Understanding Serial Predatory Behavior Through the Lens of the Golden State Killer

On April 25 of this year, 72-year-old Joseph James DeAngelo was identified as the infamous Golden State Killer (GSK), a predator who stalked, raped, and murdered up and down California, beginning sometime in the mid-1970s until his last known murder in l986. After that, GSK seems to have gone dormant.

So far DeAngelo has been formally charged with two southern California murders, and is suspected in more than 42 sexual assaults, 12 murders, and >70 residential burglaries. Additional formal charges are expected within the coming weeks. DeAngelo was identified when his DNA was recently matched with DNA recovered from his crime scenes.

It is fascinating that GSK seems to have stopped his crime spree after l986. If this is true, the question is why and how was he able to control or tamp his homicidal and deviant sexual urges for >30 years. Having spent some time on this case, I can say that the behavior of the GSK was prolific, sadistic, purposeful, extremely callous, and well planned. GSK engaged in this behavior for years, so it is hard to believe he could just stop cold turkey. The paraphilic urges and compulsions, which fueled his behavior, did not likely just fade away. So, what happened?

It is one of the most perplexing features about this type of predatory violence. An offender is prolific for years, then for unknown reasons he stops. Now that the GSK is known to investigators, his DNA will be compared with other DNA databases, including CODIS, the national DNA database, to determine whether there are other outstanding crimes DeAngelo may have committed. But if he voluntarily stopped his violent crime wave, it is critical for experts to understand why.

There is still so much we do not know about violence. It remains a mysterious mixture of psychological, physiological, neurological, and behavioral components. We know from other serial killer cases that when these offenders have been “busy” with real-life demands, for example, marriage and raising kids, it was too difficult for them to get away and commit their crimes, or maybe they were just more accountable for their time. In addition, sexual assault and murder require a certain amount of physical strength and stamina, and although that could have impacted GSK's ability to continue, he was only 42 years old when he stopped. He was not an old man. Serial killers battle with failing health, and medical conditions that can impact their ability to continue. But so far nothing has been released regarding GSK's physical health, and we know he was able to hold down a full-time job until only several years ago. Can some serial killers just become completely satiated, and loose the thrill of the hunt, and sense of power and control over life and death? Whatever the reason GSK stopped, I believe his violent, sexually deviant, and predatory urges did not just stop or go away. It is probably much more likely he found other outlets for his needs, and those outlets remain a mystery at this time. Dennis Radar, the Bind Torture Kill serial killer, was dormant for 18 years and during that time he supposedly engaged in deviant types of autoerotic behaviors.

There may be some who believe the reason GSK stopped is because he turned over a new leaf, developed empathy and compassion, maybe even found religion, and saw the mistakes of his way. I very seriously doubt that. If GSK found empathy or compassion for his victims, he would have come forward years ago, and taken responsibility for his actions, giving victims and their families some kind of resolution.

Instead, GSK was able to fly under law enforcement's radar screen for nearly 30 years, and during that time, he brought no suspicion on himself. This was, in part, because of a façade of normalcy he maintained. DeAngelo served as a police officer for a while, and then worked in a food store for years where he kept a low-profile living in plain sight in middle America. He married, had children, and grandchildren, all of which reinforced a pretense he was like his other law-abiding neighbors and fellow citizens.

So often the public's perception of violent offenders is that when they are identified, they will look like monsters or devils. That is simply not the case. And, conversely, some believe that “normal” people, who live middle America lifestyles, are simply incapable of engaging in this type of depraved violence. “He could never do something like that. He's a police officer, a father, a grandfather, and lives in a nice house, in a nice neighborhood, etc.”

At the same time GSK was identified, another high-profile offender was convicted of violent crimes, after nearly 50 years of similar allegations against him by as many as 60 women. America's Dad, Bill Cosby, was convicted of three counts of sexual assault against one victim. Cosby is 80 years old now, and the allegations against him date back to his 20s. And for years, Cosby flew under the radar screen, in part, because wealthy famous entertainers are not predators or rapists. We know with the birth of the #MeToo Movement—that just is no longer so.

Neither Mr. Cosby nor Mr. DiAngelo look like monsters. They did not look like the sexually deviant behaviors they engaged in. Society so often bases its assumptions about violence, and threatening behavior on how someone looks. Such preconceived ideas about violence have to change, and be replaced with more realistic views of who these offenders can be.

Violence begins in the brain, and to understand violence, especially predatory sexual violence, requires ongoing and well-funded research into every aspect of this abnormality: the psychology, physiology, neurology, and behavior of this violence, from the time of onset until it ages and declines—if it ever does.

I believe most of us who read Violence and Gender, and work in the field, find violence to be a fascinating aberration of human behavior, especially violence that is predatory in its nature. Many of you are editors with this journal and contributors, and are some of the best violence researchers in the world, and I urge you to continue your work in this area, and to submit it to this journal.

Violence must be viewed along a continuum. Offenders should not be placed in mental health boxes, or described using out-dated taxons. Their behavior should be explained in terms of how they select their victims, interact with the victims, engage in need-driven behavior, and react to the victim once he is finished with him or her. Discussing their social status or how they look or the job they have before we talk about their behavior is counterproductive.

All violence is not created equal, and knowing the differences is critical. We are able to solve 30-year-old crimes with state-of-the-art forensic technology. We still cannot predict who will become the next violent offender, what the precursor etiologies are, or contributing factors that first launch a serial killer's career or the evolving contributing factors that fuel it. Significant amounts of money have for years been poured into DNA technology to make it the incredible gold standard forensic science it is today. We need to do the same with behavior and violence. We all know we will not stop all types of violence no matter how “smart” we become. But we certainly need to do a better idea of how we understand it.