Many Sexual Homicides Are Not Overtly Sexual
Many attacks and murders that appear on the surface to be motivated by monetary gain may, in fact, be sexually motivated, although the sexual dynamics are covert (Schlesinger and Revitch, 1997b). Revitch (1957) first reported the case of a man who attacked a woman with a blackjack and was subsequently arrested and charged with assault and attempted robbery. The offender told the police that he needed money and that a woman was an easier victim than a man. When examined carefully, however, he revealed that his longstanding fantasies of tying women’s legs had prompted the attack. His initial stated motive of robbery (given to the police) was, then, a rationalization or simply a lie. In accepting his statement at face value, the police had ignored a noose, a rifle, and a copy of Krafff- Ebing’s (1886) classic text Psychopathia Sexualis—all found in the trunk of the offender’s car. Revitch (1965) concluded that, contrary to popular belief, erection, ejaculation, and intercourse do not necessarily accompany a violent (sexually motivated) assault or murder, since the brutal attack may be a substitute for, or take the place of, the sexual act.
Other investigators have reached similar conclusions—namely, that aggressive behaviors with a sexual motive may manifest themselves in symbolic acts of a nonsexual nature
(Davidson, 1952), and that overtly nonsexual crimes (such as burglary, arson, assault, or stealing) may be motivated by hidden sexual forces that are not, at first, obvious even to a trained observer (Banay, 1969). Banay reported several cases of assaults, stabbings, and murders, where significant underlying sexual dynamics were present but had not been initially detected. “Since the individual is seldom completely aware of the motives for his actions, it is natural that a criminal should deny and disbelieve that certain behavior, seemingly nonsexual, could be sexually inspired” (p. 94). He concluded that “crimes are classified more for purposes of orderly enforcement than for a precise identification of their source and essential nature” (p. 91). In fact, Schlesinger and Revitch’s (1997a) compendium of various forms of sexually motivated antisocial behavior includes many nonovertly sexual acts such as vampirism, burglary, fire setting, and theft. Many sexual murderers have a history of what would appear to be nonsexually motivated crimes. If the sexual dynamics of these offenses are not recognized, the potential dangerousness of the offender is missed.
Do these conclusions confirm Freud’s (1905) hypothesis that “nothing of considerable importance can occur in the organism without contributing some component to the excitation of the sexual instinct” (p. 137)? That is, are we to regard all murders as sexual murders—at least at some level? Such a notion might possibly be correct from a psychoanalytic perspective, but from the perspective of a researcher, an investigator, or a practicing forensic clinician, it is impractical and seems incorrect. There are differences between sexual murders and nonsexual murders; it is just hard to specify exactly what the differences are.
