A psychodynamic-behaviourist investigation of Russian sexual serial killer Andrei Chikatilo

This paper looks briefly at the case study of Russian sexual serial killer Andrei Chikatilo. Whilst serial homicide has received wide ranging attention more broadly in the literature, Chikatilo’s criminality and sexually deviant behaviour have thus far lacked any in-depth psychological explanation, with his crimes attributed tentatively to dysfunction upbringing and innate deviance. However, based on theoretical arguments presented in the present investigation, a more detailed account of what may have contributed to the development of such extreme sexual violence and cognitive distortions is discussed. Consideration of psychodynamic and behaviourist perspectives lead to the conclusion that a complex interaction of biological, psychological and sociological factors may account for the onset and continuation of his homicidal behaviour.     

Effect of psychopathy on physical aggression toward gay and heterosexual men

The purpose of this investigation was to examine the effect of psychopathy on antigay aggression. Participants were 84 heterosexual men who competed in an aggression paradigm in which electric shocks were received from and administered to a randomly determined fictitious opponent (heterosexual male, gay male) during a competitive reaction time task. Aggression was operationalized as shock intensities administered to the opponent. Prior to the task, all participants completed measures of psychopathy, sexual prejudice, and state anger; viewed a male-male erotic video; and reported state anger a second time. After controlling for sexual prejudice, analyses revealed that psychopathy significantly predicted aggression toward the gay, but not the heterosexual, male confederate. Psychopathy was not associated with increases in anger in response to the erotic video. These findings indicate that psychopathy is a significant marker for antigay violence, though anger experienced in response to homosexuality does not seem to underlie this association.     

The Cultural Defense

Because of immigration in the West, increased cultural diversity poses a variety of problems for the criminal justice system. This paper examines whether a so-called "cultural defense" ought to be allowed as a freestanding defense to a criminal charge. Such a defense would "negate or mitigate criminal responsibility where acts are committed under a reasonable good-faith belief in their propriety, based on the actor's cultural heritage or tradition." The cultural defense, as a formal defense, and the use of cultural evidence in order to buttress one of the traditional defenses, are distinguished. Three cases are discussed to illustrate the issues. The possible similarity of the cultural defense to an ignorance or mistake of law defense is then considered. The latter is accepted by such theorists as Gunther Arzt and George P. Fletcher and also apparently in German law, but it is rejected by Jerome Hall on the ground that it undermines the objectivity of the criminal law. The similarity, however, is shown not to hold. It is concluded that a freestanding cultural defense should not be allowed.     

For a Few Dollars More: Public Trust and the Case for Transporting Nuclear Waste in Dedicated Trains

The debate about the use of dedicated trains for shipping spent fuel and high level nuclear waste has been going on for the past 15 years. The nuclear industry and its regulatory agencies would like to consider the case closed. The recent passage of the Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Act of 1990, however, opens the door once more, giving the railroads and other proponents of dedicated trains another chance to present their case. This paper argues that earlier conclusions favoring regular trains over dedicated trains were based on incomplete cost and risk information and neglected other factors which are not technical, but social and institutional in nature. The paper finds that the additional cost of a dedicated system is lower than previously thought and concludes that it is a small price to pay for reduced public opposition and increased levels of trust.     

Between Indigenous Paramountcy and Democracy: How Differentiated Citizenship and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Could Help Fijian Self‐determination

Contemporary Fijian politics is shaped by a colonial legacy of extraordinary complexity and political tension. Since gaining independence from Great Britain in 1970, Fiji's history has been distinguished by incoherent and inconsistent accounts of political power. These concern the political rights belonging to indigenous peoples as first occupants vis‐à‐vis the claims to political recognition by the descendants of Indian indentured labourers. The relative power between the indigenous aristocracy and commoners is a further complicating variable. Following three coups (1987 and 2006) and a putsch (2000), indigenous paramount authority has been positioned against various forms of democracy and military oversight of the political process. However, none of these political arrangements has enhanced indigenous self‐determination. This article argues that indigenous self‐determination is more likely to be realised through a form of differentiated liberal citizenship consistent with the United Nations’ Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This reasonably requires the extension of the Declaration's provisions to indigenous Fijians, who, as a recent majority indigenous population, are constrained by colonial legacy in a similar manner to the minority indigenous populations for whose benefit the Declaration was primarily adopted.