadism may be a more violent, lethal sexual sadist.
The experience of sexual arousal and pleasure would have a powerful
reinforcing effect for the SSSM who is also psychopathic. Since these
offenders engage in torturing victims, often to the point of death, to
obtain the “pleasure in complete domination” over them (Dietz et al.,
1990), it has been suggested that this deviant behavior represents a
distinct, though very rare, type of paraphilia which merits its own
diagnosis. To better capture this distinction, the diagnosis “Sexual
Sadism, Homicidal Type” has been proposed for these SSSMs (Myers,
Husted, Safarik, & O'Toole, 2006).
From a psychological viewpoint, sexual perversions are regarded
as lying on a continuum from relative normality to psychopathic
perversion. The extreme end of the continuum, sadistic perversion, is
associated with the antisocial personality spectrum of disorders, such
as narcissistic personality, the syndrome of “malignant narcissism,”
antisocial personality, and psychopathy. The syndrome of malignant
narcissism has been defined as consisting of: 1) narcissistic personality
disorder, 2) severe antisocial behavior, 3) significant paranoid traits,
and 4) ego-syntonic aggression (Kernberg, 2007). In the continuum of
the antisocial spectrum, malignant narcissism would be considered to
fall somewhere between narcissistic personality disorder on one end,
and pure psychopathy on the other end. In contrast to psychopaths,
malignant narcissists are believed to retain some ability to admire and
identify with powerful and aggressive people, as opposed to simply
trying to dominate or manipulate them as seen in pure, impulsive-
aggressive psychopaths.
Malignant narcissists are driven by unyielding desires for unlim-
ited power which, in certain circumstances, may actually lend itself to
some tangible life successes. The psychopath differs in that he relates
to others primarily via destructive, predatory behaviors. Clinical
observations of psychopathic individuals suggest that they relate to
others primarily through a Machiavellian type “analysis” of vulner-
abilities and the potential “gain” to be acquired from them. Thus,
clinicians' fearful responses to a psychopath (increased heart rate and
other “fight or flight” responses) are essentially a natural biological
reaction of prey to a predator (Meloy & Meloy, 2002). When a sadistic
perversion is unmitigated by anxiety or guilt, the offender is likely to
have little concern for the distress of the victim. It is also hypothesized
that the “fusion” of aggression with sexual excitement occurs on a very
primitive level of the psyche, and arouses feelings of omnipotence.
Similar to the escape theory, the psychopathic sadomasochists may
experience feelings of “transcendence” in which they attain “freedom
beyond the boundary control of daily existence,” (Kernberg, 1991).
Interestingly, self-other boundary disturbances have been de-
scribed in at least one case report of a sadomasochistic murderer
(Claus & Lidberg, 2003). For individuals with severe psychopathology,
it has been hypothesized that a withdrawal into omnipotent fantasy
does not follow the rules of normal mental functioning (De Masi,
2006). For example, masochistic fantasies reported by patients have
been described as having an “interchangeability of roles between
subject and object,” (Grossman, 1986). Such interchangeability could
be argued as indicative of a fragile identity, in which the boundaries
between sadism and masochism are fluid and ill defined (Ross, 1997).
In a study of 20 sexually sadistic serial murderers, five of them
demonstrated paraphilic activities including transvestism (Warren
et al., 1996). In addition, over half reported homosexual experiences.
These findings led to the clinical hypothesis that these subjects were
polymorphous (or variable) in their perversity, which may suggest an
underlying disorganization of sexual development.
2. Omnipotence, grandiosity and control
2.1. Omnipotence and grandiosity
The terms omnipotence and grandiosity are sometimes used
interchangeably, which may lead to confusion (Levin, 1986). Therefore,
a brief distinction should be made between the two. From a literal
perspective, omnipotence has been defined as “having unlimited or
 J.L. Knoll, R.R. Hazelwood / Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (2009) 106–114
universal power, authority, or force,” (The American Heritage
Dictionary, 1985). In contrast, grandiosity's literal definition is:
“characterized by feigned or affected grandeur; pompous.” This is
relatively similar to the DSM-IV-TR definition of grandiosity, which is
“an inflated appraisal” of one's worth, power and importance
(American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Freud was perhaps the
first to note a connection between masochism, obsessional symptoms,
and delusions of omnipotence (Freud, 1909). The study of childhood
development has long held that “the child is born feeling omnipotent
and only gradually and reluctantly…turns to and accepts reality”
sometime by the first 18 months of life (Novick & Novick, 1991). From
this developmental standpoint, it is believed that the failure to achieve
competent interactions with others may relegate the child to a
dependence on omnipotent fantasies (Novick & Novick, 1991).
In the course of normal development, as the individual matures
and confronts reality, omnipotent fantasies are relinquished, although
remnants remain into adulthood. Examples of adult remnants of
omnipotent thinking include the belief that one can “solve any
problem,” or that no catastrophes will occur today. Thus, the relative
normalcy of omnipotent fantasy is a matter of degree. Turning to a
psychological perspective of grandiosity, people who are grandiose
typically mock or degrade those they believe are inferior to them.
Thus, grandiosity often has a hostile and adversarial quality. For
example, Gerard Schaefer was a SSSM who was convicted of two
murders, but was suspected of having murdered over 30 women. In
correspondence with one author (RRH) Schaefer wrote “…I can see
why you need my help. You really don't have much actual knowledge
about the rituals you investigate, do you?” (Schaefer, 1989). The
individual who believes he is far superior is likely to be sensitive to
perceived slights. He will take action, according to his character, to
remove himself from the “inferior” position. In summary, while
omnipotence sounds irrational, it is not necessarily pathological. In
contrast, grandiosity sounds irrational and is pathological (Levin,
1986). At the present time, no research has specifically sought to
delineate the nature of omnipotence and grandiosity in SSSMs.
A study of 24 sex offenders found that sexual fantasy served to:
1) regulate affect, 2) stimulate sexual arousal, 3) serve as a coping
mechanism, and 4) re-experience and encourage new offenses (Gee,
Ward, & Eccleston, 2003). It has been suggested that the fantasies
themselves may stimulate feelings of grandiosity and omnipotence,
since most fantasies are “perfect” and give the fantasizer complete
control of the imagined scenario (Meloy, 2000). Fantasies may occur
before, during, or after an offense. Those occurring during and after an
actual offense might be suspected of serving the purpose of
“maintaining the high” that comes from intense feelings of omnipo-
tence (Gee et al., 2003). It is speculated that this type of sexually
sadistic offender has strong character traits of entitlement and
grandiosity (Grubin, 1994a,b). This would be consistent with reports
that a significant minority of rapists genuinely believe that their
victims regard them favorably after the offense (Scully, 1990). Further
supporting the presence of grandiosity in the SSSM is the finding that
sexual murderers were distinguished from rapists by their high self-
esteem (Oliver, Beech, Fisher, & Beckett, 2007).
2.2. Control as the core of sadism
The SSSM's experience of power and control during the offense has
been described as the most important motivating factor (MacCulloch,
Snowden, Wood, & Mills, 1983). In other words, the wish to control and
dominate the victim is given primacy, and sexual arousal performs a
supportive and reinforcing role. When the offender's fantasies of
omnipotence and grandiosity are given proper consideration, it becomes
clear that the “core of sadism…is the passion to have absolute and
unrestricted control over living beings…. The person who has complete
control over another living being makes this being into his thing, his
property, while he becomes the other being's god (Fromm, 1977).”
109
Clinical forensic examples suggesting that control is the “worm” at
the core of sadism abound. Necrophilia has been described as an
attempt by the offender to “possess and destroy” the victim “beyond
death” (Hirschfeld, 1956). Meloy (2000) described a case in which a
sexually sadistic murderer's victim managed to escape after 4 days in
captivity. The victim reported that the offender “Seemed to be
enjoying the fact that I was powerless and that he had control totally”
(Meloy, 2000, p. 15). Investigators who have studied and interviewed
SSSMs have similarly noted the substantial grandiosity and imagined
superiority of these offenders (Douglas & Olshaker, 1999). SSSMs have
reported that being in control of the victim's life gave them a feeling of
God-like power which constituted the most “exhilarating” aspect of
their offenses (Warren et al., 1996).
If it is true that control is a primary driving force for the SSSM, what
sense is to be made of such offenders who also engage in sexual
masochism, or what appears to be sexual masochism? Returning to
the example of Gerard Schaefer, he is known to have photographed
himself bound and wearing women's lingerie while observing himself
in a mirror. Schaefer also obtained sexual gratification “by tying
himself to trees in the woods and then struggling to get free” (Myers
et al., 2008). Next, consider that Schaefer's offenses involved binding
women to trees before killing them. The similarities between his
offense behavior and his autoerotic fantasies would appear to be
compelling. Does pure sexual masochism adequately describe these
behaviors? Perhaps the most that can be concluded at present is that
such offenders have constructed a fantasy script in which they assume
the role of the victim after having already played the role of torturer in
reality. The next section will describe a number of hypotheses to
explain masochistic, or masochistic-like behaviors among SSSMs.
3. Masochism and the sexually sadistic serial murderer
While not exhaustive, what follows will be an attempt to discuss
some of the hypotheses explaining why a SSSM would enact the roles
of both victim and torturer. They include: 1) trauma-related theories,
2) cognitive distortion — implicit theories, 3) the substitute victim
hypothesis, 4) the vicarious enhancement hypothesis, 5) the addictive
tolerance model, and 6) the grandiose sadism hypothesis. Certainly, at
least some overlap between these hypotheses might be expected in
real life.
3.1. Trauma-related theories
Trauma-related theories point out the association between child-
hood abuse and neglect in the history of the SSSM, and posit that some
offense behaviors may represent a re-enactment of the trauma in
adulthood. For example, severe childhood trauma may lead to a
“malignant dissociative” repetition of attempts to establish a union of
victim–perpetrator (Stein, 2004). This may represent a sadistic type of
“identification with the victim” (Macgregor, 1991). Such theories are
still ill-defined and remain in the stage of psychological speculation.
Other trauma related theories suggest that the offender forms an
early identification with a parental figure who is both an aggressor
and a victim. Yet another traumatogenic theory involves a highly
inappropriate and sexually provocative mother (Meloy, 2000; Fox &
Levin, 1994). Investigators point to documented instances of strikingly
inappropriate sexual behavior on the part of the mother that would
easily qualify as sexual abuse. Evaluations of some convicted serial
murderers suggest that a displacement of aggression from their
mothers onto to their female victims was present during their
offenses.
3.2. The cognitive distortion — implicit theories
Sex offenders hold attitudes and beliefs which help justify their
offending behavior (Blumenthal, Gudjonsson, & Burns, 1999). It is
110 J.L. Knoll, R.R. Hazelwood / Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (2009) 106–114
believed that rapists maintain offense-supportive cognitions that play
a strong role in motivating their behavior (Ryan, 2004). For example,
rapists have been found to hold beliefs that their victims were
desirous of the sexual contact, and eventually succumbed to the
“pleasure” of rape (Polaschek & Ward, 2002; Scully, 1990). These pro-
offending attitudes have been referred to as implicit theories (IT),
which ultimately generate the motivation and cognitive distortions
necessary to commit sex offenses. Implicit theories have been studied
and verified among rapists (Beech, Ward, & Fisher, 2006), as well as
sexual murderers (Beech, Fisher, & Ward, 2005), Among the implicit
theories found in sexual murderers was the belief that women are
primarily sexual objects who constantly desire sex (even if coerced).
However, to the authors' knowledge, implicit theories have not
been described among SSSMs who also engage in either masochism or
enacting the victim role. Taking implicit theories as a starting place for
the motivations of some sex offenders, one might form a hypothesis
extending to SSSMs who enact the role of the victim. The SSSM has
been known to instruct his victim to engage in dialogue and behaviors
which reflect his fantasies. However, the offense, as it actually plays
out in reality, will be likely to fall far short of his fantasy script.
Therefore, like a movie director who is unhappy with an actor's
performance, the offender jumps onto the stage and enacts the role as
he wished it had been done. He plays the role of the victim, both to
prolong the fantasy experience, and to “correct” the disappointing
“performance” by his victim.
3.3. The substitute victim hypothesis
This hypothesis suggests that the SSSM “drafts himself as a
substitute for the fantasized victim when an external victim is not
available” (Myers et al., 2008). It has been noted that a subset of SSSMs
engaged in autoerotic asphyxiation and other sadomasochistic
practices, allowing them to assume the role of the victim, or at least
one of a sexual masochist. This hypothesis would seem to hold only for
those circumstances in which the offender plays the role of a victim
during autoerotic practices. It would not seem to apply to those who,
during or following the offense, assume the very identity of the victim
they have tortured.
3.4. The vicarious enhancement hypothesis
The vicarious enhancement hypothesis relies on the intuitive
notion that the torturer must, in some way, identify with the victim in
order to know what to do to the victim to evoke certain responses
(Berner, Berger, & Hill, 2003). If this is the case, then it is conceivable
that the SSSM could attain heightened sadistic pleasure by playing the
victim role, because he would have a deeper understanding of his
victim's suffering. In other words, when actually torturing a victim,
the SSSM would have a more genuine, though vicarious, experience of
the victim's pain.
3.5. The addictive tolerance model
The concept of tolerance comes from the field of substance-related
disorders, and may have some hypothetical applicability to the
compulsive, ritualistic behaviors of SSSMs. The DSM-IV-TR defines
tolerance as either “a need for markedly increased amounts of the
substance to achieve intoxication or desired effect,” or a “markedly
diminished effect with continued use of the same amount of the
substance” (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Just as repeated
exposure to drugs of abuse can produce tolerance, it is hypothesized
that other forms of addictive gratification can result in a scenario in
which larger “doses” of the behavior are needed to produce an effect
that was previously obtained at a lower dose (Haney, 2008).
Such an addictions model may apply where the SSSM has become
tolerant over time to the level of gratification produced by collected
trophies, and their associated recollections and fantasies. When the
SSSM has developed a tolerance to the sexual gratification associated
with his individualized “dose” of victim cues, he must find a method of
increasing his dose of gratification. The closer he comes to the victim,
the greater the likelihood that he will overcome his tolerance.
Ultimately, assuming the role of the victim might bring him as close
as possible, and provide a temporarily enhanced sexual experience.
3.6. The grandiose sadism theory
The grandiose sadism theory is hypothesized by the authors to
explain the unusual behavior of the rare offender who assumes the
identity of the very victim of a current or past offense. This offender
seeks to extend his control of the victim beyond mere life and death.
While this offender's behavior may appear to conform to traditional
conceptions of sexual masochism, the driving psychological force
cannot wholly and accurately be described as flowing from a desire to
be “humiliated, beaten, bound, or otherwise made to suffer”
(American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Further, because the
individual's behavior does not produce any “clinically significant
distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important
areas of functioning,” he does not technically meet DSM-IV-TR criteria
for sexual masochism.
Thus, in these exceptional cases a satisfactory explanation must be
found elsewhere. Introjection is described as an “immature defense
mechanism” whereby the individual internalizes the qualities of an
object, thereby obliterating the distinction between the subject and
object (Kaplan & Sadock, 2007). In some individuals this defense
mechanism serves to reduce anxiety by placing the object, symbolically,
more directly under their control. Introjection, or identification with
both the aggressor and the victim have been described (MacGregor,
1991; Strentz, 1980). Introjection as a mental process may explain the
behaviors of certain SSSMs who assume the identity of their victims to
enhance sexual gratification. However, given their psychopathy (Porter
et al., 2003), character traits (Hill et al., 2007), and probable deficits in
their ability to empathize (Kirsch & Becker, 2007), it is seems less likely
that this type of introjection serves the purpose of reducing anxiety.
Rather, this mental process may function to extend and/or prolong the
offender's control of the victim. In this sense, introjection of the victim
remains “in the service” of the offender's sexual sadism, and ultimately,
his grandiose fantasies. This offender gives himself a more grandiose
form of control which comes closer to omnipotence than did the mere
control over the victim's life and death. Introjecting and assuming the
identity of the victim gives the offender a fuller ability to continue
controlling the victim, much like a “puppet” on a stage (Stoller, 1976).
It has been observed that highly sadistic sexual murderers are
strongly motivated by their need to have “ultimate,” God-like control
of their victims (Warren e tal., 1996). Additionally, they engage in
offenses of longer duration (Hill et al., 2006). It could be hypothesized
that these offenders wish to extend not only the duration of control
over the victim, but also perhaps more importantly, the degree of that
control. This would give the offender the additional “benefit” of being
able to “correct” for himself, any aspects of his offenses that were
disappointing to him. Further, incorporating the victim's identity
allows the offender, at any point in the future, to summon her at will
and repeatedly relive the offense and its associated fantasies. All of
this of course, prolongs the duration of the offender's enjoyment. If
the power of life and death promises them intense gratification, then
assimilating and controlling the very identity of the victim may
provide a heightened state of transcendence.
4. Case examples
The cases of James DeBardeleben and Dennis Rader will be used to
illustrate the unusual phenomenon in which a SSSM also assumes the
identity of their victims.
 J.L. Knoll, R.R. Hazelwood / Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (2009) 106–114
4.1. James M. DeBardeleben
James Mitchell “Mike” DeBardeleben was born March 20, 1940 in
Little Rock, Arkansas. He was a middle child with an older sister and
younger brother. His father was a career Army officer who favored the
use of harsh discipline. His mother was an alcoholic, who had episodes
of violent and promiscuous behavior, and his older sister became the
de facto mother of the family. He was intelligent with a measured IQ of
approximately 127. He had an extensive arrest history with his first
arrest at age 16 for assaulting his mother. He was expelled from high
school and sent to military school. At age 18, while in basic training in
the Air Force, he was court-martialed for disorderly behavior and
given a less-than-honorable discharge from the Air Force.
Married five times, he sadistically mistreated all of his wives. By his
mid-twenties, he firmly believed that all women were “whores and
sluts.” He frequently abused marijuana and alcohol in his thirties. He
developed multiple paraphilias, most predominantly bondage and
sexual sadism. His sexually violent offenses went undiscovered until
he was arrested for counterfeiting. After his arrest, it was discovered
that he had documented his sexually sadistic crimes through writings,
photographs, audiotapes, and collections of “trophies” from his
victims. Although never convicted of murder, he was indicted on
two murders and suspected of killing many more.
DeBardeleben's audiotapes recorded the sexual torture of his 4th
wife, and included her being forced to ask him to sodomize her and
begging him to perform fellatio on him. DeBardeleben's recorded
dialogue with his 4th wife was very similar to his audiotape of a victim
(whom he renamed “Becky”).
4.1.1. Audiotape transcript of DeBardeleben victim “Becky”
During one instance of anal rape, DeBardeleben began biting
“Becky's” breast and directed her to verbalize the following:
Becky: Bite my titty. Oh I love it when you bite my titty.
JMD: Say it again
Becky: Oh, I love it when you bite my titty.
JMD: Am I biting your titty now?
Becky: Yes
After releasing Becky, DeBardeleben recorded himself in the
following voices:
Feminine: Bite my titties.
Masculine: You want me to bite your titties?
Feminine: Yes.
Masculine: Tell me exactly how you feel when I'm biting your titties.
Masculine: Bite your right tit now, okay?
Feminine: Okay. Do it, do it, do it. I want you to do it. Bite it, bite it,
bite it! I want you to do it, do it, do it! Bite it!
Masculine: Okay, here goes.
During and after another recorded anal rape, DeBardeleben forces
“Becky” to verbally degrade herself by instructing her to repeat the
following phrases: “I'm daddy's little bitch”; “Fuck daddy's little bitch
in the asshole”; “I love to suck your cock”; “Bite my soft pink titties”;
and “Fuck me in the ass”. After releasing Becky, DeBardeleben records
himself using a feminine/falsetto voice and stating: “Fuck me in the
ass. I need your cock. I need your cock up my asshole. Shove your cock
up my asshole. My ass is up in the air with your cock in my ass.”
4.2. Discussion of DeBardeleben case
The audiotapes made by DeBardeleben strongly suggest that he
enacted a fantasy script in which he assumed two roles: 1) the torturer
(played in his natural voice), and 2) the victim, (played in a piping
falsetto which mimics his female victim). The similarities between the
recordings of his wife's self-degradation, the torture of “Becky,” and
111
his own “feminine” dialogue are striking. Both the dialogue and the
sexual fantasies suggest a desire to experience “both sides” of the
power differential. In doing so, DeBardeleben extends his “control” of
the victim into the realm of his grandiose and omnipotent fantasies.
By introjecting his victim's qualities and identity, he achieves a
superior and transcendent form of control over her. This grandiose
form of control surpassed the gratification derived from mere sadistic
torture, and would be likely to provide him with a powerful, though
temporary, feeling of God-like power. The need to feel this level of
omnipotence and grandiose power over others was a pervasive theme
in DeBardeleben's life. For example, one of DeBardeleben's wives
reported that “He really thought he was omnipotent, that he was
God…The FBI and Secret Service held no threat to him. He wasn't
afraid because he was smarter and slicker than they were” (Michaud,
1994). Another of DeBardeleben's wives reported that “He thought all
law-enforcement agents were turkeys and ignorant and that he would
outsmart anyone of them, especially local police” (Michaud, 1994).
Finally, in his personal writings, DeBardeleben reveals the core
drive at the heart of his sadism: “The wish to inflict pain on others is
not the essence of sadism. One essential impulse to have complete
mastery over another person, to make him/her a helpless object of our
will, to become the absolute ruler over her, to become her God…”
(Dietz et al., 1990). From this statement, the depth of DeBardeleben's
sadism can be more clearly understood. His control over his victim
must transcend the boundaries of reality. He must have “complete,”
God-like control of the victim through the power of his “will.” This
type of grandiose, omnipotent “mastery” extends past mere control of
the victim's emotions and physical body. It must outstrip reality itself,
and “fuse” the roles of torturer and victim. In essence, the torturer
becomes the victim.
4.3. Dennis Rader (aka “BTK”)
Dennis L. Rader, who gave himself the title “BTK” (Bind, Torture,
Kill) was born March 9, 1945 in Pittsburgh, Kansas. He was one of 4
sons, and a college graduate with a degree in the Administration of
Justice. He received an honorable discharge from the Air Force. He was
married to the same woman for 27 years and had two children. His
employment history included installing security systems, being a
supervisor with the U.S. Census Bureau, and a compliance officer for
Park City, Kansas. By all accounts, Dennis Rader was a good father to
his son and daughter. His family lived in the same home for 25 years.
He had no arrest history, was a Boy Scout leader, and president of his
local church assembly. On the surface, Rader appeared to be a stable,
reliable, and respected member of his community. Nevertheless, he
held that same community in fear from 1974 (when he killed a family
of four), until his arrest approximately 31 years later.
Dennis Rader was arrested on February 25, 2005. Rader eventually
confessed to murdering 10 victims. Although 59 years of age at the
time, he had completed his selection process for an eleventh victim,
and was simply awaiting an opportune time to kill again. Regarding
his murderous desires, he stated, “It started in grade school. I used to
make sketches even back then. Annette Funicello was my favorite
fantasy hit target…I had these imaginary stories of how I was going to
get her, kidnap her and do sexual things to her…” (Smith, 2006).
During the period of time that he was carrying out his offenses, Rader
appeared to enjoy communicating with the media, writing anon-
ymous letters to a Kansas TV station. One letter stated that “no one in
Kansas is safe because I am omnipresent.” After his arrest, a large
volume of materials were seized which documented his sexual
fantasies, interests, and crimes. Among those materials were post-
mortem photographs he had taken of two of his victims along with
items of clothing belonging to each of them. Also recovered were
photographs of Rader in bondage and cross-dressed in his victim's
clothing. Analysis of the photos of Rader and his victims revealed
striking similarities.
112 J.L. Knoll, R.R. Hazelwood / Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (2009) 106–114
4.3.1. Rader victim A
On April 27, 1985, Rader murdered victim A, a middle aged woman
who lived only 6 doors away from him. He told police that he would
occasionally see her in her yard. Her body was found, some 9 days
after she had been missing, in a ditch seven miles from her home.
Authorities later learned that after manually strangling the victim in
her home, Rader took her body to his church where he “…played God:
controlled her…posed her bound body in lewd positions, and took
photographs…” (Wenzl, Potter, Kelly, & Hurst, 2007).
In one of the photographs, the victim is lying nude on her back
with her ankles and wrists bound. In two other photos, she is in a
semi-sitting position with her back against a wall partition. Rader had
placed a bra on her and she was bound at the ankles, calves, and above
the knees. Her wrists were positioned behind her back, suggesting
that they were bound. A black cloth was wrapped around the lower
part of her face. Law enforcement recovered a photo Rader had taken
of himself almost 4 and 1/2 years later (Rader had dated the photo
himself). The photo showed Rader in his mother's basement wearing
lingerie. He was standing up with his back against a wall, bound at the
ankles, calves, and above the knees. His wrists were behind his back,
suggesting that they were bound. He was wearing a black cloth over
the lower part of his face.
In another Rader photograph, victim A was lying on her right side
with her head resting on a pillow and a black cloth covering the lower
portion of her face. Her wrists were behind her back, and her knees
were drawn up in a fetal-like position with a black cloth tied above her
knees. Approximately 5 1/2 years later, Rader photographed himself
lying on his right side, wearing a bra and a decorative mask with a
cloth item covering the lower portion of his face. His head was resting
on a white pillow. His wrists were behind his back, and his knees were
drawn up in a fetal-like position with a white cloth item tied above his
knees.
4.3.2. Rader victim B
On January 19, 1991, Rader murdered victim B, a 62-year-old
widow who lived in a single family residence. Like victim A, victim B
was strangled and transported away from her home after her death.
Her body was found 13 days later beneath a bridge several miles from
her home. A decorative mask with painted black eyebrows, eye lashes,
and red painted lips was found near the body. Rader took several
photographs of victim B after he had murdered her. One photo is of
victim B lying on her back with her arms bound behind her back. Her
face was covered by the decorative wall mask.
After murdering victim B, Rader photographed himself lying on his
back in a grave that he later told authorities he had dug for her, but did
not use. The photo shows Rader with his hands behind his back, and
fresh dirt covering the lower half of his body. Having left his favorite
mask for authorities to find with victim B, the photo shows Rader
wearing a different decorative mask with black tape covering the
mouth. Photographs of Rader wearing the first mask prior to the
murder of victim B were later found by police. Upon questioning,
Rader told police that he missed the first mask, and had regretted
leaving it behind. Another Rader photo shows him at his parent's
basement when they were not at home. In the photo, Rader was
wearing victim B's clothing (Wenzl e tal., 2007).
4.4. Discussion of Rader case
The available photographic evidence shows that Rader placed his
victims in specific positions while they were bound and had either a
cloth or mask over their faces. Several years after his offenses, Rader
made special efforts to photograph himself while carefully imitating
the positions, clothing, and bindings of victims he had previously
photographed. Assuming that Rader, like most SSSMs, was operating
from a fantasy script, he would be motivated to re-experience his
offenses by memorializing them (i.e., photos), as well as by re-living
the fantasies as best he could when no victim was available. The latter
behavior may suggest that he was using himself as a “stand-in” when
no actual victim was available. If one were to stop here, it might be
hypothesized that Rader's behavior corresponds most closely to the
substitute victim hypothesis. However, there are still several other key
pieces of behavioral evidence to consider, specifically Rader's use of
facial coverings, as well as placing himself in his victim's intended
grave.
Rader's regret over parting with his mask suggests that he had
developed a significant attachment to it. From a psychiatric perspec-
tive, this may raise the possibility of a fetish. Fetishism is defined as
having “recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or
behaviors involving the use of nonliving objects” (American Psychia-
tric Association, 2000). Fetishistic objects are more commonly
women's undergarments, shoes, and leather apparel. A specific
“mask” fetishism does exist (http://www.maskme.com/ Accessed on:
9/8/08), although it is not well studied. It has been observed that adult
fetishism may develop out of the early childhood developmental
phase called the transitional period (Greenacre, 1969). Prior to the
transitional period, the infant sees himself and the mother as “one”
being. The mother gratifies the infant's needs without delay, resulting
in the illusion of omnipotence. At this stage, the mother–child
relationship is entirely symbiotic — the baby feels “merged” with
the mother, as well as all powerful.
This “subjective omnipotence” inevitably collides with objective
reality. By means of fantasy, the child may find temporary comfort. It is
at this point that a so-called “transitional object” (e.g., blanket, stuffed
animal) may be used to symbolically represent the mother when she
is absent (Winnicott, 1971). In this manner, the child clings to the
transitional object while he finds a balance between his fantasy and
objective reality. Given Rader's proclivity for his mask and facial
coverings, one might speculate about whether his female mask and/or
black cloth served as a form of transitional object allowing him to
bridge the gap between his fantasy and reality (i.e., between torturer
and victim). His regret over losing his mask may have been due to the
fact that it served as a transitional portal into his world of grandiose,
omnipotent control. Additionally, using the mask for auto-erotic
activities would allow him to re-create a fusion of torturer and victim
at his leisure, thereby prolonging his omnipotent control of his victim.
Finally, Rader's photo of himself in victim B's grave also shows his
desire to fuse himself with her. In doing so, he exerts control over her
beyond her death, and in a sense, mocks the limits of death itself.
Having become the victim, he achieves God-like power over her, and
“proves” that death cannot limit his omnipotence. His wearing of the
mask while in the grave underscores its importance to him, and
furthers his efforts to re-create a torturer–victim fusion.
5. Conclusions
The grandiose sadism theory has been hypothesized by the authors
to explain the unusual behavior of the rare offender who assumes the
identity of the very victim of a current or past offense. These offenders'
behavior cannot be fully understood and described in terms of the
traditional conceptions of sexual masochism. It is proposed that these
cases represent a grandiose form of sadism in which the offender
extends his control of the victim beyond life and death. It is likely that
these offenders are influenced by primitive psychological processes
allowing the boundaries between self and other to merge. By
introjecting the victim's qualities and identity, the offender achieves
a superior, transcendent form of control over her.
This grandiose form of control surpasses the gratification derived
from mere sadistic torture, and provides him with God-like feelings of
power. When the normal boundaries of self and other have been
transcended, the offender is able to experience gratification from
“both sides” of the power differential. Becoming the victim also allows
the offender to re-create this omnipotent fusion of torturer and victim
 J.L. Knoll, R.R. Hazelwood / Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (2009) 106–114
at his leisure, which ultimately prolongs his control of the victim, and
extends it beyond her death.
6. Summary points
■ Clinical forensic case examples suggest that control is the
“worm” at the core of sadism.
■ Sadistic sexual murderers who demonstrate both sadism and
masochism have been described, but little is known about this type
of offender.
■ There are a number of potentially overlapping hypotheses that
might explain why some serial sexual murderers would enact the
roles of both victim and torturer. These include: 1) trauma-related
theories, 2) cognitive distortion — implicit theories, 3) the
substitute victim hypothesis, 4) the vicarious enhancement
hypothesis, 5) the addictive tolerance model, and 6) the grandiose
sadism hypothesis.
■ The grandiose sadism hypothesis suggests that some rare
offenders assume the identity of the victim to extend their control
over the victim beyond life and death.
■ This type of grandiose control provides the offender with a God-
like sense of power, as a result of an omnipotent fusion of torturer
and victim. The offender is able to control and experience
gratification from both sides of the power differential, permitted
by his fluid boundaries between self and other.
References
Abel, G. G., Becker, J. V., Cunningham-Rathner, J., Mittelman, M., & Rouleau, J. L. (1988).
Multiple paraphilic diagnoses among sex offenders. Bulletin of the American
Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 16(2), 153−168.
The American Heritage Dictionary (1985). (2nd College Edition ed.). Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Company.
American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders, 4th ed.
Baumeister, R. (1988). Masochism as escape from self. Journal of Sex Research, 25(1),
28−59.
Baumeister, R. (1989). Masochism and the self. Hilldale, JN: Lawrence Erlbaum &
Associates, Inc.
Beech, A., Fisher, D., & Ward, T. (2005). Sexual murderers' implicit theories. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 20(11), 1366−1389.
Beech, A. R., Ward, T., & Fisher, D. (2006). The identification of sexual and violent
motivations in men who assault women: Implication for treatment. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 21(12), 1635−1653.
Berner, W., Berger, P., & Hill, A. (2003). Sexual sadism. International Journal of Offender
Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 47(4), 383−395.
Blumenthal, S., Gudjonsson, G., & Burns, J. (1999). Cognitive distortions and blame
attribution in sex offenders against adults and children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 23(2),
129−143.
Claus, C., & Lidberg, L. (2003). Ego-boundary disturbances in sadomasochism. Interna-
tional Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26(2), 151−163.
Cross, P. A., & Matheson, K. (2006). Understanding sadomasochism: An empirical
examination of four perspectives. Journal of Homosexuality, 50(2–3), 133−166.
De Masi, F. (2006). Psychotic withdrawal and the overthrow of psychic reality. Inter-
national Journal of Psychoanalysis, 87(Pt 3), 789−807.
Dietz, P. E., Hazelwood, R. R., & Warren, J. (1990). The sexually sadistic criminal and his
offenses. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 18(2),
163−178.
Douglas, J., & Olshaker, M. (1999). Anatomy of motive. New York: Lisa Drew Book/
Scribner.
Everitt, D. (1993). Human monsters: An illustrated encyclopedia of the world's most vicious
murderers. Chicago: Contemporary Books.
Federoff, J. (2008). Sadism, sadomasochism, sex, and violence. Canadian Journal of
Psychiatry, 53(10), 637−646.
For example: http://www.maskme.com/. Retrieved 9/8/2008 from.
Fox, J., & Levin, J. (1994). Overkill: Mass murder and serial killing exposed dell. New York.
Freud, S. (1909). Notes upon a case of obsessional neurosis, Vol. 10. London: Hogarth
Press.
Fromm, E. (1977). The anatomy of human destructiveness. New York: Holt.
Gee, D., Ward, T., & Eccleston, L. (2003). The function of sexual fantasies for sexual
offenders: A preliminary model. Behaviour Change, 20(1), 44−60.
Gratzer, T., & Bradford, J. M. (1995). Offender and offense characteristics of sexual
sadists: A comparative study. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 40(3), 450−455.
Greenacre, P. (1969). The fetish and the transitional object. Psychoanalytic Study of the
Child, 24, 144−164.
113
Grossman, W. I. (1986). Notes on masochism: A discussion of the history and
development of a psychoanalytic concept. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 55(3), 379−413.
Grubin, D. (1994). Sexual murder. British Journal of Psychiatry, 165(5), 624−629.
Grubin, D. (1994). Sexual sadism. [Editorial]. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 4,
3−9.
Haney, H. (2008). Neurobiology of Stimulants. In M. Galanter & H. Kleber (Eds.), The
American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Substance Abuse Treatment, 4th ed.
Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.
Hare, R. (2003). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist — Revised (2nd ed.). Toronto, Canada:
Multi-Health Systems.
Hare, R. D. (2006). Psychopathy: A clinical and forensic overview. Psychiatric Clinics of
North America, 29(3), 709−724.
Hazelwood, R. R., & Michaud, S. G. (2001). Dark dreams: Sexual violence, homicide, and
the criminal mind. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Hill, A., Habermann, N., Berner, W., & Briken, P. (2006). Sexual sadism and sadistic
personality disorder in sexual homicide. Journal of Personality Disorders, 20(6),
671−684.
Hill, A., Habermann, N., Berner, W., & Briken, P. (2007). Psychiatric disorders in single
and multiple sexual murderers. Psychopathology, 40(1), 22−28.
Hirschfeld, M. (1956). Sexual anomalies. New York: Emerson.
Kaplan, H., & Sadock, B. (2007). Kaplan & Sadock's Synopsis of Psychiatry.
Kernberg, O. F. (1991). Sadomasochism, sexual excitement, and perversion. Journal of
the American Psychoanalytic Association, 39(2), 333−362.
Kernberg, O. F. (2007). The almost untreatable narcissistic patient. Journal of the
American Psychoanalytic Association, 55(2), 503−539.
Kirsch, L. G., & Becker, J. V. (2007). Emotional deficits in psychopathy and sexual sadism:
Implications for violent and sadistic behavior. Clinical Psychology Review, 27(8),
904−922.
Krafft-Ebing, R. (1965). Psychophatia sexualis: With especial reference to the antipathic
sexual instinct. New York: Stein and Day.
Levin, R. (1986). Infantile omnipotence and grandiosity. Psychoanalytic Review, 73(1),
57−76.
MacCulloch, M. J., Snowden, P. R., Wood, P. J., & Mills, H. E. (1983). Sadistic fantasy,
sadistic behavior and offending. British Journal of Psychiatry, 143, 20−29.
Macgregor, J. R. (1991). Identification with the victim. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 60(1),
53−68.
Marcus, D. K., John, S. L., & Edens, J. F. (2004). A taxometric analysis of psychopathic
personality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 113(4), 626−635.
Meloy, R. (2000). The nature and dynamics of sexual homicide: An integrative review.
Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(1), 1−22.
Meloy, J., & Meloy, M. (2002). Autonomic arousal in the presence of psychopathy: A
survey of mental health and criminal justice professionals. Journal of Threat
Assessment, 2(2), 21−33.
Michaud (1994).
Myers, W. C., Bukhanovskiy, A., Justen, E., Morton, R. J., Tilley, J., Adams, K., et al. (2008).
The relationship between serial sexual murder and autoerotic asphyxiation. For-
ensic Science International, 176(2–3), 187−195.
Myers, W. C., Husted, D. S., Safarik, M. E., & O'Toole, M. E. (2006). The motivation behind
serial sexual homicide: Is it sex, power, and control, or anger? Journal of Forensic
Sciences, 51(4), 900−907.
Newton, M. (1990). Hunting humans: An encyclopedia of modern serial killers. Port
Townsend, WA: Loompanics Unlimited.
Novick, J., & Novick, K. K. (1991). Some comments on masochism and the delusion of
omnipotence from a developmental perspective. Journal of the American Psycho-
analytic Association, 39(2), 307−331.
Oleson, J. (2004). Sipping coffee with a serial killer: On conducting life history
interviews with a criminal genius. The Qualitative Report, 9(2), 192−215.
Oliver, C. J., Beech, A. R., Fisher, D., & Beckett, R. (2007). A comparison of rapists and
sexual murderers on demographic and selected psychometric measures. Inter-
national Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 51(3),
298−312.
Pinel, P. (1801). Traite, Medico — Philosphique Sur L'Alienation Mental. Paris: Richard,
Caille et Ravier.
Polaschek, D., & Ward, T. (2002). The implicit theories of potential rapists: What our
questionnaires tell us. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7(4), 385−406.
Porter, S., Woodworth, M., Earle, J., Drugge, J., & Boer, D. (2003). Characteristics of sexual
homicides committed by psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders. Law and
Human Behavior, 27(5), 459−470.
Reiersol, O., & Skeid, S. (2006). The ICD diagnoses of fetishism and sadomasochism.
Journal of Homosexuality, 50(2–3), 243−262.
Ross, J. (1997). The sadomasochism of everyday life. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Ryan, K. (2004). Further evidence for a cognitive component of rape. Aggression and
Violent Behavior, 9(6), 579−604.
Schaefer, G. (1989). Personal Communication (Letter from Gerard Schaefer to Roy
Hazelwood.
Scully, D. (1990). Understanding sexual violence: A study of convicted rapists. New York:
Harper Collins.
Smith, C. (2006). The BTK murders. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Stein, A. (2004). Fantasy, fusion and sexual homicide. Contemporary Psychoanal, 40(4),
495−517.
Stoller, R. (1976). The erotic form of hatred. Cambridge, UK: Harvester Press.
Stone, M. (2005). Mike Debardeleben, with treatment Discussion. In R. Spitzer, M.
Gibbon, A. Skodol, J. Williams & M. First (Eds.), DSM-IV-TR Casebook and Its
Treatment Companion. Washington: APA Press, Inc.
Strentz, T. (1980). The Stockholm syndrome: Law enforcement policy and ego defenses
of the hostage. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 347, 137−150.
114 J.L. Knoll, R.R. Hazelwood / Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (2009) 106–114

Warren, J., & Hazelwood, R. (2002). Relational patterns associated with sexual sadism: A
study of 20 wives and girlfriends. Journal of Family Violence, 17(1), 75−89.
Warren, J. I., Hazelwood, R. R., & Dietz, P. E. (1996). The sexually sadistic serial killer.
Journal of Forensic Sciences, 41(6), 970−974.
Wenzl, R., Potter, T., Kelly, L., & Hurst, L. (2007). Bind, torture, kill: The inside story of the
serial killer next door. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.
Winnicott, D. W. (1971). Playing and reality. London: Routledge.
World Health Organization (1992). International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10).
Yates, P., Hucker, S., & Kingston, D. (2008). Sexual deviance: Theory, assessment, and
treatment, (2nd Ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.