Has anyone here ever considered doing that? As odd it may sound, I find their psychology really interesting, and I really just want to know "Why" they do what they do.

I also believe serial killers could actually help solve a lot of these missing women cases, particularly the ones that seem like the work of a serial killer (like Angela Hammond). Even if they didn't know anyone involved, they could, from their POV as a killer themselves, offer up perhaps a better psychological portrait of these other killers.

Has anyone here ever considered doing that? As odd it may sound, I find their psychology really interesting, and I really just want to know "Why" they do what they do.

I also believe serial killers could actually help solve a lot of these missing women cases, particularly the ones that seem like the work of a serial killer (like Angela Hammond). Even if they didn't know anyone involved, they could, from their POV as a killer themselves, offer up perhaps a better psychological portrait of these other killers.

It would depend on what type of serial killer we are talking about. Most serial killers are medical personnel that acts as "angels of death", mothers that kill multiple children and attempt to disguise it as being the result of accidental deaths or criminals that kill other criminals.

None of those groups really have that much going (IMHO) that would be interesting to hear other than their methods of avoiding detection and the potential identities of undiscovered
victims, which something they won't part w/ unless there's something in it for them.

Honestly, the few interviews w/ serial killers that I have seen are mostly self-love fests where a narcissist regales another person w/ tales of how they harmed others and enjoyed it.
Not much there....

Best I can remember, Ted Bundy contacted the Green River Killer task force offering his "expertise" to help solve the case. Dave Reichert interviewed him, but the only real info that they found helpful was that Bundy told them the killer would go back to where he dumped the bodies and when the cops found a fresh corpse, they should stake it out and wait for the killer to return.

Bundy was right, but it wasn't a practical method to catch the guy. The rest of the communication was what Cocytus said, a manipulative, narcissistic love fest.

It makes me think of Silence of the Lambs. Certainly, there would be quite interesting aspects, but not necessarily the tools to catching another killer. Not to mention narcissism and antagonism would probably come into play. Could you imagine interviewing the Night Stalker? Especially as a woman (because of how they were generally his targets) that would be one hell of an interview and quite frightening. I would predict a ton of manipulation and attempted gain from such an interview.

Read John Douglas's book "Mind Hunter". That is how criminal profiling became what it is today. They interviewed incarcerated serial killers to gain insight that to this day helps to profile a killer and hopefully apprehend them more quickly.

I am not certain that nurses committing mercy kills would technically fall into the realm of serial killer. While they may kill multiple people, an act of mercy is not the same thing as abducting someone on sidewalk, taking them into the woods to kill them and mutilate their body. Most serial killings are sex crimes. A doctor or nurse doing this wouldn't seem to fit in this area.

Most serial killers when interviewed have a very arrogant attitude and tend to talk of their crimes almost like old war stories. They tend to be proud of their work. Someone interviewing them has to keep this in mind when interviewing and play off of their arrogance. Otherwise, they will likely not be to forthcoming with information.

Read John Douglas's book "Mind Hunter". That is how criminal profiling became what it is today. They interviewed incarcerated serial killers to gain insight that to this day helps to profile a killer and hopefully apprehend them more quickly.

I am not certain that nurses committing mercy kills would technically fall into the realm of serial killer. While they may kill multiple people, an act of mercy is not the same thing as abducting someone on sidewalk, taking them into the woods to kill them and mutilate their body. Most serial killings are sex crimes. A doctor or nurse doing this wouldn't seem to fit in this area.

Most serial killers when interviewed have a very arrogant attitude and tend to talk of their crimes almost like old war stories. They tend to be proud of their work. Someone interviewing them has to keep this in mind when interviewing and play off of their arrogance. Otherwise, they will likely not be to forthcoming with information.

How would they not be serial killers? There's a cooling off period between kills, they kill multiple people, they show limited or no remorse about their actions and they are usually only stopped by their own death or their incarceration.
What is the else basis for being called a serial killer?

In fact, most of the true crime shows AVOID too many stories about "angels of death" as the medical industry is powerful group to have as an adversary and looking a little too close at past practices could potentially cost them billions.

I submit that if deaths in poorly-run nursing homes, private care facilities and private caregivers for the past 50 years alone were put under scrutiny, the actions of several dozen serial killers would probably emerge. Since the cases would be expensive and difficult to prosecute, I have always believed that the authorities have avoided them at all costs.

When I was in college (I was a criminal justice major), I wrote a paper in one of my classes on Oba Chandler. I contacted a reporter for The St. Petersburg Times regarding this case just to see if anything new had developed from it, whether or not Chandler was still alive, etc.. He and I talked frequently and he helped me tremendously, then he asked how I would feel about coming to Tampa to interview Oba Chandler? I told him I would be fine with it but that I doubt I would uncover anything new since he still maintains his innocence. Anyway, to make a long story short, Chandler would not speak with me, but I was willing to interview him.

Not to continue straying off topic, but as far as the health care thing goes, I was simply saying that i doubt they would be called serial killers in the traditional sense. Serial killers kill for the gratification of killing. They get off on it. An angel of mercy as it would be called is something different. They kill to end someone's suffering. More often then not with the patients consent.

Personally if I were to the point where I couldn't move and was a vegetable, I would want to be put out of my misery and I think most would agree. However, I would not want to have the zodiac killer shoot at me while I sit in a parked car. There is a huge difference. That's all I am saying.

Now if a medical worker gets off on putting folks out of their misery, I would suggest there is something wrong with this individual. Serial killers tend to escalate in their methods. Jack the ripper is a good example. 5 known killings, each more brutal than the last (with the exception of the one he was interrupted in the process of the killing). If a medical worker somehow escalated from "pulling the plug" to beating a patient to death, then I would lump them as a serial killer. If we are talking primarily about letting someone that is a vegetable go peacefully, I would not put them in with the serial killers.

It is an interesting argument however because as was stated, they do use the same manner most.of the time, and may continue for years with multiple killings. But I think they would have to escalate and begin killing in more intense or brutal ways and go out "hunting" or so to speak, before I would call them serial killers.

"Mercy" killing is a nice excuse to hide or justify psychopathy-driven murders, and the element of compulsion remains. People who commit serial "mercy" killings remain psychopaths, however they are more apt to justify taking other people's lives, especially the sick and vulnerable ones, as a gesture of mercy.

The difference, of course, is that the victim or the victim's relatives never consented to it beforehand, so it's murder.

Maybe there is a miscomunication here. I am talking about an old go with no heart or lungs left that are doing him any good and along with the cancer and brain tumor that is slowly eating away at him and the fact that he can't walk, use the bathroom or eat. This man turns to his doctor, and says please help me to end this. I want to die. How the hell do you call someone who does that a serial killer? Even if they have done this for more than one patient. That is not the same mentality as a serial killer.


As far as the topic goes, I would find it both fascinating and chilling to talk to a true serial killer. I think its important that the authorities do this as well. They need to know what they are up against. If I were several years younger, I would seriously think of going into the field of criminal psychology or criminal profiling. It would be very satisfying to work in a field that would bring these kinds of people off of the street so they cannot hurt anyone else. Interviewing them would be strange because as I said, part of me would be very interested in what they have to say, but the other part of me would be creeped out.