The World's Most Evil Psychopaths: Horrifying True-Life Cases

THE WORLD’S MOST EVIL

PSYCHOPATHS

HORRIFYING TRUE-LIFE CASES

JOHN MARLOWE

INTRODUCTION

One hundred years ago, a book on the subject of psychopaths would most certainly have included very different cases from some of the ones contained between these covers. At that time, when the crimes of Jack the Ripper, Joseph Vacher and Thomas Neill Cream were still well within living memory, the word ‘psychopath’ would have been used to denote any form of mental illness. But in describing someone as a psychopath today, we are more often than not referring to a person who has no concern for the feelings of others, an individual lacking any sense of social obligation.

Of course, very few psychopaths ever commit murder. The individuals included here are remembered because the extent of their cruelty set them apart from the rest of humanity. These are people who took delight in inflicting pain and death on others. All might be considered serial killers or spree killers, though most committed their crimes well before either term came into common use.

The earliest examples in this book are members of the nobility. Holding great wealth and political power, they perpetrated their misdeeds before police departments and other law enforcement bodies existed. Historical figures such as Gilles de Rais and Elizabeth Báthory committed their crimes with at least the partial knowledge of fellow members of the aristocracy. We know of their activities today through court documents. Vlad III Draculea, on the other hand, has become a legendary figure through oral history, a record given to exaggeration and fancy. And yet, despite an absence of documentary evidence, we are virtually certain that this prince of Wallachia is guilty of having committed inhuman acts.

The same cannot be said about Sweeney Todd, the Demon Barber of Fleet Street, whose very existence, never mind crimes, has been debated for generations. In all likelihood, Sweeney Todd is nothing more than one more creation of the fertile imagination of Thomas Prest, a 19th-century contributor to the penny dreadfuls.

It is in Prest’s 1846 story, ‘The String of Pearls: A Romance’, that the barber’s name first sees print. No one has yet uncovered files relating to
Rex v Sweeney Todd,
the trial that is said to have sent this 18th-century serial killer to the gallows, or any similar material.

The most that one can say in support of Mr Todd’s existence is that Prest’s writing was often inspired by actual crimes.

Thomas Prest’s method continues to be used today.

Author Thomas Harris, who was in the courtroom for portions of Ted Bundy’s 1979 murder trial, later incorporated the serial killer’s techniques in creating the character James ‘Buffalo Bill’ Gumb in
The Silence of the Lambs.
The long history of murders committed by the Monster of Florence inspired Harris to set the 1999 sequel, Hannibal, in the Italian city.

Those studying American literature may one day be introduced to Jeffrey Dahmer through the character he inspired: Quentin P., the protagonist of Joyce Carol Oates’ award-winning 1995 novel,
Zombie.

Other murderers found their stories adapted for the silver screen. John Wayne Gacy, ‘the Killer Clown’, lived long enough to see himself portrayed by the Tony award-winning actor Brian Dennehy in 1992’s
To Catch a Killer.

Of course, no killer has found his way into fiction and film more often than Jack the Ripper. He features in the novels of such varied writers as William S. Burroughs, Philip José Farmer and Colin Wilson, among many others, and has had a hold on the public’s imagination like no other before or since. This can at least partly be explained by the fact that he was never caught. He remains a shadow, one might say a phantom.

In Nicholas Meyer’s 1979 film
Time After Time,
Jack the Ripper steals H. G. Wells’ famous time machine and is transported into the 20th century. After witnessing the destruction and death surrounding him, he says, ‘Ninety years ago I was a freak. Today I’m an amateur.’

Indeed, the early part of the century saw war fought on a previously unimaginable scale. As if reflecting this, the frequency of psychopathic killing continued to rise. The body counts of serial killers such as Fritz Haarmann, Gary Ridgway and Andrei Chikatilo are many times those of Saucy Jack.

As the century progressed, advances in the technology of firearms helped bring about the rise of the spree killer. Mass murderers were now able to kill with a speed and efficiency that would once have been unimaginable. In carrying out the Columbine High School massacre, on 20 April 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold used a 12-gauge Savage-Springfield 67H pump-action shotgun, a Hi-Point 995 Carbine 9 mm semi-automatic rifle, a 9mm Intratec Tec-9 semi-automatic handgun and a 12-gauge Stevens 311 D double-barrelled shotgun. Within 45 minutes, they had killed 12 students and a teacher, and had wounded 24 others. The slaughter only ended when they both committed suicide.

In 2007, Robert Pickton was tried on 27 counts of first-degree murder. The victims of this third-generation pig farmer were, mostly, prostitutes who once walked the streets of Vancouver’s downtown Eastside. Pickton thus joined William Burke, William Hare, Thomas Neill Cream, Fritz Haarmann, Andrei Chikatilo, Jack Unterweger, Gary Ridgway – and, of course, Jack the Ripper – as a man known to have preyed on these marginalized and vulnerable members of society. The British Columbia Supreme Court sentenced Pickton to life with no possibility of parole for 25 years.

The murderers featured here rarely chose their equals as victims. Edmund Kemper – standing 6 foot, 9 inches – murdered women he towered over. Others, like Peter Kürten and spree killer Thomas Hamilton, counted children among their victims. Even Harris and Klebold, who went after their fellow high school students, had a distinct advantage in the firearms they carried.

In this way, the serial killers and spree killers of our time have something in common with those of the nobility centuries ago. They seek to exercise power over who lives and who dies. Why this is so, we may never know.

John Marlowe

Vancouver, British Columbia

A BLOODY HISTORY

History records a lengthy procession of souls who have committed acts of unspeakable evil. At the very front are certain aristocrats. Abusing their positions of privilege and power, they were able to murder, rape and torture with impunity – but only for a time. They are historic figures who have become legends in their own cultures and, in some particularly gruesome cases, have come to be known throughout the world.

GILLES DE RAIS

A nobleman and soldier, Gilles de Rais fought beside Joan of Arc during the siege of Orléans; in fact, this saint of the Roman Catholic Church was one of his greatest supporters. However, he is not remembered for his heroism or his accomplishments on the field of battle. Rais holds a place in history as one of the earliest recorded serial killers.

Gilles de Rais was born in the autumn of 1404 within the appropriately named Tour Noir at the château of Champtocé. His father, Guy de Montmorency-Laval, was one of the wealthiest men in France. Intelligent and shrewd, he had achieved his status through a number of legal and political manoeuvres, one of which was his marriage to Marie de Craon, Gilles’ mother. After both parents died – his father suffered a lengthy demise after having been gored by a wild boar – Gilles inherited the barony in the Duchy of Rais (now Retz).

Gilles ended up under the tutelage of his grandfather, Jean de Craon, a man schooled in the arts of manipulation and thievery. After two failed endeavours to marry his grandson into other powerful French houses, Jean became determined that Gilles would wed his cousin, Catherine de Thouars. He accomplished this union by directing the 16-year-old Gilles to abduct his bride. There was an attempt at liberation, but Catherine’s would-be rescuers were thrown into the dungeon at Champtocé and the marriage took place as planned.

In 1427, Gilles was made a commander in the royal army, supporting Charles VII in his efforts to gain the disputed French crown. He fought alongside Joan of Arc in several military campaigns and on 17 July 1429 was honoured at the coronation of Charles VII at Reims.

That particular ceremony, which he had helped prepare by carrying Charles’ anointing oil from Paris, marked the pinnacle of Gilles’ stature. A series of political and military blunders followed the coronation. Joan was captured the following year, and on 31 May 1431 was famously burned at the stake. In November 1432, Gilles’ grandfather died. On his deathbed, Jean de Craon repented his various misdeeds. The wealthy old man dispensed his money and property, compensated those from whom he’d stolen, and provided endowments to two hospitals. Gilles received nothing.

With the death of his former mentor, Rais was left alone to navigate the rather difficult waters of French politics. Lacking the talent and cunning of his father and grandfather, he saw his power and influence quickly evaporate. Worsening matters was the fact that he had been experiencing financial difficulties, and in the months leading up to his grandfather’s death had begun selling off parcels of the old man’s land.

It appeared as if every venture was ill-considered and foolish. Among the greatest of his miscalculations was the 1435 staging of
Le Mistère du Siège d’Orléans.
Intended to celebrate the tenth anniversary of the triumph he had shared with Joan of Arc, it was a lavish production requiring a cast of over 600. In the end, it was this same ineptitude, his inability to perform the intricate legal and political manoeuvres required of the nobility, which set in motion the events leading to his downfall and, ultimately, death.

One of the many properties with which Rais had been forced to part was a château in the village of Sainte-Etienne-de-Mar-Morte. The purchaser, Geoffrey le Ferron, entrusted the property to his brother Jean, a Roman Catholic priest. However, Rais was never happy with the decision he’d made, and in 1440, two years after the sale, the baron chose to forcibly take back his former estate. On 15 May, Rais led a band of 70 men to Sainte-Etienne, burst into the village church, kidnapped Jean le Ferron and seized the château. When news of the abduction and violation of ecclesiastical property reached the Bishop of Nantes, an investigation was launched. What he discovered was that the abduction and violation were very much the least of Rais’ crimes.

As Gilles was in the favour of Charles VII, those charged with bringing the nobleman to justice moved slowly and with caution. In August, troops of the royal army marched against one of Rais’ castles, freeing the priest, Jean le Ferron. Three weeks later, Rais and four members of his circle were placed under arrest on charges that included murder, sodomy and heresy.

On 21 October, Gilles confessed his crimes. Testimony at his trial revealed a horror that stretched back seven years, to the months following the death of Jean de Craon. It was at this point that Gilles, a man who had previously killed only in battle, had turned to murder. His first victim is said to have been a boy named Jean Jeudon, who was kidnapped and brought to Gilles’ castle at Machecoul.

There, before the nobleman’s intimate circle, he was sodomized twice by Gilles – once while dangling at the end of a hook. The child was then killed.

Other children, most often young boys, were either abducted or lured to Gilles’ various residences. They were sexually assaulted, tortured and mutilated. According to testimony, the baron and his circle would set up the severed heads of the children in order to judge which was the most attractive victim. The testimony was said to be so horrific that the worst portions were ordered to be stricken from the record.

The only explanation offered for Gilles’ actions was that he had begun to experiment with the occult. An attractive young man named Francesco Prelati, who had been schooled in the fields of alchemy and evocation, had promised the nobleman that he would regain his lost fortune by sacrificing children to a demon known as ‘Barron’.

The precise number of Rais’ victims is not known. Most of the bodies were dismembered and burned or buried. Although the fates of 37 victims were discussed at trial, the true number is likely to be much higher. Two days after the baron’s confession, the court sentenced him to death. He was then excommunicated by the ecclesiastical court. After a dramatic expression of remorse by Gilles, the Church rescinded its punishment. On 26 October, Gilles went to his execution pleading with his friends to pray that their souls too might be saved. His corpse was thrown on a pyre, only to be rescued by the very bishop who had instigated the damning investigation. Rais was buried with Catholic rites.

VLAD III

Vlad III Draculea was known in his day as Vlad the Impaler. The origins of this epithet most probably lie with the Turks, who came to call him
Kaziglu Bey –
‘the Prince Impaler’. It is a reference to his preferred method of execution. Most often a sharpened stake was inserted in a victim’s anus and forced through the body until it came out of the mouth. Stakes might be pushed through other orifices. Infants were said to be impaled on a stake driven through their mothers’ breasts.

He was born late in the year 1431, probably in the Transylvanian fortress city of Sighisoara. His father was Vlad II Dracul, a Romanian surname which can be translated as ‘Dragon’. Thus, Vlad III was Draculea, ‘Son of the Dragon’. Five years after his birth, Vlad III became Prince of Wallachia, in present-day Romania.

When Vlad was ten, his father sent him and his younger brother Radu the Handsome as hostages to the Ottoman sultan Murad II. He spent much of the next six years locked in an underground dungeon in Turkey where he was whipped and beaten. Radu, on the other hand, became a favourite of the sultan’s son. He lived a life of comfort and became a convert to Islam.

Vlad’s return to Wallachia was made possible only through the murder of his older brother, Mircea, who was buried alive after having been blinded by hot iron stakes, and the subsequent assassination of his father. Murad II then installed Vlad III as a puppet prince. Mere months later, Vlad was pushed out of Wallachia by troops loyal to the kingdom of Hungary. He fled to Moldavia, where he was put under the protection of his uncle. After his uncle, too, was assassinated, Vlad switched his allegiance from the Ottoman empire to the kingdom of Hungary. In 1456, he led a successful campaign sweeping the Turks out of Wallachia, and was again installed as prince. The next six years were spent in an effort to consolidate his power. This Vlad achieved through a variety of means, not the least of which were torture and murder.

Clapped in irons

In 1462, he lost Wallachia when troops of the Ottoman empire again invaded. His wife, whose name is left unrecorded, committed suicide for fear of being captured. Vlad’s brother Radu became the new prince. Under an agreement struck between the Hungarian king and Sultan Mehmed II, ruler of the Ottoman empire, Vlad was imprisoned in Hungary.

It is doubtful that his confinement lasted four years; in 1466, he married into the Hungarian royal family and was officially released from custody eight years later.

In 1475, he attempted to take back Wallachia. Radu was now dead, but he had a new foe, Basarb the Elder, with whom to contend. It was an easy victory, but afterwards the troops that had helped to restore Vlad returned to Transylvania. He was left with a citizenry which he had once terrorized. When the Turks returned with reinforcements, Vlad was at their mercy.

Vlad III died in December 1476. Most accounts place him on the battlefield at the moment of death; facing defeat, surrounded by his men. One story has it that he was accidentally killed by one of his own soldiers as the battle’s end drew near.

After his death, Vlad’s corpse was decapitated, preserved in honey and sent to Istanbul where the head was displayed, appropriately, atop a stake. According to records, his body was buried at the monastery at Snagof, on an island close to Bucharest. However, recent excavations there have uncovered only some bones of horses. Dating from the Neolithic era, they do not at all correspond with what one would expect of a Wallachian prince.

It is an indication of the particularly brutal and sadistic nature of Vlad that his techniques of punishment and torture stand out in the Middle Ages. The earliest written record in which his atrocities are detailed is a German pamphlet issued in the Holy Roman Empire. Printed in 1488, 12 years after his death, it paints the late prince as a sadistic monster, forever terrorizing his people. Romanian oral tradition, however, appears divided. Some tales portray him as harsh but fair; a ruler who expected his people to be honest and moral. Only those who deviated from this path were dealt with in a brutal manner. Other oral records depict a cruel man who delighted in torture and punishment. This Vlad was a prince who employed a variety of methods in torturing his victims, including skinning, boiling, scalping, decapitation, blinding, strangling, hanging, burning and frying. He was said to delight in cutting off various body parts – the nose, the ears, the genitals and the tongue – as punishment.

Oral tradition has it that these techniques were not used exclusively against the Turks, but also on his own people. In the years 1457, 1459 and 1460, he tortured and murdered tradesmen and merchants who dared rebel against his laws. It is said that in August 1459, he had impaled 30,000 merchants and administrators in the city of Brasov.

The Ottoman invasion of 1462 was caused, in part, by the reception he had given an emissary of the sultan. When the emissary was granted an audience with Vlad, he was told to remove his turban. After the order was ignored, the prince had the turban nailed to the man’s head.

ELIZABETH BÁTHORY

Born to nobility, Elizabeth Báthory – Báthory Erzsébet – used her power and privilege to become the most infamous serial killer in Hungarian history. However, her most notorious crime, the one for which she is remembered today, is a fabrication promoted by an 18th-century monk.

The Countess Elizabeth Báthory was born on 7 August 1560 on her family’s Nyírbátor estate in the Northern Great Plain region of eastern Hungary. Her father, George Báthory, held enormous wealth, exceeding that of the Hungarian king Matthias. Her mother, Anna Báthory, was the older sister of the Polish king Stephan. George was her third husband. In marrying, Elizabeth’s parents had united two branches of a powerful family, and in doing so had carried forward the long tradition of interbreeding among the noble clans.

A woman of the Renaissance, Elizabeth spent her early years at Ecsed Castle, where she learned to read and write in four languages. At the age of 11 years, she became engaged to Ferencz Nádasdy, the son of another aristocratic Hungarian family, and moved to be with her future husband’s family at Nádasdy Castle in the westernmost portion of the country. Such was the status of the Báthory family that upon their marriage, on 9 May 1575, the groom adopted the bride’s name. This is not to say that the former Ferencz Nádasdy did not himself have considerable wealth. His wedding gift to Elizabeth was their home, Cachtice Castle, an expansive country house and 17 adjacent villages.

Although Ferencz Báthory was but one of countless men in history who have been dubbed ‘the Black Knight’, he was nevertheless notably cruel. Three years into the marriage, he was made the chief commander of the Hungarian soldiers against the Turks during the height of the Long War. He took particular pleasure in personally devising tortures for his Turkish prisoners, and is said to have taught torture techniques to his wife. It is thought that the countess not only shared her husband’s sadistic impulses, but that her passion for such things far outstripped those of the Black Knight. In fact, it has been suggested that Ferencz Báthory, hardly a gentle man, put something of a restraint on his wife, ensuring that her inclinations remained tempered and discreet.

After the death of Ferencz in 1604 – likely due to illness, but often claimed as having been at the hands of a prostitute – Elizabeth displayed much less discretion. The number of her victims and the degree of her cruelty both grew at a dramatic rate.

Her earliest victims were often local peasant girls, who came to the castle under the impression that they were to begin relatively beneficial servitude as housemaids. Later, Elizabeth became so bold as to abuse the daughters of the lower gentry who had been entrusted to her for the purposes of learning etiquette.