Following the conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for their part in the sexual assault and murder of Meredith Kercher, several important and influential psychologists have commented on the case.
All three of the experts come from different backgrounds related to psychology. One is a psychotherapist/analytical psychologist; one is a criminologist and the other a very influential investigative psychologist. All three differ widely in their individual opinion on Knox and the case.
Dr Coline Covington
Dr Coline Covington is a highly experienced psychotherapist who has studied at Princeton University, Cambridge University and the London School of Economics. She was the former Editor of the Journal of Analytical Psychology as well as the former Chair of the British Psychoanalytic Council. She has also worked for the Metropolitan Police.
Dr Covington has written an intelligent and brave piece on Amanda Knox in the First Post. Click the picture above for the link. In the article she describes Amanda’s behaviour in court:
“Knox’s narcissistic pleasure at catching the eye of the media and her apparent nonchalant attitude during most of the proceedings show the signs of a psychopathic personality. Her behaviour is hauntingly reminiscent of Eichmann’s arrogance during his trial for war crimes in Jerusalem in 1961 and most recently of Karadzic’s preening before the International Criminal Court at the Hague.
The psychopath is someone who has no concern or empathy for others, no awareness of right and wrong, and who takes extreme pleasure in having power over others. The psychopath has no moral conscience and therefore does not experience guilt or remorse.
Most psychopaths are highly skilled at fooling those around them that they are normal by imitating the emotions that are expected of them in different circumstances. They are consummate at charming people and convincing them they are in the right. It is only when they reveal a discrepancy in their emotional response that they let slip that something may be wrong with them.
The psychopath is the conman, or in the case of Amanda Knox, the con-woman par excellence. Her nickname ‘Foxy Knoxy’, given to her as a young girl for her skills at football, takes on a new meaning.
Whether or not Knox, who is appealing her verdict, is ultimately found guilty, her chilling performance remains an indictment against her. Her family’s disbelief in the outcome of the trial can only be double-edged”
This is not the first time a suggestion has been made that Amanda has displayed behaviour which is often associated with psychopathy. It is a view that I have also supported in the past.
Professor David Wilson
Professor David Wilson is one of Britain’s leading criminologists and is the author of ‘A History of British Serial Killing, 1888-2008’. He writes for the Guardian and is a regular feature on the BBC. He is also Professor of Criminology at the Centre for Criminal Justice Policy and Research at the University of Central England.
Professor Wilson expressed the following comments in an editorial in the Express on Monday:
“This is a woman clearly involved with an older, more experienced boyfriend who introduced her to a lifestyle that allowed her to bend the rules of morality that had guided her in the US,” he says.
“She was rather like a gap-year Rose West. I believe she was naive and got caught up in a very different world, which she embraced enthusiastically.”
So can he pinpoint the real woman behind the masks? He insists she should be judged on evidence alone.
“In truth she’s neither angel nor she-devil but a complex human being who sits somewhere in between. I do believe, though, that we are going to hear a lot more from Amanda Knox.”
Professor David Canter
Professor David Canter is an internationally renowned applied social researcher and world-leading crime psychologist, but is perhaps most widely known as one of the pioneers of ‘Offender Profiling’ being the first to introduce its use to the UK.
In comments made in The Times, he stated:
“Most bizarre murders, particularly those with a lot of sexual activity and if there are drugs involved, come out of a lifestyle that’s pretty dysfunctional in which there’s some build-up. So it’s unusual for apparently capable and functioning youngsters to get caught up in all this.”
This particular quote is already being used by a number of journalists and bloggers in support of Amanda’s innocence. I think it’s important to understand Professor Canter’s actual comment before making assumptions about what his particular opinions about the conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are.
Professor Canter is diplomatically stating that Amanda’s profile in a young killer is unusual, which nobody can deny, he is not saying that Amanda Knox couldn’t have committed this crime simply because she doesn’t fit the typical profile.
Indeed a comment made by forensic psychiatrist Dr Michael Welner on this blog a few months ago illustrates the point perfectly:
“All of my academic background and experience in this area of tragedy reinforces my impression that anyone is capable of anything, so long as they have the physical wherewithal. So many times have I seen cases that “never happened before.” And then I saw them happen.”
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
“Some of these people are fairly persuasive, they can manipulate, they’re very charming, some of them even charismatic. And a lot of people, they like them, they think they’re kind of fun to be around, but it takes a long time before you can figure out that something is really amiss here.” Dr Robert Hare.
I clearly remember watching the televised broadcast of Karen Matthews pleading for the safe return of her daughter Shannon. Even then, something about her behaviour immediately struck me as profoundly odd. For those who aren’t familiar with the case let me fill you in on a few details. Nine year old Shannon Matthews disappeared on 19th February 2008 after leaving her school in Dewsbury, Yorkshire.
The last reported sighting of Shannon was at 3.10pm outside Westmoor Junior School. Karen Matthews, Shannon’s mother appeared on television and made several emotional pleas for her daughters’ safe return. Throughout the 24 day ordeal Karen Matthews friends and family stood by her and left no stone unturned in their search for little Shannon. The reward for any information leading to her safe return quickly reached £20,000 later rising to £50,000. The UK media was impressed with the solidarity of this small community taking care of a young mother in deep distress. The public had begun to fear the worst when a miracle happened.
Shannon was found alive by the police on the 14 March 2008 concealed in a divan bed not too far from her home. A 39 year old man, Michael Donovan was arrested at the scene. The news spread throughout the community and the country like wildfire. Karen Matthews was stunned and emotional.
On Friday 24th January 2009 Karen Matthews (along with Donovan) was sentenced to eight years in prison for orchestrating what the judge called a “despicable and inconceivable” kidnap plot to claim the reward money offered for information leading to the safe return of her daughter. Apparently Karen was tired of being broke and decided to plot a kidnap and claim the reward money. The police finally put two and two together and realised that throughout the ordeal Karen had shown remarkably little interest in the safety and wellbeing of her daughter, preferring instead to soak up the attention (and eventually she hoped, the reward money) she received from the national press.
When I say ‘psychopath’, what do you think of? Maybe a serial killer or a violent rapist? You’d probably be right, most serial killers are psychopaths, but all too often I’ve seen the words serial killer and psychopath used interchangeably. Dr Robert Hare is a world renowned expert on the psychopath (he identified it) and to date has devoted his entire career to understanding psychopathy.
A psychopath is unable to feel guilt, remorse or emotion. Hare has estimated that approximately 1% of the general population is psychopathic to some degree, even if they’ve committed no crime. Psychopaths are unable to feel emotion and any sense of shame or responsibility is totally lost on them. Sound dangerous? You’d be right about that! In his psychopathy checklist (PCL) and its revised edition (PCL-R) Hare puts forward a reliable diagnostic tool for identifying psychopaths. The list of characteristics includes:
A grandiose sense of self-worth, superficial charm, criminal versatility, impulse control problems, irresponsibility, inability to tolerate boredom, narcissism, pathological lying, shallow affect, deceitful, manipulative, lack of empathy, lack of remorse, a sense of extreme entitlement, lack of or diminished levels of anxiety/nervousness and other emotions, promiscuous sexual behaviour, sexually deviant lifestyle, poor judgment, failure to learn from experience, lack of personal insight, failure to follow any life plan, abuse of drugs including alcohol and an inability to distinguish right from wrong.
I should point out at this stage that the list above is in no way exhaustive and is no substitute for the PCL-R being administered by a qualified and trained professional however I have read extensively on Hare’s research (I am myself a psychologist) and cannot help but come to a few conclusions of my own from time to time. Let’s call it a hunch and (hopefully) without seeming rude or in the least bit arrogant my hunches have turned out to be correct or more than one occasion.
The truth is I’ve always thought there was something amiss with Amanda Knox and I had a similar feeling when I first saw Karen Matthews’s emotional pleas on the TV, the same monotone sound bites, cut and paste facial expressions with crocodile tears in all the right places yet no depth of character, nothing, zip, nada, the lights are on but nobody is home. I think it’s fair to say I’m not alone in thinking that Amanda’s observed behaviour has been ‘odd’ to say the least. Being dubbed ‘the face of an angel with ice cold eyes’ rather sums it up don’t you think?
I’ve noticed that the Friends of Amanda website has stepped up a gear recently and the PR campaign has increased momentum, Candace Dempsey continues to delude herself that we are still dealing with a ‘normal’ young woman here instead of a girl that is obviously a skilled manipulator. Amanda is supposed to look nice, she is wholesome, smart, a superficially charming all-American girl that wouldn’t hurt a fly but don’t be fooled, stereotyping prevents us from seeing the female as a potentially violent individual. A lot of people have gotten away with terrible things because they simply didn’t ‘look like the sort of person that would do that kind of thing’.
Research has shown that female perpetrators can be just as violent as male perpetrators but are much more likely to coerce a male accomplice into helping commit a crime. If caught female perpetrators often protect themselves with the old “she couldn’t possibly be guilty women don’t do that sort of thing” defence which exactly the tactic which is failing for Amanda Knox. Anybody with half a brain can see that the evidence points to her being there on the night of the murder if not the one who made the fatal knife wound that killed Meredith.
I fear the PR campaign will be the ultimate blockade to the truth in this case and any hope the public had of hearing the truth from Amanda’s own mouth has rapidly faded with every day of Dempsey’s crusade. Amanda will never talk. She has too much to lose and a whole lot to gain by keeping everyone in the dark.
