Marinade Dave posted a little research he did on the Casey Anthony case, in which he found that the two houses closest to the area where Caylee was found have the names “Zenaida” and “Gonzalez”.
Interesting, and very strange. Yes, it’s even a little creepy.
Of course, that still doesn’t explain how Casey knew that someone named Zenaida Gonzalez had looked at the very same apartment at Sawgrass where she claimed “Zanny The Nanny” lived (though the apartment was long empty), but nevertheless, it’s still something to ponder.
Thank you very much for the plug, ElfNinosMom, and coming from Devil Anse’s ancestry, that’s a really nice compliment. Actually, you earned everything on your own and you make him proud.
The “Zenaida/Gonzalez” theory is just that. I don’t know if it really does mean anything, but it could be where she got the name and she jumped at it when she saw the Sawgrass application or whatever. I just don’t know, but even if we could tie the name to either or both, where did the Fernandez come from? I’m still working on that one.
Much obliged.
The pleasure is all mine, Dave. Thank YOU for doing the legwork, and for the compliment. Of course, I have to give props to ol’ Devil Anse and far too many other relatives (both living and dead) to count, since coming from a family like mine makes understanding the criminal mind a lot easier, LOL.
I personally suspect Casey threw the “Fernandez” name into the mix to throw off the cops, as well as to make the alleged nanny/kidnapper seem more obviously Hispanic, and therefore more frightening to her mother Cindy. After all, Cindy has a serious problem with Hispanics according to at least one of Casey’s friends, and of course Casey intentionally led her family to believe they were in serious danger.
I would like to have been there when she was looking at the photo lineup, so I could observe her expressions and behavior, because I strongly suspect she did recognize Zenaida Gonzalez as the woman she had set up. The tell on that one would be if she physically moved her head while looking at the photos, rather than just looking at them by moving her eyes, because she would feel the need to make a show of pretending like she was studying the photos.
However, I always wondered why she latched onto that one particular person, because details of that nature are never purely random with disorganized killers. There is always truth interspersed with the lies about their crime, because they are not intelligent enough to realize what they are letting slip, but they have to lie eventually because the victim and/or the area are very familiar to them, and when objects are used in the murder, they use objects readily at hand.
For that reason, I knew there had to be more to it than Casey just fingering a random stranger, so I was very excited to read your post.
I suspect Casey knew that those people lived in those houses, perhaps even just subconsciously, when she somehow found out about Zenaida Gonzalez via Sawgrass, and that’s why Zenaida was targeted rather than Casey just making up random information about the alleged kidnapper (which would actually have been much smarter, but again, disorganized killers are not very intelligent). For that reason, what you said makes perfect sense to me, even if Casey is not aware of that connection herself.
That’s one very interesting little coincidence, isn’t it?
Yes, it sure is a strange coincidence.
Also interesting: Apparently there was a car pulled over and tickets given, on May 24, that match up (or coincidence) with Amy H and Casey driving around, and the name Zenaida Gonzalez was given as the driver, but Amy’s name given as passenger and owner of car and insurance. Hmm.
The method of payment and timing of payment for these tickets is interesting indeed!
I will try to re-find this article for you and send you the link.
It was out in blogs around January so you may have seen it, but it suggests she may have been using the name ZG as an alias for a while. The article also speaks of a robbery, where a computer and cellph was taken, from a Zanaida Gonzalez, who lived in the same building as the murdered blogger in Blanchard Park.
Remember Cindy deftly removed cash and a license (was not casey’s picture on it) and a credit card from Casey’s wallet, and slipped it into her pockets before turning over the purse to LE.
Casey is a very interesting gal indeed, what with the escort service, the Facebook advertising her voluntary attendance to parties, and her use and abuse of other peoples credit cards and names.
This article even suggests she had ties to the jogger killed in Blanchard Park. Actual tickets at the courthouse, that makes me look further. Theories grow like Daisies !
I am oddly fascinated by them all.
And of course, MARINADE DAVE is a BABE!
Pozelenore, hope you find that article, I’d love to read it !!!
This is the story. It’s called “Annie & Zannie Go To Traffic Court” and it’s fascinating!
http://tinyurl.com/oyld4h
It is indeed interesting, but note that the tickets given to Annie Downing and Zenaida Gonzalez were not numbered consecutively. This means that the two women could not have been in the same vehicle when given the tickets.
Thanks beez, im slow – The Beez Knees faster than superbee
and with a wonderful grin !
Thanks for the blogs, all of you, its a lot of work and it is appreciated by all of us commenters !!
THANKS !
Thanks for reading the blog!
Personally, I will say that I’m partial to both the ‘Could Zenaida Gonzales Been Code For Caylee Location?’ AND the Zannie & Annie Go To Traffic Court story. Both stories also covered by Blink at Scared Monkeys. Compelling IMO.
Zenaida Gonzales Property: http://tinyurl.com/7q352t
Zannie & Annie Go To Traffic Court: http://tinyurl.com/oyld4h
As soon as I get out of moderation you will see the link to the Zenaida Gonzales Property story. It’s good too.
Sorry you got stuck in moderation, Akismet does that whenever there are links, thanks to spammers.
The spooky part is….when Casey said “Zenaida Gonzales “has” Caylee”…she was actually telling the truth (in her oddball way). Caylee was there, with Zenaida on one side and Gonzales on the other. Too strange.
Her parents would be the only ones who would have known or suspected that there was in fact no Zanny the Nanny.
Sociopaths use language and circumstances in ways which will baffle and offend most sensible and credible people. I am sure that when she was interviewed by LE during the early days of this investigation that she not only annoyed the investigators but also spooked them out.
She didn’t spook law enforcement. Detectives are used to dealing with people like Casey.
Poz-I don’t think she was a disorganized killer as she was more a disorganized thinker. I think she knew the definition of words and their meaning but she had no emotional attachment to them. She didn;t even have the intellectual energy it took to make up a good story. She used words and people like they were expendable. The fact that she was a lazy and thoughtless thinker leads me to believe that she used whatever was around. If everyone knew she identified someone identifable that was good enough for her. The rest is just a coincidence-many times the inconsequential and offbeat take up the time of serious and fairminded people.
She was and will continue to be a consummate liar. Sad for the sociopath that neither her lies nor the truth will set her free.
Sociopathy and disorganization are completely separate issues. The former describes the psychological mechanism by which others are depersonalized and devalued as the norm. The latter describes murder methodology based upon a number of factors.
A disorganized killer is opportunistic, kills close to home with weapons readily available at their disposal, and their victim is usually known to them. They are of average to below-average intelligence, have trouble maintaining relationships, and are socially incompetent (can’t hold down a job, drops out of school, etc).
An organized killer is socially competent, intelligent, targets strangers, and rarely kills close to home. They are very cunning, rarely leave behind significant evidence, and are therefore far more dangerous and difficult to catch before they amass multiple victims.
Boston, I agree with you. She was obviously very used to lying and getting away with it. It would be interesting to talk with her teachers, although I have no doubt that she acted the same at school. How do you think she’ll spin this to herself as she wiles away her life in prison? Who is she going to blame? Cindy? George? Caylee? Cause we all know that at no point will she ever see it was her own fault ending up where she is. What a waste of more than one life. She has managed to decimate her entire family by killing Caylee. I think she is evil.
Patti – we can take that one step further. If Casey had used Zenaida as an alias, then Zenaida (Casey) did indeed “have” Caylee.
I do not believe that control freak Cindy never asked Caylee about the nanny. How was your day with the nanny, what did you do today with the nanny, where did you go? she would not want to fire questions at casey, but would have no problem asking caylee things. I know George said he brought up zanny the nanny & only got a blank stare from caylee. I wonder why he never asked her any more about it?
I think that’s a very good question, Molly.
Both the organized killer (a serial killer) and the disorganized killer, someone who kills a known victims, etc. share the same lack of remorse, shame and empathy. Both are diagnosed as sociopaths.
Molly-Cindy never believed for a moment that Casey left Caylee with Zanny the Nanny. If Cindy Anthony became anything but a loving grandmother and a supportive wife and mother to her daughter, it will never be because she was a control freak. Cindy provided a home, food and clothing to Casey and Caylee and we all know where that got her.
Actually, no, not all killers are diagnosed as sociopaths. “Sociopath” is not even a diagnosis. It is a loosely-used term clinically referring to Antisocial Personality Disorder, but also used in common parlance to reference those with moral bankruptcy who do not fit the diagnostic criteria.
Antisocial Personality Disorder is a very specific diagnosis, with established diagnostic criteria which first rules out any mental or physical disease/defect which can cause the same symptoms, and takes into account whether the behavior is traceable to adolescence as a conduct disorder.
Many people kill due to mental illness, and in fact schizophrenia and mania are differential diagnoses for Antisocial Personality Disorder. Some even kill due to physical disease which affects their psychiatric functioning, and head injuries are often attributable in those cases. Many kill as the result of drug or alcohol abuse. Some killers are reliving a traumatic event through killing others, as it provides a form of release. Many killers are quite remorseful about their actions, but some are unable to control the urge to kill again.
There are many reasons why people kill which are not related to Antisocial Personality Disorder, and therefore they would not all be diagnosed as such.
Bees-With the boatload of narcissism that she so often displays I would say that she probably forgave herself the moment the deed was done. She was working on her “case” when most people in Orlando were still searching for Caylee.
She brings new meaning to indifference with not only a complete disregard for Caylee but for each and every member of her family. They were and will continue to be the people she has always thrown under the bus, manipulated, feigned love and affection for while stealing their money, lying, using the car they gave her as a coffin and all the while telling friends and strangers she slept with that her parents were “F**king low-lifes”.
It’s comments like that that make the grieving process so tough for them. They deserve better. They aren;t saints and either am I.
“She brings new meaning to indifference.” You hit the nail on the head with that one, Boston!
Hello All! This is one of the best discussions in a while. It’s been quiet lately and I did read Daves post the other day. Lots of good and interesting information.
I don’t know how I ever missed the “traffic” or the “house” information. Although it was January and I was still recovering from surgery. So with all those mes maybe I did read it…lol
I keep wondering: If it is true that Casey will take the stand, is she going to throw her parents, brother and all else involved under the bus? I know that it was said a while back that she was going to target Jesse Grund, but I wonder if the entire will be taken aback when their names are dropped on the stand??? Just a thought.
Good question, Halfpint!
She may in fact try to blame it on someone else. The defense will likely claim the police developed tunnel vision, and failed to follow up on other leads.
I suspect someone directly in her line of fire will be Ricardo Morales, because he deleted data from his computer after specifically being told not to do so, yet the police still did not investigate him as a potential suspect.
All the defense needs is to establish reasonable doubt, after all. They don’t have to prove a single thing, because the burden of proof is completely on the prosecution in a criminal trial. The jury will be clearly informed of that fact, too.
[Edited to correct that the response was to Halfpint rather than BeesKnees - ENM]
Whoops! Should have read: ” with all those meds”
The disorganized and the organized sociopaths, if they kill, are sociopathic killers. They are catorgorized as organized and disorganized as a way in which to delineate their actions, inactions, feelings, lack of feeling, etc. These descriptions, I think, are really talking about how their personalities are established or distinguished from one another. A check list of characteristics if you will. But in order to fully understand the sociopath we have to know straightaway that the mental processes of those suffering from APD/Sociopathy are poorly regulated and not bound by conventional rules. They do not suffer from mental illness and when they kill it is a choice.
Millions of people each year are diagnossed with mental illnesses and it is clear in the literature that most people suffering from a mental illness DO NOT kill.
EXAMPLE
Andrea Yates killed her children because she was phychotic.
She had been known to mental health officials since she was first treated for adolescent scizhophrenia (age 16). She went off her meds, was neglected and when arrested for the crime she told LE that she hadn’t taken a bath in three weeks. Andrea was disoriented and out of touch with reality.
Casey had testing done prior to her Bond hearing. Coupled with the results of that testing and the smell of decomp in the car her Bond was set at 500K. When Casey Anthony told her parents that she didn;t have any mental illness, I would hazard a guess that her answer was predicated on what the psychiatrist might have told her after the testing was completed. Just a hunch.
Psychopaths are not disoriented or out of touch with reality, nor do they experience the delusions, hallucinations, or intense subjective distress that characterize most other mental disorders. Unlike psychotic individuals, psychopaths are rational and aware of what they are doing and why. Their behavior is a result of choice, freely exercised. (Hare, 1993)
“The disorganized and the organized sociopaths, if they kill, are sociopathic killers.”
Great game of semantics you’ve got going on there, LOL.
Let’s review for a moment. You originally said is that Casey is not a disorganized killer, because she is a sociopath. When I corrected your statement, you then said disorganized and organized killers are all sociopaths. When I corrected you again, you changed your statement to refer to organized and disorganized sociopaths being sociopathic killers.
Well, you finally got something right, because if a sociopath kills, they are indeed a sociopathic killer. LOL
However, the problem with your latest statement is that there is no such thing as an organized or disorganized sociopath. Organization, again, is a term referring to crime methodology, while sociopathy is a term referring to personality. They are NOT the same thing.
Furthermore, the word “psychopath” never appears in the DSM-IV or the ICD-10. It’s just another non-clinical term referencing Antisocial Personality Disorder, as well as referring in common parlance to those with moral bankruptcy.
The difference between a sociopath and a psychopath, historically speaking, is only in the perceived cause of the condition, and not in the condition itself. “Psychopath” is a term coined in Germany in the 1880s, and refers to the condition being caused by “internal sickness”. Evolving opinions about the cause of antisocial personality disorder eventually resulted in the term “sociopath” in the 1930s, which refers to external causes for the same condition. However, neither term is medically defined.
When Robert D. Hare used the word “psychopath”, the work was written for those who already understand the subject matter, and not for general consumption in quotes taken out of context, as you have done here. Hare actually believes that psychopathy is a separate and distinct “super disorder” which encompasses traits of Antisocial Personality Disorder, Histrionic Personality Disorder, and Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
However, Hare’s work has not been accepted by the American Psychiatric Association, and his “Psychopathy Checklist Revised” (PCL-R) is not available for public sale because it is a research document.
Boston just got pwnd again, LOL!
Give up, Boston. We all know you’re just making stuff up as you go along, trying to make yourself look smarter than you really are. You want to make people think you’re an expert, but I bet you never even took a college psychology course, LOL!
Elfsmom, what do you think causes Boston to do something that weird? Narcissism? Delusion? Is she a Sociopath? Inquiring minds want to know!!
ElfNinosMom, you might be interested in reading a piece I wrote in April. It’s funny that with the amount of comments I got from it, most people didn’t seem to get it at all.
http://marinadedave.wordpress.com/2009/04/17/when-a-mother-kills/
Great work, Dave! I’m going to start a new thread on that one, because I think it’s a great subject for discussion, but don’t want to confuse anyone here by discussing two separate articles in one thread.
Hiya, Dave. I posted the discussion about your link at
http://elfninosmom.wordpress.com/2009/07/13/what-was-casey-anthony-thinking/
Hare is an outstanding Canadian clinician. Read some of his writings and maybe you might change your mind about him.
I see above that Dave has an article that might he interesting to read.
I know exactly who Hare is, because I have actually studied his work.
The fact remains, however, that his assertion about psychopathy is not accepted in the mainstream psychiatric community, nor is it likely to be accepted.
If you studied his work than you should be familiar with his reputation. He has spent well over 35 years in the field researching psychopathy.He is renownd in the field of criminal psychology.His PCL is used throughout North America as a diagnostic tool in identifying who might and might not be a sociopath. He advises the FBI, State Police in almost every jurisdiction, RCMP,etc.
Read Without Conscience (see citation above)and you will get a better handle on his insights and contributions to the field of criminal psychology. Snakes in Suits is also excellent.
It is perfectly okay to disagree with me but I wouldn;t want that to interfere with your understanding of Hare.
Please read the following:
Slate
The Depressive and the Psychopath
At last we know why the Columbine killers did it.
This article states that Hare’s book Without Conscience is the seminal book on the condition (sociopath/psychopath). In this article you will see my citation above. It is a coincidence but a nice one. Neither one of us cited the page number but I will-see p.22.
Elfnino’smom, good discussion on the terminology! I appreciate some of the clarification. Two questions; if Casey is a disorganized killer, does that eliminate premeditation?
My other question pertains to the entire discussion: Is your terminology legal, medical, or academic?
Disorganization does not eliminate premeditation, since legally speaking premeditation can take place in mere seconds. Great question, by the way!
To answer your other question …. My education and training is in Criminology (an interdisciplinary science encompassing the fields of psychology, sociology, and law), while most of my experience is in law (predominantly criminal defense).
Since my background is so varied, I may use terms which are legal, medical (or occasionally) academic in nature; but since this is just my personal blog, for readability purposes I usually just use words here which have a commonly understood meaning which conveys the same general idea. For example, when I say “sociopath”, I am referring to the diagnostic term Antisocial Personality Disorder, and when I say “premeditation”, I am referring to the legal standard for establishing premeditation.
However, unless there is a reason to do so, I don’t usually discuss those advanced concepts in any detail here. If I did that, I’d have no time left to discuss reality tv shows on this blog, LOL.
See also: Psychiatric Times
Vol. 13 No.2
Psychopath and Antisocial Personality Disorder (APSD)
Sorry-I should have finished that….
A Case of Diagnostic Confusion
by Robert D. Hare, Ph.(see DSM-IV as well as Some Problems)
This is a good article and will I hope, shed more light on this complex and interesting discussion.
Robert D. Hare was honored by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in 2001 and received the Issac Ray Award.
Please see article:
Psychiatrists, Congressman, Non Profit Organizations Receive Distinguished Service Awards at the APA Annual Meeting
You copy, almost verbatim and without a citation, from articles you read online. Your 4:03pm post is from SciTechLab dated Dec 4, 2008 “What is a Psychopath”. Had you gone down a little further you would have noticed that Hare’s books were cited.
A real understanding of these complex issues is from your reading and your analysis of reliable sources. It is best to give credit where credit is due and cite the author and the reasons why you agree or disagree. If you do not agree with the author and his/her research findings it is not prudent to say he or she has no credible standing in the field.
Last thought. In the article above the unkown author states that Hare’s book Without Conscience was published in 1999. That is incorrect. It was published in 1993 -see citation above.
yipes. elfmom, on the other boards there is a suggestion of how tickets are given out and the order and why, re your comment to me on the Annie great adventure story. Just lookin your way scares me, I dont make eye contact here with you.
Geez it was just a muze, and like I said, theories sprout like daisies and dang, cut a daisy head off and eat it why dont ya.
Off with their heads !!
You don’t seem to be having any fun anyway.
I read all the comments here and you must be exhausted.
ROFLMAO, Pozelenore!
Believe me, I am exhausted. And I have a headache too, LOL
That’s okay, though, because only the interesting people are here now.
I didn’t mean to give you the impression that I was knocking the theory, because I find the various theories interesting to read as well. I was just referring to the ticket numbers reflecting that they couldn’t have been in the same car together when the tickets were given
However, it’s still extremely interesting that there is a Zenaida Gonzalez in that area who is close to Casey’s age, because there has been nothing I have seen to suggest she was located, much less investigated, as the possible “Zanny The Nanny”. It also makes me wonder if she fits the description given by Casey.
If so, the defense will have a heyday with that information at trial.
Well, I am pleased to say I don’t know any killers, sociopathic, disorganized, or otherwise, but I think I can spot a well-organized mind and I cast my vote for elfninosmom. She makes sense to me, and I’m just waiting to hear a bit about the provenance of her info.
Hiya, Kari, and thanks for the kind vote of confidence.
I’m not always possessed of a well-organized mind, by the way. On some subjects, my mind is just about as disorganized as they come (and as if that’s not bad enough, you should see my closet, LOL).
I am answering your previous question below where it appears. Sorry it took me so long, but I haven’t been online since you posted it.
Ok, I just read your FAQ’s, so I guess I answered my own question. Your background is legal, your terminology would be mostly legal in origin.
Just curious, I guess. There is obviously a difference in the medical, legal, moral, or general-public definitions of words like ‘crazy’, ‘dead’, ’sick’. Some of those differences I am still learning, and they surprise me. I have a lot of trouble with the idea that sociopathy is not classed as a mental illness. I keep asking people what is it, then, a lifestyle choice??? A learning difference, maybe? Since these people seem to have never learned to care about others’ feelings or welfare, except for how it relates to themselves.
Well, there’s nothing illegal about consummate selfishness. A perfectly acceptable lifestyle, legally. Though unless the subject lives in perfect isolation, it could easily lead to criminal acts…
Hiya, Kari! Sorry I didn’t respond to your prior question before you ended up having to look for it, but I’m just now returning to the blog.
Honestly, I normally would never bother to go into terminology at all here, since so many commonly used words to describe behavior don’t have clinical definitions, but we all have a pretty good idea what they mean anyway. The only reason I did it in this case was because Boston was assuming to speak as an expert on a subject she obviously does not even begin to understand, and it’s not the first time she’s done that on this blog. I’ve always just ignored her before, but this time, I couldn’t because she was misinforming others on a level I just can’t in good conscience ignore.
Sociopathy (Antisocial Personality Disorder) is not a mental illness, because it is a disorder of personality. In a mental illness, the person’s thought process and behavior are reacting to something, for example, emotional trauma or a chemical imbalance. In a personality disorder, the person is merely being their normal self, so medically speaking, there is nothing wrong with them. Personality disorders are not even diagnosed unless it causes significant impairment in social functioning, no matter how dysfunctional the person may otherwise be.
There are degrees of sociopathy. Most sociopaths have a capacity to function in society, so they do have some non-sociopathic tendencies. Some however are so dysfunctional that they cannot function at all in conventional society. However, while they are not mentally ill, it is also not a choice, because they have no insight into their behavior. Without insight, one cannot change or even recognize their own behavior. For that reason, most with personality disorders are only diagnosed as the result of a mental illness which does not respond to conventional therapy, or as the result of involvement in the criminal justice system.
There are many theories as to the cause of sociopathic behavior, including of course external factors (especially neglect during infancy). Some researchers believe that people with sociopathy are simply born without the natural human capacity for empathetic behavior, or as some prefer to call it, “without a conscience”.
Having dealt with many, many sociopaths over the years, I have met many without any background which would suggest the disorder is external. They come from loving attentive families, have no indication of another physical or mental disease/defect which might tend to suggest another explanation for the behavior, and no drug or alcohol abuse which may explain it either. At the same time, those sociopaths are far more dangerous than typically seen.
Those people usually have a criminal history involving felonies reduced to misdemeanors, they rarely are held strictly accountable for their crimes because they always have a plausible explanation for why they did what they did, and they usually come to my attention when they finally cross the line into murder.
They can be quite charming, are highly manipulative but not obviously so, and usually those who know them long sensed that something wasn’t quite right about their behavior. The reason for this is that they are merely a caricature of a human being, since they lack normal human emotion, but they are also very adept at mimicking normal human behavior except in the most extreme of situations. It is rare that anyone suspected the person to be capable of murder, which makes them singularly dangerous. I loosely refer to those people as “true sociopaths”.
In those cases, the question becomes whether it is an acquired disorder, or something which always existed within them. Personally, I believe they are natural-born predators, and that the disorder has its basis in human evolution and may therefore have an as yet undiscovered genetic component. I am not alone in this belief. Scientists regularly study the genetic makeup of known killers, with a particular interest in families with multiple killers, in an attempt to locate a genetic basis for the behavior.
Until we understand the underlying cause of sociopathic behavior, we are doomed to remain their prey.
Boston, your narcissism knows no bounds. The sum total of your knowledge about the criminal mind comes from the internet, mass production books, and television. There’s nothing at all wrong with that, obviously, unless of course you fancy yourself an expert on crime for some inexplicable reason, and decide to present yourself as an authority while repeatedly engaging in gross disinformation.
To answer your accusation: I write everything here myself unless it is in quotes with a link. I don’t copy anything from the internet, because unlike you, I don’t have to copy anything from the internet. I don’t even have to research this particular information, because I know it off the top of my head. That you believe otherwise proves only that you are every bit as delusional as I assumed you to be.
Frankly, you are wasting my time, and have been wasting my time since you first started posting here over a month ago, because there is nothing even remotely interesting or insightful about your comments. I normally just ignore you, as you are very well aware. However, at this juncture you are also wasting the time of everyone reading this blog, because they are forced to wade through your ridiculous level of disinformation disguised as expertise.
However, I knew you would continue to post obsessively on the subject of Hare in my absence, and that I would return to many additional comments from you since you finally managed to get my attention in this thread. Like a needy child, you are oblivious to whether that attention is positive or negative.
Of course, I would note that I didn’t say anything negative about Hare, since I was actually just pointing out your lack of even basic knowledge about the very subject in which you view yourself as an authority. Reading comprehension never has been your strong suit here, though.
I also knew if I ignored you long enough after you first got my attention, you’d start hurling ridiculous accusations against me in a desperate attempt to garner my attention again. Since I’m the current target of your obsessive behavior, you were able to do nothing less.
So let me give you some of that much-desired attention, by explaining your behavior for everyone else’s edification and amusement.
You cannot tolerate being ignored by me, because you view yourself as superior. You wish to be viewed as an authority on any subject about which you are speaking, but you are not willing to do the work necessary to be viewed as an authority; as a result, you harbor strong resentment against others, especially other females, who have received the recognition you have not. You consistently attempt to belittle me because you believe your every word to be worthy of admiration, and even awe, but I have not recognized that about you. Your obsessive posting stems from your desire for me to acknowledge that you are superior and thus worthy of admiration, coupled with anger because I have not so acknowledged you.
Your motive in commenting is equally twisted, as you post not to engage in honest dialog like everyone else here, but instead to feed your pathological need for attention.
However, you have absolutely no insight into your behavior, so you do not see yourself in this description. Even as you read this, you are in such a state of denial that you still believe that you are absolutely right, and I am absolutely wrong. Prior to reading this reply you believed you had finally defeated me into silence, and thus proved yourself superior, but it never even occurred to you that I just wasn’t online in the interim. You will not be able to resist attempting to post additional comments here, in the desperate hope that I will finally recognize your brilliance, thus allowing you at long last to receive the recognition to which you falsely believe yourself entitled.
In other words, you need psychiatric help. Seriously.
Nevertheless, you have wasted more than enough of my time, since I am not at all inclined to engage in an ongoing battle of wits with an unarmed opponent, but especially not with an unarmed opponent who possesses your disturbed psychological profile. I am not your mother, I am not your babysitter, I am not your therapist, and I am not going to tolerate your abusive and highly dysfunctional behavior for even one more minute. I most definitely am not going to allow you to continue repeatedly posting disinformation on this blog, thus confusing the issues and wasting the time of every single person here.
Therefore, effective immediately, you are no longer welcome to comment on this blog. Any further comments from you will be automatically relegated to spam, and deleted without even being read.
But hey, thanks for putting the tard back in Frickintardistan. LOL
well its just a frickinfightistan.
I’m not fighting with Boston. I’m just putting her out of our misery.
Okay, that is hilarious. Always fascinating, in either eye.
Thanks, Elfninosmom, for your response. In some situations, like Casey Anthony’s, grave results may hinge upon just one little word, like ‘insanity’ or ‘premeditation’. I was not aware that premeditation could legally happen in a matter of moments.
But, I guess that’s understandable. A flash of anger or a blind rage should dissipate if there are several intermediate steps before an attack can take place. One of the best arguments for strict gun control; because guns make unpremeditated murder much more likely, in my opinion.
Also, I found your discussion of sociopaths extremely interesting because I have an ex who has been diagnosed (among other things) as sociopath. I have maintained a friendship with that person, and consequently spent years pondering what exactly was wrong with him.
He is a fortunate sociopath, since he sincerely wants to have loving relationships and a normal life. Or is that fortunate? There is an old Arabic curse I have heard of; “May you long to be decent!” That sort of describes his life. He has learned to successfully mimic normal conversational conventions, like expressing sympathy, etc. And he has a very few friends, myself and his son included.
Anyway, I finally came to the conclusion that he was simply born without any empathy. Other people’s feelings are not real to him. Though there is a gray area as well, for sociopaths in general, and for my ex, where a certain amount of learning can and should take place in the first 5-7 years of life. If a normal child does not have a healthy, loving relationship in those first years, s/he may never fully recover from that. But I do believe the condition is for the most part innate.
And your discussion of the term ’sociopath’ did help me to see it as not a mental illness. I suppose it might be regarded more in the light of a sort of disability. Like color blindness. Not an illness, not even a ’syndrome’, but just a sort of birth defect, as it were.
So, most of what you described agreed with my own observations. Thanks for the insight.
Hi again, Kari. Glad I could help.
Yes, premeditation can happen very quickly, despite public perception that it takes actual planning. It is simply a matter of whether there was a moment in time, even one second prior to the death, where the killer could have chosen to not kill.
Most cases involving premeditation, however, are not prosecuted as such. Prosecutorial decisions are made based upon a wide range of factors, including motive and continuing dangerousness.
For example … If the murder was for personal gain, it is far more likely to be prosecuted as a premeditated crime, even with a very short period of premeditation. If the murder occurred out of jealousy, however, it is unlikely to be prosecuted as a premeditated crime, even if they engaged in actual planning.
The difference is that jealousy is a normal human emotion, whereas killing for personal gain is never, ever considered normal behavior. Furthermore those who kill out of jealousy are unlikely to kill again, so lifelong periods of incarceration are usually not necessary for public safety; whereas those who kill for personal gain may kill repeatedly, and over a long period of time, if not permanently removed from society.
I am sorry to hear about your situation with your ex. That must have been extremely difficult for you.
Out of curiosity (and of course you don’t have to answer this question) was he diagnosed with a mental illness in addition to the personality disorder? If not, how did he come to be diagnosed?
Forgot to mention in response, just for clarification since you mentioned it and since we have been discussing the source of terminology … insanity is a strictly legal concept. Since it is not a diagnosis, there is not even a medical definition for insanity.
Legally speaking, however, insanity is the inability to differentiate between right and wrong. Insanity in fact can be fleeting, and one can be insane during the crime, but not insane immediately before and immediately after the crime.
However, it is still an extremely difficult defense to prove, even when the defendant has a diagnosed mental illness of extended duration, and even when that mental illness has been thoroughly documented to result in extreme psychosis.
The case of Andrea Yates comes immediately to mind as an example. You may recall that she murdered her five very young children, after repeated episodes of postpartum psychosis requiring extended inpatient psychiatric care and the administration of strong antipsychotic medications. She methodically drowned each child in the bathtub, then called 911 and calmly told them what she had done. She made no attempt whatsoever to cover up her crime, or to leave the scene.
Her motive was wholly altruistic, in that she believed that by murdering her children, she was saving them from hell.
The prosecution charged her with capital murder and sought the death penalty, and she pled not guilty by reason of insanity.
The defense presented evidence of her severe mental illness, as well as her excessive religiosity and the influence upon her by a cultish and abusive “minister” who had repeatedly told her that, because she was a “bad mother” and thus committed a deadly sin, her children were all doomed to spend eternity in hell. The prosecution’s assertion was that Andrea was not insane at the time of the murders, but instead got the idea from an episode of Law & Order.
The jury found her guilty of capital murder, and though they rejected the death penalty, she was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for 40 years.
Her conviction was overturned on appeal, however, due to materially false testimony by a prosecution witness. Dr. Park Dietz had testified that a Law & Order episode depicting the same crime had aired shortly before the murders, and that the character in that episode had been found not guilty by reason of insanity. However, no such episode existed at that time. The appellate court found correctly that the jury may have been unduly influenced by Dietz’s false testimony, and ordered a new trial.
The jury in her second trial found her not guilty by reason of insanity, and she was remanded to a psychiatric facility for an indeterminate period of time.
The second jury was right. Andrea Yates was legally insane when she killed her children, because she was unable to differentiate between right and wrong.
In truth, Andrea Yates poses no danger to anyone except her own children, who are now all dead. As long as she doesn’t have anymore children, though, she will never harm anyone again. By moving her to a low-security facility, the doctors have recognized this. However, it would cause a firestorm of controversy if she were ever released, so it is unlikely to happen anytime soon. She may never be released.
Don’t even get me started about Dietz lying under oath for the prosecution in a death penalty case, because it absolutely infuriates me even today. As a forensic psychiatrist and as a criminologist, he knew damn well that poor woman was insane when she killed her children, and he made up the story because he otherwise could not explain what she did in a manner which would help the prosecution. For that reason, he should have been prosecuted.
Thank you again, for clarifying that legal definition of insanity. I certainly agree with the folks who say Casey is/was not insane, in the sense that she knows right from wrong, enough to lie about it, and she should not be able to plea insanity. But she is somehow abnormal.
I began by saying she was mentally ill, but, since sociopathy is not classed as an illness, I suppose I will have to settle for saying she is just, um, morally bankrupt. Or socially disabled?
Anyway, I really like your dispassionate and practical approach toward punishment and society’s need to protect itself from criminals. I sincerely hope there are a lot more like you in the justice system, looking out for our best interests.
My ex was prosecuted, a couple years after we had divorced, as a sex offender, and during incarceration was diagnosed as sociopathic, bipolar, and schizophrenic. Not all at once, but each doctor seemed to have a different opinion. Which is why I was left to mull it over and decide for myself. He seems to fit each category, a little bit. But as his (ex)wife, what bothered me most were the sociopathic behaviors. Being able to sincerely say to me, and others, “I love you, you are very important to me!” while totally failing to notice or care about my/our unhappiness.
I thank you for your sympathy. It was difficult, but I did learn a lot, and it’s all water under the bridge, now.
Hiya, Kari! A lot of sex offenders are diagnosed with Antisocial Personality Disorder, simply by virtue of the nature of their crime. Schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, however, are something altogether different. He had to have symptoms of a major mental illness to get those diagnoses, even if doctors couldn’t agree on the diagnosis itself. It sounds like they felt he was experiencing psychosis, since that would be the common link between those two illnesses.
Just to be clear, not all bipolars are psychotic, but some do have psychotic features to their illness. All schizophrenics are psychotic by definition, but they are not all dangerous.
The complication in the criminal population, but especially in the prison system, is that psychosis can be rather easily feigned by a reasonably intelligent offender, and of course inmates have a motive to feign an illness of that nature.
However, I understand where the doctors were coming from in making those seemingly diverse diagnoses, since sociopathic behavior can be explained by all of them, and in fact schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are differential diagnoses for Antisocial Personality Disorder. The question then becomes whether his crimes were committed exclusively while under the influence of one of those differential diagnoses, or if it occurred even when the other illness was not active.
Also bear in mind that there is yet another illness which may explain all of it, including the inability of psychiatrists to agree, and that is schizoaffective disorder. Schizoaffectives have features of both schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and as such may also display symptoms of Antisocial Personality Disorder. However, it is a far more complicated diagnosis, and thus unlikely to be made in a prison setting unless the diagnosis is quite clear.
So it’s (obviously) impossible for me to tell what was wrong with him, but at the same time, there is also nothing which says he couldn’t have both Antisocial Personality Disorder as well as a major mental illness. The truth is, a lot of people with personality disorders also are mentally ill, so a dual diagnosis of that nature would not be at all uncommon.
Either way, I’m VERY glad you got out of that relationship, before you and your children were irreparably damaged by his behavior.
By the way, did you get my private response? I got a bounce-back notification on it, so I just wanted to check.
No, I did not receive a private response, I don’t know why. I’m good with a ‘keyboard’ (trained on a typewriter) but not so smart with the actual computer…
Interesting remarks on the subject of multiple diagnoses. A friend of his had also suggested schizo-affective disorder, but, as you say, the prison doctors were not looking to explore all possibilities. They did get him on lithium, though and it has gone a long way toward making his life livable, and reducing the risk that he might re-offend.
Thanks for your time.
I’m very glad your ex is doing better. If lithium changed his life to that extent, chances are that he is bipolar. If he were schizophrenic, lithium would not make any demonstrable difference, unless it were used in addition to antipsychotics. If he only had Antisocial Personality Disorder, it would have no effect at all on his behavior.
Just be aware that it is not uncommon for people go off their lithium without warning not only due to severe side effects, but sometimes because they miss the euphoric highs of mania which make life without it seem, by comparison, dull and meaningless. While that normally would not be catastrophic, if he committed a crime due to the illness, in his case it could be.
I just re-sent that, hope you get it this time.
Snooooooze …………………ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz