Murderabilia

by Andy Kahan

Victim Advocate City of Houston

In the fall of 1999, I was perusing through a New York paper when I came across a small news brief that stated serial killer Arthur Shawcross’ art privileges were rescinded because officials found he had artwork for sale on eBay. I immediately went over to eBay and clunked in a search for 'serial killers' and items came pouring out. Like most rational thinking individuals I was under the false impression that it was illegal to commit some of the most diabolic crimes and then be allowed to profit off them.

I was wrong.

I contacted eBay officials who politely advised me, "We are not the morality police and as long as it is legal, we have an obligation to offer it to our customers and if you don’t like it, feel free to do something about it."

So I did.

Most Americans have heard of Son of Sam Laws that were enacted to prevent convicted criminals from selling their rights for books and movies. What most Americans are not aware of is that in 1991 a little known court, The United States Supreme Court, overturned New York’s law under the guise that it violated free speech rights because it singled out profits from expressive works. The Supremes advised the states to go back and revise their statutes. Most states ignored their suggestions making their statutes ripe for challenges.

Strangely enough serial killer David Berkowitz, for whom the Son of Sam Laws were named after, never made a dime. And in an even more bizarre twist, he has become one of my most trusted allies in my war against murderabilia.

Recent challenges to Son of Sam Laws have all come out in favor of, you guessed it, convicted criminals. Some of you might recall that Frank Sinatra, Jr. was a kidnap victim in the 60’s and his two kidnappers were convicted, served their time and released from prison. Several years ago, Columbia Pictures offered the kidnappers almost half a million dollars for the rights to their story entitled, Snatching Sinatra. Sinatra Jr. sued under California’s statute and the State Supreme Court ruled in favor of Columbia Pictures and the two kidnappers, thus overturning California’s Son of Sam Law.

We all probably remember former school teacher Mary Kay LaTourneau, who in reality is a convicted child molester. You will be happy to know that the Washington State Supreme Court overturned the Judge’s order barring her from selling her story for books and movies.

Some recent cases in the news indicate that the so called Barefoot Bandit and former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick (both convicted felons) are receiving hefty book deals with the intentions of proceeds being used to pay court ordered restitution. I’ll believe it when I see it.

Going back to eBay, you might be pleased to hear after a two year battle they finally relented and sent out a press release stating, “They will no longer allow the sale of 'murderibilia' out of respect for victim’s families." Coincidentally, the press release was released several weeks before a segment on murderabilia was to air on ABC’s 20/20. Timing was merely coincidental according to eBay officials.

Dealers that once plied their trade on eBay now had to set up shop on their own. Currently there are five to six dealers peddling their wares on internet websites. Top selling items range from serial killer artwork, letters, autographs, worn clothing and, yes, even hair and fingernail clippings.

In the ensuing years of the decade old battle to curb this rather despicable insidious industry, I have encouraged states to enact what is now commonly called, “Notoriety For Profit Laws.” Unlike Son of Sam Laws, NFP does not restrict free speech, or as I like to put it,  you can paint, draw, write, scratch, sniff or whatever - you just don't make any money off of the ill-gotten notoriety you achieved by murdering people.

As a board member of the Houston Chapter of Parents of Murdered Children, I can unequivocally state that the legal sale of items connected to killers is like being gutted all over again by our criminal justice system. It is the most nauseating and disgusting feeling to find out the person who murdered one of your loved ones now has items being hawked by third parties for pure profit.

Recently, a seller offered up scoops of dirt from Ohio serial killer Anthony Sowell's home where he murdered eleven women. Last year, a seller stooped as low as one can get in the bizarre industry of murderabilia by auctioning off dirt from the grave site of murder victim James Byrd Jr. One might recall that Byrd was dragged to his death by white supremists. The seller even offered up pavement from the road where his broken body was dragged. Years back a seller offered a signed t-shirt by one of the killers. New York serial killer/rapist Arohn Kee was peddling 'Rape Cards' in which he included explicit descriptions of his sexual attacks and how taunted his victims, including tell one of them that she was "lucky" to be attacked by such a handsome rapist.

Even public documents are not immune from being sold from the talons of the vultures. Whoops, I meant dealers. The jury list for Florida's infamous Vampire Killer, which included names of prospective jurors and their contact information, were even sold. The autopsy report of murder victim Nicole Brown Simpson is routinely auctioned off. Death certificates of high profile victims and murderers, including Timothy McVeigh, are also for sale in this macabre so-called business.

For some inexplicable reason, a bipartisan federal bill sponsored by Texas Senator John Cornyn and Minnesota Senator Amy Klobacher in 2010 has yet to be granted a hearing. From my perspective a federal law is necessary mainly because for the most part sellers are obtaining their products via US Mail; hence making it Interstate Commerce.

So despite our best efforts, the murderabilia industry continues to thrive, even though most rational thinking Americans would readily agree that no one should be able to rob, rape and murder and then make a buck off of it. Our society has to ask itself how far we are willing to allow so-called free speech to go. But as much as we believe in First Amendment rights, can we legally draft statutes that will be able to withstand constitutional mustard while also restricting convicted felons from profiting off of their crimes?

Angel Rescendiz Ramirez better known as the 'Railway Killer' succinctly put it to a reporter one day when he stated "I'm famous now, and if someone wants to buy my autograph or artwork, so be it."

It's time to draw the line and reign in this so-called industry that re-victimizes victims all over again.

photo credit: amayzun

Tweet

Teachers Behaving Badly

by Anne Bremner 

This post has been written by a dear friend of mine and a true talent, Katherine Kaufmann (pictured left), better known as "Coach Kitty." She has been my personal trainer for years, and she voraciously follows media regarding crimes and legal issues. She always has a sharp and witty opinion about everything she sees, and I'm honored to give her an opportunity to voice that opinion here. Take it away, Coach Kitty! 

I heard a story today about a little girl, just 12 years old, and so cute. What happened to this young girl at the hands of someone who was charged with protecting and educating her is appalling and illegal. Upon entering the sixth grade, Vicki (not her real name) became quite a teacher’s pet. (In all fairness, she did come from a broken home and the teacher was just taking her under his wing, right?) This handsome sixth-grade teacher would invite her to his home for dinner, she joined him on family outings, and he showered her with gifts and attention. What Vicki didn’t know was that like any pedophile worth his salt, Mr. Larson (not his real name) was doing something known as grooming. Alas, he was preparing his young victim for an eventual sexual assault.

By the time Mr. Larson eventually raped Vicki, it seemed to her the natural progression of a close relationship. Although she did know that they were doing something wrong, she never thought it was illegal or really even bad. Remember, she was just 12 years old. Mr. Larson had invited her over for slumber parties with his kids and had shared a sleeping bag with her many times, so by the time he raped her, nothing really seemed amiss for Vicki. After all, Vicki had known Mr. Larson since she was in the second grade and he was her teacher,. She knew his wife and kids, and this must be how things work, right?

Mr. Larson was eventually charged with first-degree rape of a child and sentenced to 30 years in prison. You should have heard the radio and TV pundits in my city where this crime took place. The outrage and fury was palpable. One noted radio talk show host was ready to form a lynch mob to go after Mr. Larson and the people I heard discussing the case at Starbucks were beside themselves with horror. This poor little girl! And this pedophile in our schools--how could this happen? Now, everyone clings a bit closer to their little girls, and every real or perceived threat to them is swiftly investigated.

Okay, here’s the deal. That story is only partly true. The teacher’s name in the real story would have been Mary Kay LeTourneau and the student's name would have been Vili Fualaau. Oh ,and the other part that isn’t quite true is that Mary was only charged with second-degree rape and was sentenced to six months in the county jail and three years of treatment. She was not, however, forced to register as a sex offender. Then, two weeks after her jail sentence ended, LeTourneau was caught having sex with 13-year-old Fualaau in her car and was re-arrested. That time, she was sentenced to 7-1/2 years behind bars, and upon release required to register as a level-two sex offender.

The part where the radio pundits and public were outraged? Meh? Not so much. I actually heard Mary Kay referred to as a “dreammaker” and, if I had a dime for every time the song "Hot for Teacher" by Van Halen was played as an intro to a story about her, well, let’s just say I could quit my day job.

This double standard that society has with the way it reacts to female and male sexual predators is deep and complicated. On one hand, it appears to be rooted partly in the idea that women, unlike men, are incapable of sexual aggression. By the same token, it seems to many, that young boys are willing participants in these sexual encounters. Although both may or may not be true, it seems to me anyway, that it shouldn’t matter. If a child is unable to legally consent to sex before a certain age it is a crime for he, or she to have sex with anyone. If an adult has sex with a child, that act is considered rape. The punishment and social taboo associated with it should be the same for men and women.

Susan Strickland, a 
University of Georgia professor and social worker who treats sex offenders, surveyed 60 women 
serving time for sexual offenses. 
She found that women who have sex with boys:

a. lack the mature relationship skills to partner with men their age;

b. are also motivated by a need for power and control, and they see the boy as a blank slate they can turn into the partner they want;

c. may never have had relationship in which they felt safe.

You know what I say to that? So what? It’s either a criminal act or it’s not. I realize that the motivations between male and female predators might be different, but the outcome is the same. A child is stripped of his or her sense of security, autonomy, and ability to trust. And that is a crime. The society at large would do well to see children as children whether boys or girls. With the same developmental components and emotional capabilities.

In the case of Mary Kay LeTourneau, as well as Debra Lafave (a teacher charged with seducing a 14-year-old boy), the fact that both are blonde and stereotypically pretty has only added to the myth that they were fulfilling boyhood dreams rather than committing crimes. I did notice that the majority of media figures who had this impression were men. Perhaps they can’t see past sixth grade, and, lucky for them, they are now free to act on that hot-for-teacher fantasy they’ve been harboring all this time. However, as long as a child is under the age of consent, women and men who commit these crimes should be treated equally in the eyes of the law and society.

Tweet