Children Who Kill: Profiles of Pre-Teen and Teenage Killers

by Carol Anne Davis

Why would two young boys abduct, torture and kill a toddler? What makes a teenage girl plot with her classmates to kill her own father? Traditionally, society is used to regarding children as harmless -- but for some the age of innocence is short-lived, messy and ultimately murderous. Children Who Kill is a comprehensive new study of juvenile homicide. Carol Anne Davis sets out to explore this disturbing subject using in-depth case studies of thirteen killers aged between ten and seventeen. Exclusive interviews with experts offer an invaluable insight into the psychology behind these atrocities and a hard-hitting look at the role of society in an area too shocking to ignore

Genres: True Crime, Nonfiction, Crime, Ebooks, Psychology

383 pages, Mass Market Paperback

First published January 1, 2003

Reviews

[Eva-Marie Nevarez · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm going to refer people to Bettina's review. I hope she doesn't mind (if you do please let me know and I'll remove this.) My reason for this is she basically says what I don't have the time for right now.
The oversimplification is so over the top it's nuts. I'm not sure what happened to Davis to make her believe everything is so easy, most especially when dealing with a subject like this, but apparently something has.
She's far too opinionated on a subject that should have been covered with facts alone. IMO anyway.
A few cases in point since I do have a minute.
Page 73 - "Name tattoos are often a sign of insecurity, for people in secure relationships don't feel the need to make such obvious public statements about their love." Um, guffaw.
So.... apparently it's come to light I'm probably not "secure" in my relationship with my daughter. According to this idiot. Or, am I over-analyzing? Is this only with "other" relationships? Familial relationships don't count? Get the hell out of here.
How about this? Uh, some people like tattoos. Ever think of that Davis? Or too set in your idiotic ways.
Also apparently Jon Venables was completely stressed because his Mother had an unhappy marriage, a divorce, and a council house. Newsflash!!!!!! Lots of us deal with that same shit and don't kidnap little babies an brutally murder them. He doesn't get a pass for the reasons above, he doesn't get a pass for his age, he gets a pass for NOTHING from me. His pass was taken when he made his decision.
The Wendy Gardner and James Evans chapter is especially interesting. Those two were just totally stressed and out of their minds. I mean, my God, they couldn't' date at 11, couldn't stay out all night at 12, who wouldn't do that they did. Duh. It was only natural.
Kip Kinkel - we all know him right? He made sure of that. The poor thing had "just mastered English" when he was "thrown into school in Spain." His not being able to "master English" made life so, so hard.
(Yes, I do know what I typed. I typed what was in the book. Your question is my question.)
So, what we have folks is a built in excuse. And I'm going to go out of my way, right now, to help each and every one of you parents out there.

Don't want your kid to grow up (or start to grow up) and become a murderer? No problemo.
1. Don't live too far in the city.
2. Don't live too far from the city.
3. Don't allow kids to watch t.v.
4. Only allow kids to listen to YOUR music. (After all, you do know best.)
5. Allow them, girls or boys, to date whenever they want. (9? Okay!)
6. Don't have pets.
7. Do have pets.
8. Don't let them go to school.
9. Make sure they get an education.
10. Listen - and do - everything they say.

And there you have it. Then, if they do become a cold blooded murderer, you can say you tried your best. Me? I'm sticking to my way. I'll come back in 20-some-odd years and let y'all know how it worked out.
As for this book? The two stars come from the facts. The actual facts of the crimes and the families seem to be legit. The rest sucks. I mean, listen, if you want to pay for people's opinions I have a bunch for you. And I don't even charge all that much. Hit me up if interested.
Personally, you couldn't pay me to pick up another book by this one. I'm so tired of the blanket excuses for criminals it's not even funny. How about accountability? How about making decisions and dealing with the consequences? That's gone in this country. GONE.

[Bettina · Rating 2 out of 5]

Of course this book is engaging and the subject matter is difficult to present in a "boring" manner. It also isn't overly sensationalist, which is positive and rare in this area. The author successfully manages to empathise with the situation without demonising or condoning the crimes.

However, although this book is clearly above tabloid level, the author falls into many common traps.

1.) Oversimplification - "look what the world did to those poor children, is it any wonder they turned out like that?" The sentiment is understandable, but offending behaviour is influenced by a number of other factors, which she disregards.
2.) Overgeneralisation - "what we tend to find in the pyromaniac...", "like all serial killers, he tortured animals", "children who are abused eventually take revenge". Enough said. She does not back these claims up with either evidence or clinical experience (having none herself). Most of the typologies she uses -where she does use them- are also outdated, especially in the area of arson.
2.) Pop psychology - making claims without supporting them by any evidence, simply because they were once fashionable. For example, the triad of enuresis, cruelty to animals and fire-setting has only very limited support by research, and competing models are replacing it. A lot of the theories she uses seem to come out of FBI agents' autobiographies and general FBI models used, rather than from research. These FBI models are contentious in this country and are not well-supported by research, which she should know as a British writer.
3.) Arbitraty inference - "children who daydream were often abused and cope with this through daydreaming". Again, looking at actual, proper research would have been helpful here, and understanding the principle of having a control group or at least checking base rates in the population would be helpful. How many people daydream who were NOT abused? Has she considered ADHD? etc.
4.) Omission of relevant facts - she tends to leave out certain details which would be helpful to know about both the offences and also about what research has told us, favouring certain models over competing explanations that are better supported by research. She would claim, for example, that the fact that a boy's mother criticised men and his father left made him kill for money. NOTHING in her chapter gives us any reason for this inference or tells us how she arrived at this conclusion. Is there a link? Did the boy even exhibit signs of anger? Did he hold attitudes against men? Her disregard for base rate also lets her ignore the issue of how many boys have mothers who criticise men in the first place, who don't kill for money, and why they do not do so. You can't just look at one side of the coin.
5.) No references used!!!

Hence my two stars for this book. I think it might be okay as a starting point if you are not very familiar with the topic, but don't take what she says at face value. If you know a bit about the field, I don't think this is essential reading, although the summaries of the cases are quite nice.

[Carla · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting, but I think it's telling that I forgot that I had already read it. I read it on the heels on her Women Who Kill book, and she made the same erroneous statement in both books, without sourced material. I say it's erroneous as a former (disabled) therapist, who has studied this material in great detail, and I quote directly:

Psychologists say that everyone who attempts suicide has at one stage wanted to kill someone else.

What psychologists? Who? This is a false, dangerous, and hurtful statement, and again, it's in both books. There can be anger and even rage involved in some suicidal ideation. Not all. And those feelings are not always aimed at other people. This really disturbed me, to the point of almost DNF.

[♥ Marlene♥ · Rating 2 out of 5]

hmm I know most of the stories already and the author is a know it all.

Did finish the book but as I said this one was definitely not one of her best. I have read books by her I liked a lot but this one was filled with her opinions which became quite annoying after a while.

[William Boyle · Rating 5 out of 5]

Through this book.
I now know who I am.
I now know how I got here.
I now know why I do want I do.
I now have the knowledge, perhaps, to move on.
-
Because.
I know why I get angry.
I know why I get depressed.
Recognising that it is not completely my fault means I can step back easier and review any situation.
-
I don't think I have read such a valuable informative book.

[Soph Thurlby · Rating 4 out of 5]

Extremely interesting profiles and case studies around children who have been/are abused during childhood and the almost inevitable connection to criminal activity, including murder, thereafter. A great read.

[Julia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nonfiction isn't usually my thing, but a family friend, who is a psychologist, thought I would be interested in Children Who Kill by Carol Anne Davis due to my interest in the field (of psychology, not children killing). The book was thin enough (around 250 pages), so I decided to sit down with it. I consider myself a slower reader, but I was finished with this one in less than a week. It was simply so engaging and thrilling, I couldn't put it down.

First, this book is divided into two parts. The first part deals with different young murderers, each given their own chapters, and assesses what they did and the contributing factors as to why they did it. The second section of this book focuses more on mythbusting, such as pointing out and then deconstructing, which things society often blames for making children killers, but are ultimately less responsible for their creation (such as rock music).

In the first portion, I appreciate how Davis did not limit herself. The killers she profiled were both British and American, male and female, with varying ages (some being quite young children and others being in their mid-teens) and modi operandi, such as arson, poisoning, and shooting, some with and some without a sexual element. So the scope of killer she included is broad, which is helpful from a psychological standpoint--it helps to prove that not all killers behave alike, think alike, or are motivated for the same purposes. Some have criticized Davis as making excuses for the killers in this book, but I disagree. I found her tone honest and neutral, without downplaying either what they did or the wrongs done onto them that helped spur them on to become killers (bad parents are no less responsible for their cruelty than than the violent product of their parenting is for being a killer).

In the second section of this book, Davis even makes a point of explaining how the cycle of violence tends to culminate in murder. She provides examples of how the subjects' parents were mistreated when they were children., and then went on to repeat the bad things they learned. This effectively shows that child murderers do not spring from nowhere--it's not a case of simple bad luck--but that the home environment and parenting style have a much stronger effect on a child than, say, too much television.

From the perspective of a layperson not well-trained in psychology, I highly enjoyed this read. The entertainment value is there. It was not written in a sensationalist way, and was not sympathetic, either. It was an honest reporting of facts, neither demonizing nor dismissing the perpetrators for what they've done. I was not familiar with any of the killers mentioned beforehand, but I think that unawareness mixed with her neutral writing worked in my favor, since I did not already have, say, a blinding hatred for anyone written about, and could focus solely on her reporting. I found this book entertaining and informative, and would be interested in her other works (especially her new work on sadistic killers). Please keep in mind that Davis has no formal psychological or forensic training--she is ultimately not that much more informed than anyone else in the public is about these kinds of topics. But she arranges the information in a way that is palatable and easy to read, so anyone interested in brushing up on notable figures of this sort has a bevy of basic information to keep them entertained--and that is, ultimately, what books are for.

I think I loved this book so much because of my preexisting interest in the topic. Those who don't share that interest probably won't be converts from this book. Nonfiction has a way of seeming dry and boring, and I don't have much faith that this book could kindle that in someone who is neutral at best in the subject.

[R.M. Gardner · Rating 5 out of 5]

I would definitely suggest this book to anyone that has an interest in crime or child psychology. The profiles in this book are very in depth and references many other authors that you can look into. This book talks about many well known children who you will never look at the same way again after reading of their horrific childhoods.

[Jay Miraldi · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was so interesting, even if it was a little tough to get through at times. The insight into the lives and minds of these "killer kids" is captivating and I really learned a lot from this book.

[Simon Bruce · Rating 1 out of 5]

I feel like the author has picked a hand full of Wikipedia pages, after typing "Children who kill" into a search engine, then proceeded to print them, bind them, and with a smattering of average banal thoughts, from her highly unqualified head, proceeded to get it published! Complete shit!

[Lili · Rating 5 out of 5]

An absolutely amazing read. This book has made me want to read more from this author, as she truly points out the flaws in society that turned these children into gruesome murderers.

[Braxton · Rating 5 out of 5]

possibly the best book on this subject that you can find.

[readerofreallife · Rating 3 out of 5]

Carol Anne Davis' second foray into true crime writing introduced me to many real-life cases from around the world. Since I enjoy reading before bed, I appreciated that the chapters of 'Children Who Kill' are short, yet detailed enough for me to feel informed. This format is identical to her first true crime book, 'Women Who Kill.' Additionally, Davis provides a bibliography of recommended books, some of which are already on my "to-read" list.

Davis evidently conducts much research into her case studies, starting with the murderers’ childhoods and presenting the information in a chronological structure that is easy to follow. She avoids sensationalism and doesn't shy away from the horrible details of the murders, revealing exactly what happened to the victims.

However, while she often seemed, from the very first sentence, intent on eliciting sympathy for the young killers, the victims are frequently glossed over in her accounts. She rarely touches upon the pain their families must have endured. A sentence or two about them would not have gone amiss. I kept thinking, yes, many of these kids had difficult beginnings (although some more than others), but then again, so do many others who don't resort to murder. I did, however, come away with the realisation, as Davis frequently emphasises, that parental influence must indeed be significant in some of these cases as many of them do seem to bare that out (there's even one case documented early on where a mother encouraged her son to kill her father). Personally, I prefer when an author sticks to the facts and avoids bias or personal opinions.

I often wondered how much of Davis's commentary is useful or even factual. She makes sweeping assumptions, and I just don't think she is that qualified enough to inject her opinions into the text. Many of her 'explanations' for the offenders' behaviour are overwhelmingly simplistic, and there are many generalisations throughout. As I mentioned in my review of "Women Who Kill," understanding the factors that lead a person to murder is important, of course it is, but should never serve as a total justification.

I was particularly shocked to learn about the case of Manchester-born Peter Dinsdale, who was a prolific arsonist (a crime that particularly chills me). After reading about all the innocent people who died horrible deaths as a result of his actions, Davis concluded her study by stating that Dinsdale "has spent almost his entire forty-two years in some form of institution - that is, in orphanages and then a secure hospital. It's a sad indictment of society, but this special hospital has provided Bruce with the closest he's ever had to a secure home." Personally, I'll spare a thought for the victims over him, and think of the countless children whose mothers were also prostitutes and, like him, were raised in orphanages but didn't go on to commit arson. I don't want to give the impression that I did not feel sorry for some of the awful things that happened to these killers when they were children. No child should have to suffer that (or anybody for that matter), but neither should the victims, and the loved ones left behind.

In the chapter about Mary Bell, the 11-year-old girl who murdered two young boys in Newcastle, Davis shows much sympathy for Mary (who I DO believe experienced a difficult childhood with her mother, and I WAS horrified to read what she was subjected to). I would rather she balanced it with sympathy for the boys and their loved ones. For instance, Davis describes the murder of Bell's first victim, Martin Bell, then mentions how Mary and her friend broke into a local nursery, leaving gloating notes about it. In the next breath, she describes how Mary ran away and was brought back by the police and says, "Poor Mary was beaten for this by her mother." Yes, but what about "Poor Martin" and "Poor Brian," the children who were never allowed to grow up? I also question how selective Davis is with her information. While many of the cases were unfamiliar to me, I was aware of Bell's case. Interestingly, Davis doesn't mention that Bell briefly escaped from jail (nor did she mention in 'Women Who Kill' that Myra Hindley tried to do the same, and it crossed my mind that perhaps, this was because it wouldn't have gelled with the theory of 'Away from her lover Ian Brady's infulence, Hindley became a good girl again'), nor does she mention how, many years after her release, Bell accepted a substantial sum from a writer to share her childhood story. This brought her case back into public focus and deeply upset the families of her victims. Davis writes, "And the love she (Bell) feels for her daughter has made her fully aware of the pain she caused to the families of her little victims," which raises the question, did she realise how difficult it must have been for them to have it all dragged up again? Also, did she consider the effect it would have had on her daughter to suddenly realise that her mum had killed, and how she would handle it when the press began hounding them because of Bell's action as a much older woman? Did Bell donate any of her earnings to victims' charities?

I also have issues with the chapter dedicated to James Bulger's killers. Davis seems rather concerned with Jon Venables' mother, who was searching for him after the murder and hit him when she saw him at the video store. At that time, no one knew that he had killed the boy, but let's think more of what little James had just endured. That chapter made my heart ache, not for Venables and Robert Thompson, but for James and his family. And as we know now, Venables' story didn't end after his release.

In terms of a decent casebook of child murderers, I would recommend 'Children Who Kill.' However, like say, I wish that this otherwise capable author would focus on the facts and allow readers to form their own opinions. I purchased several of Davis's books all at once and am about to read 'Couples Who Kill' next.

[Snem · Rating 2 out of 5]

When people ask you what you’re reading and you answer “Children Who Kill” it’s super fun to watch their reactions. The profile of child killers were well-done, in depth and I appreciated the author providing background and context. I thought the typology information towards the end was extremely informative.

Seems like the author entirely blames bad parenting for children who kill. While it’s certainly a contributing factor, to say it’s entirely nurture (vs. nature) seems overly simplistic. What about all the children who kill who had healthy childhoods and kind parents? What about all the kids who had incredibly brutal childhoods who don’t kill? None of that is addressed. The author needs a better editor, the typos were distracting.

I recommend this if you’re dark and creepy like me.

[Shani · Rating 2 out of 5]

this book was okay. definitely dated. would love to see an updated version with more cases and examples. seems like it was written with no experience - i am under the impression she has no background as a psychologist but i may be wrong. despite her saying ‘not an excuse but a reason’ it comes across as she is almost giving an excuse. it is hard though as they were children and it was terrible what happened to all. would like to have seen more evidence behind what she was saying and the use of references. the formatting was also a little strange? at first it’s a bunch of cases then groups them into categories. then changes to categories with cases for each one.

[J · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well, this book was certainly out of date. In some places it is very progressive, but then others it is … questionable.

Some points:
- psychologists say everyone who has attempted suicide has thought of murder first. (What psychologists, I wonder.)
- pornography is actually good for young men because it can be used as an educational material. (Lol)
- “transvestites” are mostly harmless but some cross dressers are deadly serial killers (yes the book lumped “transvestites” with cross dressers without differentiating the two)

Other than that, I found the stories profiled in here very interesting. The main point is that children don’t kill for no reason, as mostly they are abused.

[George · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5 Stars A quick read and that is the problem. The author chooses to cover too many topics in too few pages. I guess if you just wanted a quick look at these chases, this would be the book you'd read. Even then the author attributes too many causes to 'anger' and 'teen angst' without making any attempt to indicate what motivated or caused these crimes. (For example what would cause to Mormon kids to turn to Neo-Nazi and White Power views.) The value of the book was further lowered by the authors injection of personal feelings and snips, sometimes directly (The Mendez Brothers) sometime more subtly with wording and tone.

[Lindy · Rating 5 out of 5]

I absolutely LOVED this book. I could not put it down! I finished it faster than most books I try to read. A very clear, concise, interesting true-crime book, laid out in a fantastic way. I love how each story is laid out so you get a good history on each person, as well as a brief psychology on them. Really helped me understand their lives a bit better, as to why they committed crimes. SO CREEPY, too!

[Dave N'renee · Rating 4 out of 5]

this book is based on the british legal and child protection systems though there is discussion of cases in the US. details both cases involving very young children committing murder as well as older teenagers. very interesting take on school mass killings. parents seem to be the cause of most of the cases … and often are the victims of these young killers. anyhow an interesting read.

[Lola Em · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 stars. The message is good (violent children are the products of abuse, not bad seeds) but a lot of the language is outdated (which makes sense, it came out twenty years ago), there's a tangent about how Ritalin makes you kill and "ADD" is fake, and for some reason she seems to think George Stinney was guilty?????

[Maria · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's hard to "like" a book with this subject matter and some of the cases are difficult to read. However I found it very insightful and I became more aware of biases I might hold without knowing the whole story and being exposed to sensationalized accounts.

[Layla · Rating 5 out of 5]

I had this book years ago... No idea where it has gone.... Probably In A box somewhere.... Extremely interesting book about pre teenagers who kill for thrills accidentally well worth reading...... Will buy this on kindle.....

[Rebecca Doyle · Rating 2 out of 5]

Informative of the cases individually and how an environment can shape a child's mind however the author says after every case almost that each child had a sexual thrill from their kills which I personally find disgusting and ridiculous.

[Jennifer · Rating 1 out of 5]

predictable and simplifies the route of sociopathic behaviour.

[Saoirse · Rating 2 out of 5]

A lot of interesting cases were presented in the book and a lot of background information was given. However, there were blatant generalisations, which irked me quite a bit.

[Katy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Informative and well researched but language perhaps ‘of its time’ and some of the graphic descriptions of sexual abuse where somewhat salacious. Very readable.

[Rachael Fair · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good

[Maddie Borth · Rating 1 out of 5]

I was hoping for more of a psychological explanation for these killers, but instead I felt the writer spent too much time on the crimes themselves. I definitely think it's important to understand the brutality of the crimes and to have empathy for the victim, but my god, I don't need to relive every moment of someone's torture.

[The Scouse Druid · Rating 2 out of 5]

“Children Who Kill,” by Carol Anne Davis, is a relatively long (396 pages) book which looks at the always emotive subject of juvenile homicide. The author sets out to explore this subject using in-depth case studies of children aged between 10 and 17. The book, as it was published in 2003, is relatively out of date and it does show when it comes to certain cases.

This could have been a very good book, it is relatively easy, if repetitive, to read. But then it is hard to write a boring book about such an emotive topic. Although this book is described as individual profiles, they are more like average essays including the obligatory lack of supporting evidence for what she puts forward as facts. Which unfortunately leads to Carol coming across as a bit of a ‘know it all’. It also leads to some wild claims which don’t sit as true to me, including a claim that all people who have attempted suicide has at one stage wanted to kill someone else. If I any Psychologists out there can confirm, or deny, this I would be grateful. She also makes the outrageous, and possibly libelous claim that Pathologists lie to spare the feelings of family members.

My main concern with this book, and thus the author, is that she seems to have a very simplistic view of what causes children to kill. Claiming that the only thing that can cause a child to kill is an abusive childhood, she seems to choose to ignore the influence of genetics as well as possible neurobiological influences.

Overall I was glad when it was over and that I don’t have to read it again.

I gave it 2 out of 5

[Ellie · Rating 3 out of 5]

A great read for those interested in psychology.

The book provides insight into the psyche of children who kill. Unsurprisingly, one of the main factors that drive a child to commit murder is the presence of violence in the child's environment. Violence manifests itself in various ways - sexual, physical, emotional.

However, sometimes even in a seemingly perfect family, parents could be unintentionally hindering the normal development of their child. Carol gives an example of a boy who is born to a family of overachievers keen on shaping their son into a great athlete and an excellent student. Unfortunately, the kid was not of an athletic built and was with low IQ - as hard as he tried, he could never please his parents. Over time, he built up so much rage and frustration that he snapped and did the unthinkable - murdered his parents.

The think that annoyed me about the book was that the author was often generalising or expressing her personal opinion on a matter as if it is a fact.

For that reason, I would say read the book for the stories but take Carol's "analysis" with a pinch of salt.