THE ROLE OF LEARNING IN EXPLAINING MURDER

    Murder is a vicious crime that occurs everyday within our society.  What is it that makes someone decide to kill another human being?  Society has publicized murderers in such a way that it almost turns killers into legends.  It is the idea of eternal remembrance that develops ordinary good living individuals into cold-hearted killers.  This paper will examine situations that have awarded these killers for their heinous actions, therefore giving future killers the incentive to begin their life of fame.  The methodology used will include a review of previous research supplemented by a survey.  This research will show that killers are not born, but learn from the study of their role models.

   It is the purpose of this paper to show that murderers are not born but learn their behavior based on their environment, which consists of the lack of an appropriate punishment and the likelihood of positive acceptance.  This paper will adopt the assumptions of the learning theory perspective in criminology.  It is assumed for the purposes of discussion that neither sex, race, geographical location, class, ethnicity, nor religion has any relevance in any factors leading a person to commit murder.  This paper will be based on the micro theory approach dealing with specific individuals, not society as a whole.  This paper will adopt the process point of view in that a person must grow over a period of time to become a killer.  The process of being a murderer is not instantaneous but gradual.  A conflict point of view will be assumed in the values of right and wrong, which is consistent with the standpoint of learning theory on value consensus.

Literature Review

            It is imperative that the reader has an understanding of two concepts in order to gain a full understanding of this paper.   A background of learning theories must be understood as well as the police role in curtailing crime, more specifically murder.  A natural response in the community is, “if the police did their job, people would not commit murder.”

            This paper will attempt to give a background of the learning theory by providing leading opinions in this field of study.   The learning theory is based on the opinion that criminal behavior is not acquired at birth but is learned through interaction during one’s life.  It is a process begun at birth but continues to mold and conform to the experiences and interaction with other individuals within society.  Ronald Akers developed the concept of Social Learning Theory as an adaptation to Edwin H. Sutherland’s Differential Association Concept. (Brown, 2001).

            Akers continues with the basis of his theory developing on the intentions that criminal behavior is a learned behavior and not inherited.  Akers breaks his concept into four key sections:  differential association, definitions, differential reinforcement, and imitation.  Each section is key in the development of Akers’ theory.  They are a continual process that helps prove his idea of learned criminal behavior.  It is important to break down and explain each of key elements.

            The first of Akers’ elements is differential associations.  This is the idea that a person rationalizes their belief towards criminal offenses and the legitimacy on their mere existence.  Their social, economic, and moral standings all tend to play a role in their rationale.

            The next section of Akers’ thoughts is definitions.  This is the idea that an individual bases their perception of crime and moral being based on their associations with others.  Their viewpoint is consistent in the environment in which they learn to define different aspects of crime as they have learned throughout their life.   A person may rationalize that certain laws may be over stated and are acceptable.

            Differential reinforcement is the next key element in Akers’ theory.  This idea is based on the fact the belief that an individual will base their actions on the expectation of a reward or punishment.  These rewards or punishment can be in many different forms whether physical, mental or sociological.  An action will be initiated on the basis that the rewards outweigh the punishment.

            The last key element is the theory of imitation.  A person will act as they have learned from a role model.  This learning process continues throughout life and will change to conform to the role model at that particular time.  It is imperative to suggest that a murderer will learn to commit the crime based on a current role model whether it is a family member, friend, or idol from a media source.

            Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) argued that all knowledge is acquired through experience and that none is inborn or instinctive (Vold 2002).  It is the simplest of experiments that attempt to prove the learning theory.  Pavlov conducted an experiment that a dog will always salivate at the sight of meat.  He would in term present other things not associated with meat at the same time, for instance ringing a bell.  He found that after enough attempts that sound of the bell alone would be sufficient to force the dog to salivate.  This salivation is a learned behavior based on the earlier experiences that the dog had.  The system of rewards and punishment can also be used in a similar fashion.  Rats are taught that each time they press a lever they get food or get shocked for not pressing the lever.  This is a learning system that is created when the rewards outweigh the punishment.

            Gabriel Tarde was another criminologist who did research on the imitation theory of criminal learning behavior.  Tarde did not believe that criminals were born but were a creation of those they came in contact with throughout their life.  The more contact two people had with each other and the closer the two became would heighten the degree of the imitation and the speed of the process.  Tarde’s theory also suggested that the inferior imitated the superior.   His last section of his imitation theory is that new fashions would take place of older fashions, for example shooting victims has overshadowed killing by the use of a knife. 

            Hans Toch in his book Psychology of Crime & Criminal Justice furthers details the learning theory by the following statement, “People are not born with preformed repertoires of aggressive behavior.  They must learn them”.  He continues, “Some of the elementary forms of aggression can be perfected with minimal guidance, but most aggressive activities-whether they are dueling with switchblade knives, sparring with opponents, military combat, or vengeful ridicule-entail intricate skill that require extensive learning” (Toch 1979).  Toch takes the learning theory a step further and introduces a slight biological factor.  He believes that biological factors set the limits on how aggressive a person can be and at what rate or extent a criminal will learn their trade.

The book, Destined for Murder by Sandra Harrison Young looks at the profile of six serial killers.  Young attempts to look into the fact that these killers; Ed Gein, Jeffrey Dalmer, Angelo Buono and Kenneth Bianchi, Albert DeSalvo, John Wayne Gacy, and Dennis Nilsen are destined by astrological charts (Young 1995) but I believe their destiny was based on their learning ability. 

            Ed Gein was born to parents that constantly bickered and fought with each other.  His mother became the aggressor in the relationship until on day Ed’s father became so drunk and upset he struck Ed’s mother.  This beating soon became a common ritual within the household.  Ed’s mother Augusta had wanted a girl when Ed was born.  She would often treat Ed like a girl and constantly force him to be around her.  He was under the total control of her.  He learned to shrug beneath her power.  He began to need her existence to prove himself to her.  His father died when Ed was young leaving a greater connection to mother and son.  The younger brother also continued to live at home leaving the two brothers close.  Then one-day Ed’s brother would experience a mysterious death shortly after defying his mother.  This left Ed and his mother to totally rely on one another.  Still unable to meet his mother’s expectation, Ed continued to work solely for her.  She would die leaving Ed alone.

            Ed Gein would begin his second life, the life that he learned from his mother.  It was a life that was without rewards but full of punishment.  He continued to try to impress his mother by taking the lives of those that could not conform to her perfection.  Those that he didn’t kill he would still their lifeless bodies from their graves.  He constructed several bedposts from these skulls.  He was able to sew a skin suit from the bodies in hopes that he would be able to be like his mother.

            Albert DeSalvo began his life of crime not as a murderer but that of a sexual predator.  He learned from his mistakes and police techniques that help him make the fatal transformation.  He contends that it was slack police work that allowed him to remain on his predatory field.

            Albert DeSalvo was born in 1931 in Chelsea Massachusetts.  He was a victim of physical and mental abuse from his father.  At the age of seventeen, DeSalvo was arrested for the first time, breaking and entering.  He DeSalvo joined the Army and was stationed in Germany.  While awaiting his discharge, DeSalvo was accused of molesting a nine-year-old girl.  The mother, wanting to leave her daughter in dignity, refused to prosecute DeSalvo.  This is an example of the reward out weighing the punishment.  The learning process had begun.

            Albert’s sexual need continued to overwhelm his wife leaving his desires unsatisfied.  He was again arrested for burglary and once again given a suspended sentence.  He soon began a rouse of being a representative for a modeling agency.  He would convince attractive women to allow him to “take measurements”.  They would often invite him into their homes where he would measure and intimately touch them.    The police were once again called and he would be arrested.  An agreement was reached charging him with attempted breaking and entering.  He would spend eleven months in prison.  His release would be the birth of a new criminal.  DeSalvo began tying up his victims and forcibly raping them.  He would later claim over a thousand victims during this sexual crime spree.  His learning to murder came from his frequent trips to prison.  He made the ultimate decision that there would be no witnesses.  It was the justice system that taught Albert that the rewards outweighed the punishment. 

            Jeffrey Dahmer began his killing spree at the age of eighteen.  He learned murder through years of experimenting with animals.  He learned to peel their skin from their bones with the use of chemicals.  This process would be instrumental to Dahmer’s process once he upgraded to experimenting on humans.  With each killing he would fashion better and more secretive ways of hiding and disposing of the bodies.  It was not only the process of killing or disposing the bodies that Dahmer learned.  He also learned police techniques or lack of such.

            Jeffrey drugged and kidnapped a thirteen-year-old boy taking him back to his apartment.  The boy managed to escape and contacted the police.  Jeffrey was arrested and charged with molestation.  He pled guilty acknowledging the fact that he needed help and expressed his intentions to get that help.  The District Attorney pleaded for a harsh prison system noting that Jeffrey was a terror on society.   Jeffery was sentenced to one year in prison on a work release program with the intent he would receive drug and alcohol abuse counseling.  This imperfection in the justice system allowed Jeffery to continue his deadly game.  Jeffery was released from prison and placed on probation.  He would continue to kill while on his probation. 

            Jeffery would meet fourteen-year-old Konerak Sinthasomphone.  Continuing with his learned procedure Jeffery coaxed the young boy back to his apartment drugged him and performed oral sex on him.  Konerak was able to escape as Jeffery went to the store.  Konerak managed to gain the help of citizens on the street.  Jeffery returned home just in time to see his naked prison free in the arms of two women.  Dahmer attempted to control the situation acknowledging that he and the boy were lovers.  Just as Jeffery was taking the boy inside two patrol cars pulled up to his apartment.  Dahmer continued his lover story and even invited the officers inside.  With a dead body just on the other side of the living room door, Jeffery was able to dub the officers into his story and even convinced them to leave the boy.  Jeffery began strangling Konerak before the officers could even pull away.  Jeffery now learned that he was smarter than the police and therefore would never be caught.

            The police officers that responded to Jeffery’s apartment used a technique known as the decision-making process (Gaines 2003).  This process allows officer to distinguish whether or not to begin the criminal justice process.  This power of discretion is a simple task of whether or not to write the speeding ticket or too arrest the drug user for possession.  Their discretion does not stop at the initial interaction between the offender and the officer but continues throughout the criminal process.  Officer can and often do influence the process up until the time the trial begins.  The officer always has the option of dismissing the charges, amending the charges, or seeking a plea agreement. The officer’s discretion can ultimately teach the offender how to act in order to influence the officer to fall for his ploy.

Research Plan

    A study of murder from the statistical point of view is essential to the understanding in its frequency and by who is committing murder.  It is important to understand that statistics are often misleading and therefore not always consistent with actual numbers.  This paper will use two sources of information to give the reader a little insight on the number of murders in the United States in 1999 and the current trend in murders committed in the United States from 1976 to 1999.  These two graphs will give the reader an idea of the current expected murders that occur each year and by what age, race, and gender a majority of these murders are committed.

            Table 1 gives the reader an understanding of the total amount of crime committed in the United States in 1999.  It is the papers intention to focus on only murder.  This table shows that 15,533 murders were committed within the United States in 1999.  This table was extracted from the United States Senate Republican Party Committee website dated July 11, 2001.

Crime Reported in the United States, 1999

It is the intention of this paper to not only show the number of murders committed but also by what type of person is most frequently committing these murders.  Table 2 shown by this paper will include a breakdown of the commission of murders.  It is taken from the Bureau of Justice Studies from statistical data collected from 1976 to 1999.  The second portion of this statistical view is a line chart that graphs the data listed below.