In landmark cases, the Supreme Court set standards for pro se cases, which include boundaries for not only those individuals who choose to represent themselves, but also for the standby counsel in these particular cases.

• In Faretta v. California (1975), the Supreme Court ruled that the defendant, Anthony Faretta, had the constitutional right to refuse legal counsel and to represent himself in a state criminal trial. This case set the standards for pro se cases following it by upholding the constitutional right of an individual to represent him or herself in court. However, the Court also ruled that a defendant who voluntarily self-represents him or herself in court may not argue after the proceedings that they received ineffective counsel.
• In Mckaskle v. Wiggins (1984), the Supreme Court considered what the role of ‘standby counsel’ should be in pro se criminal cases. According to the Court, Wiggins’s sixth amendment right had not been violated by the presence of a standby counsel at his criminal trial, as he was still able to defend himself in any way he saw fit. This case established limits on the role of the standby counsel in pro se trials by refining standards that were set by Faretta.
• In Martinez v. Court of Appeal in California (2000), the Supreme Court ruled that an appellant who was the defendant of a state criminal case does not have the right to refuse the counsel of an attorney in a court of appeals; this ruling contrasts with the decision in the Faretta v. California case. The opinion of the Court was that the sixth amendment only extended to the defendant’s right to self-representation in criminal and civil cases, and that there is no such right in a court of appeals.

The post Pro Se: Representing Yourself in Court appeared first on Crime Museum.

As a result of social changes there have been subtle and gradual changes to our skeletal make-ups, making the work of a forensic anthropologist difficult. Those once clearly defined markers on the skull (as well as the rest of the body) are becoming less definitive. It is the responsibility of scientists to grow with the times and expand their arsenal of examination in light of these events.

For many years, it has been posited that the frontal sinus pattern in the human skull is unique to an individual, similar to the idea that fingerprints and DNA are unique. In 2008, a study was published in the Journal of Forensic Science by Roberto Cameriere and colleagues, that sought to test the accuracy of this position. They also sought to measure the rate of false positives between persons that were closely related (kin) to better understand the strengths of using sinus patterns to truly identify human remains.

Cameriere x-rayed skulls of 99 individuals from 20 families between the ages of 15 and 74 (from Northern Ireland). This enabled the scientists to test the effect of closely related persons for false positives. After all the skulls were radiographed and digitally imaged with both anterior (front) and posterior (back) views, they were then statistically analyzed. They used functions and probability to measure the rates of false-positives within their sample.

The results showed that even when examining individuals from the same family group the probability of falsely identifying is very small. They also posited the rate for a false positive did not change significantly when family relation was a factor. This research and its results can be helpful when trying to solve cases [especially with=”” closely=”” related=”” kin=””][/especially] where other heavily relied upon identifying methods (DNA fingerprints, etc.) are inconclusive. These results can provide a level of comfort to the scientist(s) attempting to make identification and serve to improve accuracy in tough cases.

The post Human Skulls and Forensic Anthropology appeared first on Crime Museum.

1. Antisocial Behavior
Psychopaths have a strong tendency towards antisocial behavior, so watch for extremely antisocial children. That being said, some children develop more slowly, and this is not a definitive sign. Pay attention if a child regresses from being extremely social to extremely anti-social.
Ed Gein, the inspiration for Psycho’s Norman Bates and Silence of the Lamb’s Buffalo Bill, had no social connections besides his extremely religious and abusive mother, who punished him whenever he tried to make friends. After she died in 1945, Gein began to murder and dig up graves, collecting body parts of women who looked like his mother and trying to make a “woman suit.”

2. Arson
Many serial killers start as arsonists. Arson is psychologically attractive because it involves manipulating power and control, something that serial killing also offers.
David Berkowitz, the “Son of Sam” killer, was infatuated with pyromania as a child, to the point that other children called him “Pyro.” After being arrested, he took responsibility for dozens of New York arsons. Some sources indicate that he might have been responsible for up to 1,400 fires.

3. Torturing Small Animals
This is one of the strongest warning signs. Children who torture or kill small animals like squirrels, birds, cats, and dogs without showing remorse are highly likely to be sociopaths. Many serial killers kill to control others’ lives, and as children, small animals are the only lives they have the power to control.
Cannibalistic serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer would bike around the woods as a child, collecting dead animals to dissect. Dahmer even killed and dismembered his own puppy, mounting its head on a stake when he was done.

4. Poor Family Life
Many serial killers come from unstable families with criminal, psychiatric, or alcoholic histories. These killers often have terrible relationships with their families, and often use them as their first victims.
When he was only fifteen, Ed Kemper, “the Co-ed Killer,” killed his grandparents. After being released at age twenty-one, Kemper killed six female college students. The police finally caught him when Kemper killed his violent, alcoholic mother. He treated his mother’s corpse particularly brutally, decapitating her, using her head as a dart board, and throwing her vocal cords down the garbage disposal.

5. Childhood Abuse
Many serial killers are abused – physically, psychologically, sexually – as children by a close family member. This behavior instills in the child feelings of humiliation and helpless, feelings which they will later seek to instill in their victims.
Aileen Wuornos, the prostitute serial killer portrayed by Charlize Theron in Monster, was abandoned by her mother when she was four and never met her father, who was serving time in prison for raping a seven-year-old girl when Aileen was born. Aileen’s grandfather, who took over care of Aileen when her mother left, physically and sexually abused her until she ran away at age fifteen.

6. Substance abuse
Many serial killers struggle with drug and alcohol abuse.
Jeffrey Dahmer began drinking in his teens and was an alcoholic by his high school graduation. His alcoholism resulted in both his expulsion from college and his discharge from the military.

7. Voyeurism
From a young age, many serial killers are interested in voyeurism, sado-masochistic pornography, and fetishism.
Ted Bundy claimed that, as an adolescent, he would get drunk and stalk around his community at night, looking for undressing women or other titillating sights.

8. Intelligence
Many serial killers have IQs in the “bright normal” range. Organized serial killers who kill methodically, like John Wayne Gacy or Ted Bundy, have an average I.Q. of 113, while disorganized serial killers have an average I.Q. of 93.
Ed Kemper had an I.Q. of 136 (140 is often used as the genius mark in I.Q. tests). He used his intelligence to convince psychiatrists to release him after serving only five years for his grandparents’ murders, claiming to have reformed. He hadn’t, and he killed eight more women before being caught again.

9. Shiftlessness
Despite higher than normal intelligence, many serial killers have trouble keeping jobs or work in unskilled labor.
After leaving the military, David Berkowitz, who reportedly was of “above-average intelligence,” held several blue-collar jobs before he was captured, including his last one as a postman.

The post 9 Early Warning Signs for Serial Killers appeared first on Crime Museum.

In 1875, Reeves began his career as a deputy U.S. Marshal under the guidance of Federal Judge Isaac Parker of the Western District of Arkansas. Roaming a 75,000 mile area in what is now mostly Oklahoma, Reeves was responsible for chasing and apprehending criminals. At 6’2″ Reeves learned from the Native Americans how to make himself appear smaller on his strong white and grey horse. At times he would surprise outlaws by adopting their clothing and mannerisms. Reeves apprehended more than 3,000 outlaws and killed 14 during his time as a marshal.

The post Bass Reeves appeared first on Crime Museum.

Chefs and Cannibals: “Over The Edge” from Tales From The French Quarter by Kalila Smith

Revenge is sweet and not fattening.
-Alfred Hitchcock

Zachary Bowen was a war hero. While serving as a military policeman in Kosovo and Iraq, he earned numerous awards for his bravery. Bowen had moved to New Orleans in the mid-ninties, leaving only to go to Iraq and returning after completing his tour of duty. During the turbulent winds of Hurricane Katrina he met and fell in love with Addie Hall. Hall offered Bowen shelter in her apartment on Gov. Nicholls Street. While the two knew each other before Katrina, the exact details of their relationship are vague.

After Katrina, the two became inseparable. They gained local notoriety for refusing to leave the Quarter after the storm, choosing instead to stand by New Orleans.

Aside from his military honors, no one knew much about Bowen’s past. He had indicated to some that he had been married at one time and had two children. He worked in a local grocery store doing deliveries and bartending part-time.

Hall and Bowen’s relationship was anything but blissful. They fought endlessly, breaking up and reconciling often. They lived troubled, chaotic lives. In the year following Katrina, Bowen was arrested for possession of marijuana and Hall for aggravated assault after pulling a weapon on a man walking in the French Quarter. A friend of Bowen’s reported that he had talked of “getting rid of her.” Many who knew Bowen claim that he often talked negatively about her, yet mysteriously remained in the relationship.

As the city recovered, Bowen and Hall’s relationship began to disintegrate further. By the end of September 2006, the two had been evicted from the Gov. Nicholls apartment and had moved to another at 826 N. Rampart Street, above the New Orleans Voodoo Spiritual Temple. At first, things appeared normal to the landlord, but by October 5, Hall had visited him requesting to have Bowen thrown out. Hall had discovered that he had been cheating on her and she had decided to end the relationship. The landlord discussed the situation with Bowen and suggested the couple try to work things out and get back to him with their decision. When the landlord didn’t hear from them again, he assumed that they made up.

On the evening of October 16, 2006, Bowen had been out drinking with a friend. He appeared to those who encountered him to be in good spirits and talked about a much needed vacation. His friend even made a comment to him about “being in paradise” the following night. But the night of October 17 turned out to be anything but a trip to paradise for Bowen.

Around 8:30 PM on October 17th, a guest at the Omni Royal Orleans, sitting in an upper level lounge, noticed the body of a man atop the roof of the parking deck. Bowen had jumped to his death from a rooftop terrace with a suicide note tucked into his pocket. His badly mangled body was covered in cigarette burns. Surveillance camera footage shows Bowen walking to the ledge several times before following through with his fateful jump.

No doubt it took some time for him to summon up his courage knowing that this would be his final moment. His suicide note revealed that, riddled with grief and guilt, he realized he could not live with himself. He felt like a failure in every aspect of his life:

I didn’t contact any of my family, so that’ll explain the shock. This is not accidental. I had to take my own life to pay for the one I took…Every last one of these [aspects] I failed at, hence the 28 cigarette burns, one for each year of my existence.

The note directed police to Bowen’s apartment, where Bowen had spray-painted his wife’s telephone number on the wall for her to be notified. Another spray-painted note directed police to a couple of large pots on top of the stove. Inside one they found the head of Addie Hall, in the other her hands and feet. A basting pan inside the oven contained her arms and legs—one had even been sprinkled with seasoning. There were chopped vegetables in a container on top of the stove.

Bowen had left details for the police in Addie’s journal:

Today is Monday 16 October, 2:00 AM. I killed her at 1:00 AM, Thursday, 5 October. I very calmly strangled her. It was very quick.

His note claimed that he had repeatedly had sex with the corpse, passing out drunk on the sofa alongside Addie’s body. The following day, he moved her body to the bathroom and began to dismember her with a handsaw and a knife. Police noted that he had attempted to clean up the bathroom. It took four days for Bowen to decide how to dispose of Addie’s chopped up remains.

He put the thermostat on 60 degrees and went about his normal routine.

Halfway through the task, I stopped and thought about what I was doing. The decision to halt the first idea and move to Plan B (the crime scene you are now in) came after awhile. I scared myself not only by the action of calmly strangling the woman I’ve loved for one and a half years, but by my entire lack of remorse. I’ve known forever how horrible a person I am (ask anyone).

An autopsy performed on Bowen showed no signs of cannibalism. No one knows what he had planned to do as he prepared Addie’s body parts to be cooked. Outside of his cryptic ranting that he left scribbled in the journal, he gave no indication to anyone that he was capable of such a heinous act.

I happened to mention to a friend that I planned to include this story in my book and he told me that he had seen the actual crime scene photos. He described a photo in which portions of her disemboweled torso lay out on the kitchen table. He said she definitely had not been charred as the media suggested, but literally cooked! He also mentioned that despite the report disclaiming any cannibalism, her legs in the pan looked as if they had been eaten partially. He made an analogy to that of a ham that had been “picked over,” revealing underlying bone.

Many people who knew Zachary Bowen said that he had suffered severe trauma during his time served in the Army. He mentioned some horrific event happening to a child that he could not erase from his memory. Clearly another instance where a once normal person simply snapped in the French Quarter. One could attribute his descent into madness to compounded post-traumatic stress disorder…or maybe a dark and evil entity had entered and resided inside of him.

Agression Cannabalism
by Jaci Seelagy

Cannibalism may be the ultimate taboo, but it occurs far more often than most people realize, and for many different reasons. A number of serial killers have practiced cannibalism (see Albert Fish or Jeffrey Dahmer); for them, an urge to consume their victims is just a step away from murder in fulfilling their desire to exercise power over life and death, to possess their victims entirely. Some believe consuming another person allows them to take on certain powers, or take on the life force of that person (see clinical vampirism, or “Renfield’s Syndrome”). But why would someone like Zachary Bowen, who killed out of anger, take the time and effort to cook his victim, even after the immediate rage has faded?

One possible answer, of course, is that cooking and eating a victim is simply a bizarre attempt to dispose of the body. This may be its purpose in the case of the Sweeney Todd-style murder by a Russian chef a few weeks ago—he killed his father-in-law during an argument, then cooked the remains into meat pies to sell to unsuspecting customers. In cases like that of Omaima Aree Nelson, however, this doesn’t seem to add up. She killed her husband—supposedly in response to systematic spousal abuse—and then cooked and ate parts of his body. She then began trying to dispose of the rest of it by taking it to various ex-boyfriends for help. Did frying his hands or dipping his ribs in barbecue sauce make it significantly easier to get rid of the evidence? Probably not.

In cases of argument-related murder that end with cooking and/or eating of the body, the motive is more likely the same as the motive for the murder itself—anger. If someone’s rage is so extreme that mere murder doesn’t satisfy it, they may try to continue expressing control and revenge by consuming their victim. It may even simply be a way to draw out the murder over time, continuing it even after the victim’s death.

Of course, Zachary Bowen committed suicide after killing his girlfriend, not exactly a sign of someone wanting to draw out his aggression as long as possible, and the autopsy was said to show no signs of actual consumption of her remains. Cooking, however, shows a clear plan to eat, so it seems he simply changed his mind. This may just be a sign of his rage running out—that it lasted several days before he stopped what he was doing and killed himself instead.

Since most crimes of passion don’t end with a barbecue, something about these killers must separate them from the killers whose anger ends just after death. Omaima Aree Nelson, like Zachary Bowen, was said to have post traumatic stress disorder—could this hinder their ability to stop at murder alone? Or is some other, more sinister influence at work?

“The Boogie Man” from Tales From The French Quarter by Kalila Smith

It is far harder to kill a phantom than a reality.
-Virginia Woolf

In May of 1918, a year and half long reign of terror struck the French Quarter leaving a trail of blood and a mystery that remains unsolved today. Many residents of the city believed the killer to be some sort of supernatural creature, others merely a psychotic serial killer with a taste for blood. The nature of the massacres indicated that the killer used an ax, giving rise to the media calling him the Axeman.

In 1911 and 1912, similar murders left forty-nine people slaughtered in their sleep across portions of Louisiana and Texas. The trail of carnage began in Rayne, Louisiana where a young woman and her three children were found slaughtered in their family home. A month later, a family of three had been found in the same manner in Crowley, Louisiana, then shortly afterwards, another four found dead in Lafayette. All of the victims were asleep when decapitated and dismembered with what appeared to be an ax.

Entire families were slaughtered mercilessly over the next year in various areas between Lafayette, Louisiana and San Antonio, Texas. The killer left a note for police at one home that read, “When He maketh the inquisition for blood, He forgetteth not the cry of the humble, human five.”

Baffled police speculated whether the killer was a man or woman and even suggested that he might be a midget. The chiseled panels in the door, which afforded entry, were not large enough for a full-grown man to fit. Some police began to blame supernatural forces. The elusive killer evaded police and continued the bloodbath accessing homes through small openings in doors hardly large enough for a child to fit into. Those lucky enough to survive described images of a shadowy or phantom-like figure seen fleeing the scenes of the crimes; one witness described a phantom that disappeared quickly, as if he had wings.

On March 14, 1919, the editor of the New Orleans Times-Picayune received a letter from the killer. It read:

Hell, March 13, 1919

Esteemed Mortal:

They have never caught me and they never will. They have never seen me, for I am invisible, even as the ether that surrounds your earth. I am not a human being, but a spirit and a demon from the hottest hell. I am what you Orleanians and your foolish police call the Axeman.

When I see fit, I shall come and claim other victims. I alone know who they shall be. I shall leave no clue except my bloody axe, besmeared with blood and brains of he whom I have sent below to keep me company.

If you wish you may tell the police to be careful not to rile me. Of course, I am a reasonable spirit. I take no offense at the way they have conducted their investigations in the past. In fact, they have been so utterly stupid as to not only amuse me, but His Satanic Majesty, Francis Josef, etc. But tell them to beware. Let them not try to discover what I am; for it were better that they were never born than to incur the wrath of the Axeman. I don‘t think there is any need of such a warning, for I feel sure the police will always dodge me, as they have in the past. They are wise and know how to keep away from all harm.

Undoubtedly, you Orleanians think of me as a most horrible murderer, which I am, but I could be much worse if I wanted to. If I wished, I could pay a visit to your city every night. At will I could slay thousands of your best citizens, for I am in close relationship with the Angel of Death.

Now, to be exact, at 12:15 (earthly time) on next Tuesday night, I am going to pass over New Orleans. In my infinite mercy, I am going to make a little proposition to you people.

Here it is:

I am very fond of jazz music, and I swear by all the devils in the nether regions that every person shall be spared in whose home a jazz band is in full swing at the time I have just mentioned. If everyone has a jazz band going, well, then, so much the better for you people. One thing is certain and that is that some of your people who do not jazz it on Tuesday night (if there be any) will get the axe.

Well, as I am cold and crave the warmth of my native Tartarus, and it is about time I leave your earthly home, I will cease my discourse. Hoping that thou wilt publish this, that it may go well with thee, I have been, am and will be the worst spirit that ever existed either in fact or realm of fancy.

The Axeman

The city followed the instructions of this maniacal killer filling homes, restaurants and the streets of the French Quarter with music. One local songwriter, Joseph Davilla, created a song called “The Mysterious Axeman’s Jazz,” which became very popular. No murders occurred that night.

The brutal killings resumed again on August 3, 1919, again maiming and killing victims ending in October that same year with the murder of grocer Mike Pepitone. The grocer’s wife and six children lay asleep in the room next door as the Axeman wielded fatal blows to his sleeping victim.

A little over a year later, the person who many believed may have been the Axeman had been shot in California. A man named Joseph Mumfre had been shot and killed by a woman, Esther Albano, AKA, Mrs. Mike Pepitone. Mumfre led a ring of blackmailers in New Orleans’ Mafia and had served time in jail beginning in 1911 at the end of the first set of murders, then released in 1918 shortly before the next. The case remains a mystery as no actual evidence ever surfaced proving that Mumfre was the Axeman. The phantom never returned to New Orleans after his murder. No one will ever know.

MO and Signature Analysis
by Tara Wright

In serial killing investigations, it is important to identify the killer’s modus operandi (MO) and signature to identify all possible crime scenes. An offender’s MO is the specific actions taken during the perpetration of a crime in order to complete that crime. Their signature is a little different. Often referred to as their ‘calling card,’ it is a specific set of indicators that point to an individual offender’s personality. These are not always necessary when identifying offenders, but can be useful when attempting to link multiple cases together.

In the early 1900s, New Orleans experienced a chain of horrific axe murders. The authorities linked the Axeman murders through several similarities in each of the cases. In all of the murders, a wooden panel was chiseled out of a back door. Also, an axe was the weapon of choice in these murders. It is hard to determine if these similarities were signatures or MO.

Many have speculated that this removal of the panel from the door was the Axeman’s way of entry into the homes. If this is the case, then the chiseling of the door is a part of his MO. But is it possible that it is his signature? Questions have arisen concerning the likelihood that a grown man could fit through small panels in order to enter the home. If chiseling the door panel wasn’t how he entered the houses, then what exactly was it? In every case, the murderer left the chisel on top of the removed panel, meaning the Axeman had to get another chisel every time he broke into someone’s home.

Serial killers’ signatures often leave the investigators confused as to their motivations. While the chisel could have been the Axeman’s modus operandi, I find it more believable that this was his signature. As an MO, it would require a lot of extra effort. In general, you would expect an offender’s MO to evolve into something that would lower the risk of apprehension and would be easier overall. I’m sure an offender would be able to think of much easier ways to break into someone’s home besides chiseling out a panel.

Weapons of choice are also possibly illuminating. While it’s difficult to know exactly why the killer selected a certain weapon, speculations can be made. What made the Axeman pick up the axe? Interestingly, he never brought the axe with him and instead found an axe, or hatchet, at the victim’s home. In his search for the axe, he probably walked past several potential weapons, like kitchen knives or shaving razors. Why not use any of these other potential weapons?

Does this automatically mean the use of an axe is his signature? Not necessarily, he could have been used to using an axe. He knew he could handle the axe well, and it would get the “job” done effectively. In this case, logical reasoning was employed to commit the murders; therefore, the use of the axe was his MO.

What if logic had nothing to do with it? Is it possible that emotional satisfaction plays a more important role in the offender’s choice of weapon? In his fantasies, the Axeman could use the axe to commit the murders. If he goes against these fantasies, it will not produce the same thrill and joy as following them exactly as he imagined. This could explain why he had to find the axe in each victim’s home. Maybe just using an axe wasn’t good enough. He even used their own axe to kill them–using their own weapon against them might add extra pleasure. If pleasure and emotional satisfaction were the factors in choosing the axe as his weapon, then the axe was more of a signature than the MO.

In the Axeman murders, it is impossible to be sure exactly what his MO and signatures were. No suspects were ever convicted so none of these questions could be answered. All that can be made are speculations based upon the several similarities in each of the murders.

However you see the Axeman—as a phantom with unknown powers, able to enter a home through the smallest of openings, or as a brutal but human madman with a creatively undetectable means of entry—the case is certainly bizarre. The Jack the Ripper-style letter submitting music requests, the strangely consistent use of an axe and a chisel at each scene… We’ll never know for certain what they mean or who the Axeman was. All we can do is speculate, and hope that history never repeats itself, carrying an axe into our homes. Keep checking the “Truly Chilling” page of the blog for more mysterious and spooky tales.
–Jaci Seelagy

The post Truly Chilling appeared first on Crime Museum.

The 1,000 page report put together by USADA contains testimony from nearly a dozen of Armstrong’s former teammates detailing the sophisticated and professional doping program which Armstrong allegedly spearheaded. According to the report, Armstrong not only participated in illegal drug use himself, but actively controlled the doping culture of the entire U.S. Postal Service Pro Cycling Team. Many speculate that his televised confession is the first step towards a full confession, which may in turn reduce the period of his ban from competitive sports.

Armstrong Career & Doping Allegations
Lance Edward Armstrong, 41, began his athletic career as a triathlete at the young age of 16. In 1992 he turned to the world of professional cycling with the Motorola Cycling Team, and went on to win the World Championship and his first Tour de France title in 1993. In 1996 his career seemed to be reaching a tragic end when Armstrong was diagnosed with stage three testicular cancer. However he emerged triumphant and cancer free the following year, gaining him an idol-like status internationally. He continued on to co-found the largely successful charity Livestrong, as well as pick up several international and national titles. In 2011 Armstrong retired from competitive cycling while facing the US federal investigation on doping which would ultimately lead to the 2012 USADA report. He was ultimately stripped from all titles won after 1998 and subsequently banned from competing in all sports following World Anti-Doping Agency codes. Even more recently, More recently his 2000 Olympic bronze was revoked.

Armstrong has faced doping allegations for most of his athletic career. In 1999 he first tested positive for corticosteroids. These results were later explained with a medical certificate for saddle sores which contained the substance. Reports from Armstrong’s masseuse at the time state that this prescription was pre-dated, and used to cover up Armstrong’s long-term drug use. Similar reports into the use of illegal performance enhancing drugs by Armstrong and the US Postal Team continued into the early 2000s, with an active investigation by the French government into the Team’s use of a product called Actovegin. Though these allegations were dropped, accusations of doping continued as several former US Postal riders stepped forward and admitted to using such drugs. In 2004, the French book L. A. Confidentiel – Les secrets de Lance Armstrong created a stir by publically accusing Armstrong of doping, relying mainly on the allegations from the same masseuse Emma O’Reilley. Controversy was re-ignited when Armstrong came out of retirement in 2008, and came to a head in the 2011 Federal investigation.

Courts
On the televised interview, Armstrong admitted to using testosterone and cortisone steroids as well as the blood-booster erythropoetein, or EPO. EPO, one of the three types of “blood doping”, involves the use of techniques and substances to increase one’s red blood cell mass which in turn allows for the body to transport more oxygen to muscles and therefore increase stamina and performance. Because Armstrong has decided not to challenge the USADA allegations he will not face a hearing on the charges, but will face a lifetime of illegibility from all competitive athletics under the USADA’s jurisdiction.

Nevertheless, Armstrong currently faces multiple lawsuits and legal entanglements. The first lawsuit is a federal whistle-blower case, in which Armstrong and the US Postal Service cycling team are accused of defrauding the government by allowing doping on the squad when the team’s contract with the Postal Service clearly stated that any doping would constitute default of their agreement.

The case was filed under “qui tam” provision of the False Claims Act , which allows citizens not affiliated with the government to file actions on behalf of the government in situations where persons or companies may have defrauded government programs (informally called “whistleblowing”). The U.S. Department of Justice stands to join in on the lawsuit, making the case much more formidable. If the team is found guilty, they may be required to return all the money under the contract with the Postal Service, which amounts to over $30 million.

Armstrong is also engaged in two other civil lawsuits. One involves the Dallas- based insurance company SCA Promotions, which insured bonuses to Armstrong after his Tour de France victories from 2000- 2004. Armstrong sued the company for over $7.5 million in 2004 after the doping allegations listed in “L.A. Confidentiel: Les Secrets de Lance Armstrong,” which caused the company to withhold payments to Armstrong. In lieu of recent circumstances the company is planning on filing a lawsuit against Armstrong for over $12 million. Armstrong is also being sued by British newspaper The Sunday Times, which he had sued for libel in 2004 after they had published doping accusations from the same “LA Confidential” book.

Recent accounts suggest that Armstrong may be considering a confession under oath, which may reduce his ban from sports to eight or even four years. However, such a confession may cause him to perjure himself, as he had previously swore under oath in 2004 to never have used performance-enhancing drugs. Therefore the Department of Justice would have to give him protection from perjury if he were to confess and testify.

The post Lance Armstrong Comes Clean appeared first on Crime Museum.

1. The Name Itself– The first misconception to address is the very name lie detector test. It is more correctly known as a polygraph, and can be more accurately considered to be a truth verifier test, because …
2. They Don’t Detect Lies – Polygraphs can confirm that a person is responding truthfully to a question; however, the body functions that are monitored in a polygraph test will not specifically identify a lie, simply an abnormal physiological reaction.
3. They Are 100% Accurate – When administered by an experienced professional examiner, a polygraph test can be very accurate in establishing truth or indicating deception, but there are many factors that can alter their reliability.
4. They Are Not Admissible In Court – Contrary to the belief even among some lawyers, this is no longer universally true. There have been cases where polygraph results have been entered as evidence in trials.
5. You Can “Beat” A Polygraph Test – A professional examiner will conduct a polygraph in three phases – the pre-exam interview, the polygraph exam, and the post-exam interview – over the course of several hours. The exam will include control questions, which are designed to confirm the truthfulness of the responses.
6. Drugs Can Help You Beat The Exam – Drugs or medications won’t aid in defeating a polygraph. Part of the pre-exam phase is for the examiner to ensure that the subject is fit to take the exam, and verify if any medications have been taken.
7. Nerves Can Affect The Results Of A Test – Nervousness does not register in the same way the physiological response of the nervous system does during a polygraph. Also, the examiner will work with the subject throughout the process to ensure that they are as relaxed as possible.
8. Polygraphs Include Trick Questions Intended to Elicit A Response – In fact, the respondent will be made aware in advance, of every question he will be asked in the polygraph exam. There are no surprise questions.
9. Control Questions Are Standard Questions With Standard Responses – Not exactly. A control question is not something like “Is your last name Lipschitz”. The purpose of a control question is to induce the subject into giving a deceptive answer, so that the examiner can have reliable measurements of what a deceptive response will look like.
10. You Only Fail If You Lie – While polygraphs do have a high percentage of accuracy when administered by a well-trained and qualified examiner, it’s quite possible to be completely truthful and still “fail” a polygraph exam.

For more information on this topic and much more check out this link here.

The post 10 Misconceptions About Lie Detector Tests appeared first on Crime Museum.

It is perfectly fine for John Kitzhaber to have an opinion about the death penalty. However, it is not okay for him to go against the people he is representing. If the people of Oregon are in support of the death penalty, the death penalty should be carried out. No questions asked.

As a whole, Oregon has been on the fence about the issue concerning the death penalty over the years. Voters have outlawed and legalized capital punishment twice. The State Supreme Court has even “struck it down once.” However in 1984, Oregon legalized the death penalty with a 56-44 vote.

Since the legalization of the death penalty in 1984, two executions have been made. Kitzhaber said he should have never allowed Douglas Wright and Harry Moore to be executed in 1996 and 1997. It is not his responsibility to allow or prevent executions. A judge and/or jury are responsible for those decisions. Kitzhaber has described the death penalty system in Oregon as “an expensive and unworkable system that fails to meet basic standards of justice.”

Since this recent ban on the death penalty, Kitzhaber has preventing the upcoming death sentence for   Gary Haugen who was scheduled to be executed later this month. Haugen is a twice convicted murderer and has spoken directly of his opposition to this ban. He hired a legal team to express concern that “leaving an inmate uncertain of his execution is psychological torture.” Maybe this argument will prove to be effective and allow the death sentence to be carried out.

John Kitzhaber’s moral opposition and duty as a physician to “do no harm” are not legitimate reasons for him to ban the death penalty. According to the vote in 1984, Oregon wants to utilize capital punishment. Personal beliefs aside, the wishes of these people should be carried out. Kitzhaber stated his duties as a physician, what about his duty as governor to represent the wishes of the people of Oregon?

The post Oregon Governor Bans Death Penalty appeared first on Crime Museum.

Shirley Ree Smith was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison in December 1997 for the murder of her 7-week-old grandson. In 2006, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned her conviction by stating the case was a “miscarriage of justice.”

In November 2011, the Supreme Court Justices voted 6-3 to reverse the ruling in favor of Smith and to reinstate her conviction. Although the high court agreed that the doubts of Smith’s guilt are “understandable,” they believe the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals should have upheld the state’s conviction.

These “understandable” doubts about the guilt of Shirley Ree Smith are the result of an ongoing controversy about the existence of Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS). SBS is a phrase used to describe child abuse involving head trauma that could be the result of shaking. The three main symptoms of SBS include subdural hemorrhage, retinal hemorrhage, and brain swelling or damage. These symptoms are believed to be caused by an adult holding a child by their body and shaking them rigorously back and forth, causing their head to rock as well. This theory is generally accepted due to the lack of evidence of an impact-induced injury.

Those who disregard the existence of SBS believe that shaking alone is not enough to cause such injuries that lead to death. They believe some sort of impact against a surface is necessary to cause this sort of damage. Many people have their own beliefs about the existence of SBS. An autopsy has proven that there was enough damage done to Smith’s grandson to tear his brainstem. Also, there was bleeding into his optic nerves as a result of contusions to the brain. These contusions are the result of “violent shaking.”

As you can see, there is a lot of evidence supporting the existence of SBS especially in the Smith case. However, the Supreme Court did not reinstate her conviction as a matter of opinion concerning her guilt or the existence of SBS. They reinstated her conviction on the basis that it is not their job, nor the job of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, to determine whether the state was correct in their theory about Smith’s guilt. That was the jury’s job.

The post Shaken Baby Conviction Reinstated appeared first on Crime Museum.

Tales From The French Quarter by Kalila Smith

Revenge is sweet and not fattening.
-Alfred Hitchcock

Zachary Bowen was a war hero. While serving as a military policeman in Kosovo and Iraq, he earned numerous awards for his bravery. Bowen had moved to New Orleans in the mid-nineties, leaving only to go to Iraq and returning after completing his tour of duty. During the turbulent winds of Hurricane Katrina he met and fell in love with Addie Hall. Hall offered Bowen shelter in her apartment on Governor Nicholls Street. While the two knew each other before Katrina, the exact details of their relationship are vague.

After Katrina, the two became inseparable. They gained local notoriety for refusing to leave the Quarter after the storm, choosing instead to stand by New Orleans.

Aside from his military honors, no one knew much about Bowen’s past. He had indicated to some that he had been married at one time and had two children. He worked in a local grocery store doing deliveries and bartending part-time.

Hall and Bowen’s relationship was anything but blissful. They fought endlessly, breaking up and reconciling often. They lived troubled, chaotic lives. In the year following Katrina, Bowen was arrested for possession of marijuana and Hall for aggravated assault after pulling a weapon on a man walking in the French Quarter. A friend of Bowen’s reported that he had talked of “getting rid of her.” Many who knew Bowen claim that he often talked negatively about her, yet mysteriously remained in the relationship.

As the city recovered, Bowen and Hall’s relationship began to disintegrate further. By the end of September 2006, the two had been evicted from the Gov. Nicholls apartment and had moved to another at 826 N. Rampart Street, above the New Orleans Voodoo Spiritual Temple. At first, things appeared normal to the landlord, but by October 5, Hall had visited him requesting to have Bowen thrown out. Hall had discovered that he had been cheating on her and she had decided to end the relationship. The landlord discussed the situation with Bowen and suggested the couple try to work things out and get back to him with their decision. When the landlord didn’t hear from them again, he assumed that they made up.

On the evening of October 16, 2006, Bowen had been out drinking with a friend. He appeared to those who encountered him to be in good spirits and talked about a much needed vacation. His friend even made a comment to him about “being in paradise” the following night. But the night of October 17 turned out to be anything but a trip to paradise for Bowen.

Around 8:30 PM on October 17th, a guest at the Omni Royal Orleans, sitting in an upper level lounge, noticed the body of a man atop the roof of the parking deck. Bowen had jumped to his death from a rooftop terrace with a suicide note tucked into his pocket. His badly mangled body was covered in cigarette burns. Surveillance camera footage shows Bowen walking to the ledge several times before following through with his fateful jump.

No doubt it took some time for him to summon up his courage knowing that this would be his final moment. His suicide note revealed that, riddled with grief and guilt, he realized he could not live with himself. He felt like a failure in every aspect of his life:

I didn’t contact any of my family, so that’ll explain the shock. This is not accidental. I had to take my own life to pay for the one I took…Every last one of these [aspects] I failed at, hence the 28 cigarette burns, one for each year of my existence.

The note directed police to Bowen’s apartment, where Bowen had spray-painted his wife’s telephone number on the wall for her to be notified. Another spray-painted note directed police to a couple of large pots on top of the stove. Inside one they found the head of Addie Hall, in the other her hands and feet. A basting pan inside the oven contained her arms and legs—one had even been sprinkled with seasoning. There were chopped vegetables in a container on top of the stove.

Bowen had left details for the police in Addie’s journal:

Today is Monday 16 October, 2:00 AM. I killed her at 1:00 AM, Thursday, 5 October. I very calmly strangled her. It was very quick.

His note claimed that he had repeatedly had sex with the corpse, passing out drunk on the sofa alongside Addie’s body. The following day, he moved her body to the bathroom and began to dismember her with a handsaw and a knife. Police noted that he had attempted to clean up the bathroom. It took four days for Bowen to decide how to dispose of Addie’s chopped up remains.

He put the thermostat on 60 degrees and went about his normal routine.

Halfway through the task, I stopped and thought about what I was doing. The decision to halt the first idea and move to Plan B (the crime scene you are now in) came after awhile. I scared myself not only by the action of calmly strangling the woman I’ve loved for one and a half years, but by my entire lack of remorse. I’ve known forever how horrible a person I am (ask anyone).

An autopsy performed on Bowen showed no signs of cannibalism. No one knows what he had planned to do as he prepared Addie’s body parts to be cooked. Outside of his cryptic ranting that he left scribbled in the journal, he gave no indication to anyone that he was capable of such a heinous act.

I happened to mention to a friend that I planned to include this story in my book and he told me that he had seen the actual crime scene photos. He described a photo in which portions of her disemboweled torso lay out on the kitchen table. He said she definitely had not been charred as the media suggested, but literally cooked! He also mentioned that despite the report disclaiming any cannibalism, her legs in the pan looked as if they had been eaten partially. He made an analogy to that of a ham that had been “picked over,” revealing underlying bone.

Many people who knew Zachary Bowen said that he had suffered severe trauma during his time served in the Army. He mentioned some horrific event happening to a child that he could not erase from his memory. Clearly another instance where a once normal person simply snapped in the French Quarter. One could attribute his descent into madness to compounded post-traumatic stress disorder…or maybe a dark and evil entity had entered and resided inside of him.

Aggression Cannibalism by Jaci Seelagy

Cannibalism may be the ultimate taboo, but it occurs far more often than most people realize, and for many different reasons. A number of serial killers have practiced cannibalism (see Albert Fish or Jeffrey Dahmer); for them, an urge to consume their victims is just a step away from murder in fulfilling their desire to exercise power over life and death, to possess their victims entirely. Some believe consuming another person allows them to take on certain powers, or take on the life force of that person (see clinical vampirism, or “Renfield’s Syndrome”). But why would someone like Zachary Bowen, who killed out of anger, take the time and effort to cook his victim, even after the immediate rage has faded?

One possible answer, of course, is that cooking and eating a victim is simply a bizarre attempt to dispose of the body. This may be its purpose in the case of the Sweeney Todd-style murder by a Russian chef a few weeks ago—he killed his father-in-law during an argument, then cooked the remains into meat pies to sell to unsuspecting customers. In cases like that of Omaima Aree Nelson, she supposedly killed her husband in response to systematic spousal abuse, and then cooked and ate parts of his body. She began trying to dispose of the rest of it by taking it to various ex-boyfriends for help. Did frying his hands or dipping his ribs in barbecue sauce make it significantly easier to get rid of the evidence? Probably not.

In cases of argument-related murder that end with cooking and/or eating of the body, the motive is more likely the same as the motive for the murder itself—anger. If someone’s rage is so extreme that mere murder doesn’t satisfy it, they may try to continue expressing control and revenge by consuming their victim. It may even simply be a way to draw out the murder over time, continuing it even after the victim’s death.

Of course, Zachary Bowen committed suicide after killing his girlfriend, not exactly a sign of someone wanting to draw out his aggression as long as possible, and the autopsy was said to show no signs of actual consumption of her remains. Cooking, however, shows a clear plan to eat, so it seems he simply changed his mind. This may just be a sign of his rage running out—that it lasted several days before he stopped what he was doing and killed himself instead.

Since most crimes of passion don’t end with a barbecue, something about these killers must separate them from the killers whose anger ends just after death. Omaima Aree Nelson, like Zachary Bowen, was said to have post traumatic stress disorder—could this hinder their ability to stop at murder alone? Or is some other, more sinister influence at work?

The post Truly Chilling: Chefs and Cannibals appeared first on Crime Museum.