Mitigating Factor: Filicide Children Killed by Parents?

[ibyoungr]

I can't believe how many sick people there are out there. How can you lock your child in a trunk and then walk off as he cries? Unbelievable!!

You can't. That's why you use duct tape.

You don't you kill them first then put them in the trunk.

 

[s1rebecca]

I doubt it, as it would require Casey to admit guilt and/or mental illness. I'm not sure a jury would buy it as a defense either.

Fillicide isn't a made-up word, the word and the studies have been around for years and years and years. These studies are written by social and medical statisticians and other scientists, so the language tends to be detatched. Most of the raw data for the US studies comes from of all places the CDC (Center for Disease Control).

My frustration with these studies and even more so for studies on the death penalty, is for all the detached language many of them seem to have a particular theory or axe to grind. I'd rather drawn my own conclusions-- thank you very much.

Oh well, what's the phrase... "Lies, damn lies, and statistics?"

With all due respect the word was made up by someone in the psychiatric field. I understand they may have done studies but the word is used to take the place of child murderer so are other words like soft kill and other silly words to make horrible acts sound better.

 

[BondJamesBond]

It's just chalked full of juicy tidbits, isn't it. This one really made me sit up and take notice "we must find the strength to file even those motions that we know will not be granted"...isn't that exactly what JB has been doing? And to think it's all for the sake of due process and justice and the off chance that one will be granted and they'll win.

Momtective, I was glad to read this follow-up post. I couldn't tell in your original post that you were quoting the article (as I cruised through w/o reading it myself)...it appeared you were making these statements as your own...

 

[BeanE]

Next installment of Terry Lenamon's series:

In Depth Look: Filicide is Different
April 17th, 2009

This is Part 3 in the series.

http://swartzlenamon.com/deathpenaltyblog/

 

[momtective]

Momtective, I was glad to read this follow-up post. I couldn't tell in your original post that you were quoting the article (as I cruised through w/o reading it myself)...it appeared you were making these statements as your own...

Bond, I thought you knew me better than that...:crazy:

 

[Phumi]

In the book Born to be Killers :The Complexity of Abnormal Human Behavior (Time Warner Books , 2004, Britain) there is a chapter on women who kill. In referencing the Susan Smith case specifically and mothers who kill in general this is written:

"These type of women tend to overdramatize a situation and consequently act on impulse. They can superficially look like loving, caring mothers, but in truth they seem to save most of their feeling for themselves, even if only in self-pity. Just like a doll, they tire of the child that is in effect in the way of progress, and the baby becomes ultimately expendable, especially if a new man comes into their life."


I found this interesting in light of the argument I have read in these threads that Casey was a loving, caring mom and therefore could not have killed Caylee. In an admittedly unscientific and brief search of the internet last night, I was able to find reference to friends and family saying that Susan Smith, Darlie Routier and Andrea Yates were by all appearances loving, doting mothers.

 

[MADJGNLAW]

I was wondering the same thing maybe this is his secret defense. Try to get manslaughter instead of life wop for a fancy word someone made up to take the place of child murderer.

I have been thinking this all along. Baez stated early on we will be shocked at the truth when Casey gets to tell her side of the story. I always felt that the defense was going to use an insanity plea, maybe they will argue that yes there was a nanny in Casey's eyes by the name ZFG and that is who killed Caylee. They will make this claim since the so called ZFG has not been found; Defense: Doesn't mean that she (So called ZFG )is not the one responsible, and that is where the reasonable doubt will be drilled into the juries head.
Or they will claim that Casey has another personality. I have heard here and there that Lee didn't know who Casey was, same as Jesse. They claim this is not the Casey they know.
In either case, I don't see how the judicial system or anyone for that matter can disregard the fact that a child died at the hands of her mother or whom ever.
Insane or not, it's a crime and the person should pay. Regardless of who that person may be. Any child that is murdered should have more rights. I see all these stipulations and exceptions for the criminal. Where are the Rights for the victim? It just doesn't seem fair in this case or any case regarding a murdered child "IMO".
In regards to someone that is insane committing a crime because they are not in the right frame of mind, then the penalty should not matter, there insane, they won't know the difference right? Bottom line...a child is dead. And whom ever killed the child should face the maximum penalty. Old, young, pretty, male, female, regardless of race or other. If you do the crime, serve the sentence whether it's death or life. No cold hearted murder should ever be set free. :behindbar

 

[TURBOTHINK]

With all due respect the word was made up by someone in the psychiatric field. I understand they may have done studies but the word is used to take the place of child murderer so are other words like soft kill and other silly words to make horrible acts sound better.

I have been researching that word, and it appears to be a word only used by defense attorneys. I can't find anything in reference to that word in the field of psychology.

 

[SuziQ]

I am a big fan of statistics. I have not seen a thread like this started yet. Please feel free to add interesting studies, facts, or statistics relating to Parents who murder children.

Here is some good info I found....

The Numbers
Children under the age of 5 in the United States are more likely to be killed by their parents than anyone else. Contrary to popular mythology, they are rarely killed by a sex-crazed stranger. FBI crime statistics show that in 1999 parents were responsible for 57 percent of these murders, with family friends and acquaintances accounting for another 30 percent and other family members accounting for 8 percent. Crime statistics further reveal that of the children under 5 killed from 1976 to 1999, 30 percent were murdered by their mothers while 31 percent were killed by their fathers. And while the strangers, acquaintances, and other family members who kill children skew heavily toward males (as does the entire class of murderers), children are as likely to be murdered by their fathers as by their mothers.


If you would like to read more of this article it can be found here
http://www.slate.com/id/2063086/

JBean, thanks for bumping up this thread. I'm bumping up the original post so that others are sure to see the stats.

 

[Brini]

I found this to be most interesting. There seem to be a lot of supporters on here that think that she couldn't have possibly murdered her, because mothers don't do that, because we all have maternal extincts, etc etc, but I have been saying all along that mothers can and DO murder their children - just having the ability to give birth to a child doesn't automatically make you a mother. and that women can be just as evil as men to their own. thanks for trotting out stats to support this...I like this thread!

Mothers kill kids all the time. That KC is middle-class and decent looking doesn't make her any different.

 

[Brini]

I have been thinking this all along. Baez stated early on we will be shocked at the truth when Casey gets to tell her side of the story. I always felt that the defense was going to use an insanity plea, maybe they will argue that yes there was a nanny in Casey's eyes by the name ZFG and that is who killed Caylee. They will make this claim since the so called ZFG has not been found; Defense: Doesn't mean that she (So called ZFG )is not the one responsible, and that is where the reasonable doubt will be drilled into the juries head.
Or they will claim that Casey has another personality. I have heard here and there that Lee didn't know who Casey was, same as Jesse. They claim this is not the Casey they know.
In either case, I don't see how the judicial system or anyone for that matter can disregard the fact that a child died at the hands of her mother or whom ever.
Insane or not, it's a crime and the person should pay. Regardless of who that person may be. Any child that is murdered should have more rights. I see all these stipulations and exceptions for the criminal. Where are the Rights for the victim? It just doesn't seem fair in this case or any case regarding a murdered child "IMO".
In regards to someone that is insane committing a crime because they are not in the right frame of mind, then the penalty should not matter, there insane, they won't know the difference right? Bottom line...a child is dead. And whom ever killed the child should face the maximum penalty. Old, young, pretty, male, female, regardless of race or other. If you do the crime, serve the sentence whether it's death or life. No cold hearted murder should ever be set free. :behindbar

Another personality would b awfully hard to sell. KC has no history of fugue.

DID starts in early childhood, and is hard to miss. It's also often iatrogenic, and the symptoms go away when the patient changes treators.

KC is not legally insane. Period.

 

[Brini]

I have been researching that word, and it appears to be a word only used by defense attorneys. I can't find anything in reference to that word in the field of psychology.

You bet!

I was throw off a jury, because a defense lawyer asked whether I had ever heard of "Urban Survival Syndrome."

I answered, "There's no such diagnosis. It's not in the DSM."

 

[debs]

With all due respect the word was made up by someone in the psychiatric field. I understand they may have done studies but the word is used to take the place of child murderer so are other words like soft kill and other silly words to make horrible acts sound better.

Euripides would beg to differ with you. But the word itself is more than 400 years old, though the act that the word describes is as old as time.

 

[BeanE]

New installment of death penalty attorney Terry Lenamon's series. This is Part 4

In Depth Look: Filicide is Different - 4
May 1

http://swartzlenamon.com/deathpenaltyblog/in-depth-look-filicide-is-different-4

 

[RevCrim]

New installment of death penalty attorney Terry Lenamon's series. This is Part 4

In Depth Look: Filicide is Different - 4
May 1

http://swartzlenamon.com/deathpenaltyblog/in-depth-look-filicide-is-different-4

I read part 4- for this to work for KC- does this mean the defense is going
to claim KC was sexually abused by GA and LA, as a child ? I have thought this for months now. KC's refusal to see or talk to her parents and LA.
I think the only reason she acknowledged her parents in court was to keep it a secret what she and JB have up their sleeves. The parents could visit KC anytime and not discuss anything about the case at all, if they really all cared about one another. Emotional support would have been a true example when Caylee's remains were found, and then the memorial. Looks to me like a train wreck is on the way, and the A's are going to be tied to the tracks.

After the A's covering up and deceptions, and outright lies, will this will bring out the real KC that JB must be talking about. Can anyone see the A's just sitting in a court room being torn to shreds by JB. Will CA finally see the real KC? Will the A's change their stories again and squish KC like a bug if this is what's coming?

It was like KC gave her parents a warning at the jail visit when she told them that they had an oportunity to get her out but, they didn't take it. Her attitude was like, so now the heck with you, because you are not of use to me any longer.
These are just my opinions, alone.

 

[Dear Prudence]

I read part 4- for this to work for KC- does this mean the defense is going
to claim KC was sexually abused by GA and LA, as a child ? I have thought this for months now. KC's refusal to see or talk to her parents and LA.
I think the only reason she acknowledged her parents in court was to keep it a secret what she and JB have up their sleeves. The parents could visit KC anytime and not discuss anything about the case at all, if they really all cared about one another. Emotional support would have been a true example when Caylee's remains were found, and then the memorial. Looks to me like a train wreck is on the way, and the A's are going to be tied to the tracks.

After the A's covering up and deceptions, and outright lies, will this will bring out the real KC that JB must be talking about. Can anyone see the A's just sitting in a court room being torn to shreds by JB. Will CA finally see the real KC? Will the A's change their stories again and squish KC like a bug if this is what's coming?

It was like KC gave her parents a warning at the jail visit when she told them that they had an oportunity to get her out but, they didn't take it. Her attitude was like, so now the heck with you, because you are not of use to me any longer.
These are just my opinions, alone.

It could be this is where the defense is going but I don't think so. We've only seen JG and TL say that Casey told them Lee once tried to get sexual with her. We know Casey is a pathological liar. Would be more likely to be brought in during punishment phase after she's found guilty, if at all.

Lenamon's articles have been pretty informative. The stats are really sad. The vast majority of homicidal child abusers are convicted of manslaughter, not murder. Only 64% of filicides are even prosecuted. When the death penalty is available, juries mostly avoid it. For some reason people who murder their own children receive more mercy than other murderers. There was another article I read that said it was because we perceive children to be the property of the parent, especially the mother. Society teaches that children belong to their mother. Kind of like the old the saying "I brought you into this world so I can take you out." Therefore we punish them less because they are just destroying their own property. Gosh that's heartbreaking for me to write because I have a hard time agreeing with that but it was interesting to read, I'll try to find it.

 

[kushka]

With all due respect the word was made up by someone in the psychiatric field. I understand they may have done studies but the word is used to take the place of child murderer so are other words like soft kill and other silly words to make horrible acts sound better.

The word is an old one, it was not created by a lawyer or some one in the psychiatric field. The first reference I found for filicide was in a paper by John Webb written in 1665 called "A vindication of Stone-Heng restored".

 

[Brini]

I read part 4- for this to work for KC- does this mean the defense is going
to claim KC was sexually abused by GA and LA, as a child ? I have thought this for months now. KC's refusal to see or talk to her parents and LA.
I think the only reason she acknowledged her parents in court was to keep it a secret what she and JB have up their sleeves. The parents could visit KC anytime and not discuss anything about the case at all, if they really all cared about one another. Emotional support would have been a true example when Caylee's remains were found, and then the memorial. Looks to me like a train wreck is on the way, and the A's are going to be tied to the tracks.

After the A's covering up and deceptions, and outright lies, will this will bring out the real KC that JB must be talking about. Can anyone see the A's just sitting in a court room being torn to shreds by JB. Will CA finally see the real KC? Will the A's change their stories again and squish KC like a bug if this is what's coming?

It was like KC gave her parents a warning at the jail visit when she told them that they had an oportunity to get her out but, they didn't take it. Her attitude was like, so now the heck with you, because you are not of use to me any longer.
These are just my opinions, alone.

Not to mention KCs covering up and outright lies.

They might TRY that. She'd prolly have to offer some evidence. And, the fact is she's lied SO much. who'd believe her about anything? Also, that doesn't excuse her for murdering KC.

Last I noticed, she was actually trying to set up JG, not her parents.

I think they'll try to set SOMEBODY up, but I doubt it will be the parents. That somebody will be accused of killing Caylee, not molesting KC.

 

[sleutherontheside]

http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/content/full/33/4/496

Just a few bits from the above article. It looks like a lot BUT it is a loooooooooooooooooooong article.

Several recent cases of filicide, child murder by parents, have drawn national attention to this archetypal tragedy. Specific motives for filicide were initially described by Resnick,1 classified as (1) altruistic, (2) acutely psychotic, (3) accidental filicide (fatal maltreatment), (4) unwanted child, and (5) spouse revenge filicide.1 Altruistic filicide is murder committed out of love to relieve the real or imagined suffering of the child. Altruistic filicide may be associated with suicide. For example, a mother who is suicidal may not be willing to leave her child motherless in a "cruel world." Distinct from this, acutely psychotic filicide occurs when a parent in the throes of acute psychosis (e.g., experiencing command hallucinations) kills his or her child with no comprehensible motive. Fatal maltreatment filicide may occur as a result of child abuse, neglect, or Munchausen syndrome by proxy. Parents committing spouse revenge filicides kill children in a specific attempt to make the spouse suffer. Furthermore, filicide may occur within the context of familicide, the extermination of the entire family. Resnick1 reported a "relief of tension" after altruistic and acutely psychotic filicides. The expulsion of energy after the child’s death explains why some parents who had intended filicide-suicide did not complete the act of suicide. Conversely, other parents, "upon realization of the gravity of their act...may attempt suicide even if it was not planned" (Ref. 1, p 79). In the reported literature, a large proportion of filicides are filicide-suicides, with 16 to 29 percent of mothers and 40 to 60 percent of fathers who commit filicide also committing suicide.2–4 Fathers’ higher rates of filicide-suicide are possibly related to the higher male suicide rate in general.5 In children under five years of age, just over 60 percent are killed by their parents.6 Meanwhile, the murder rate for U.S. children under five years of age is more than twice the rate of our Canadian neighbors’ children of that age.7 While homicide victimization rates increase in the teenage years, significantly fewer teen homicides are committed by parents. A Chicago study found that while filicides are only 2 percent of all homicides, they represented 7.6 percent of homicide-suicides.8

Filicide-suicides are often not included in research samples of filicides, because study populations are frequently drawn from jail or psychiatric populations of living parents who have killed.9,10 However, several studies in other nations have been based on coroners’ records of filicides. In a Quebec study,11 of 27 mothers who killed their children, just over half (n = 15) committed suicide. A Swedish study of death records revealed 43 filicide-suicides in 65 filicide cases.12 In more than 40 percent of cases, there were multiple homicide victims. A Finnish study of filicide-suicide found almost twice as many fathers as mothers committing filicide-suicides, with fathers tending to kill more of their children than did mothers.13 Meyer and Oberman noted: "Women who commit infanticide and then attempt to take their own lives are more likely to kill multiple children" (Ref. 14, p 91).

While suggestions have been made for prevention of certain types of filicide, little is known to date about prevention of filicide-suicide. Epidemiologic studies have identified childbearing at an early age and no prenatal care as risk factors for child murder in the general population in the first year of life.15 There have been multiple studies of filicide that classified types of child murder and further categorized the offender, but little research has focused on identifying commonly occurring factors that may confer risk in the psychiatric population. Resnick1 noted that three-fourths of the parents had psychiatric symptoms prior to committing filicide and 40 percent had recently seen a physician or psychiatrist. In fact, "some mothers talked openly of suicide and even expressed concern about the future of their children" (Ref. 1, p 80). If multiple commonly occurring factors can be identified in filicide-suicide offenders by clinicians prior to the act, there is hope that some deaths may be prevented.

Based on a synthesis of the literature, the authors investigated the existence of commonly occurring characteristics shared by filicide-suicide offenders: severe mental disorder (schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, or major depressive disorder), prior contact with a mental health professional, severe depression, past suicide attempts, psychotic features, poor social support, and an abnormal relationship with the child. Furthermore, specific delusional themes (delusions regarding the children or the family) may be related to filicide-suicide. Knowledge about common characteristics may help clinicians in their risk assessments.

The authors also hypothesized that motives for filicide-suicide would most likely be altruistic or acutely psychotic, because parents who had fatally abused a child, had an unwanted child, or sought revenge on a spouse would be less likely to kill themselves after having killed their children. In all three of these scenarios, the offending parents would be less likely to merge their own fate with that of their children. The parent may fail to commit suicide because, in the case of fatal maltreatment, the child usually has been neglected or abused but unintentionally killed; in the case of an unwanted child, there is a lack of identification with the child; and in the case of spouse revenge, there may be a desire to remain alive to take pleasure in the vengeance.

While I know KC had no spouse.....I substitute Cindy and wow does it fit.

 

[logicalgirl]

Excellent contribution Sleutherontheside - thank you! I've been mulling over mitigating circumstances since ALyon came on the scene. While I can understand that Casey may have had some parallels - it's just not working for me for the "primary reason", and hardly an excuse.