What do you think?
Rate this book
Whoever Fights Monsters: My Twenty Years Tracking Serial Killers for the FBI
Face-to-face with some of America's most terrifying killers, FBI veteran and ex-Army CID colonel Robert Ressler learned form then how to identify the unknown monsters who walk among us--and put them behind bars. Now the man who coined the phrase "serial killer" and advised Thomas Harris on The Silence of the Lambs shows how is able to track down some of today's most brutal murderers.
Just as it happened in The Silence of the Lambs, Ressler used the evidence at a crime scene to put together a psychological profile of the killers. From the victims they choose, to the way they kill, to the often grotesque souvenirs they take with them--Ressler unlocks the identities of these vicious killers of the police to capture.
And with his discovery that serial killers share certain violent behaviors, Ressler's gone behind prison walls to hear the bizarre first-hand stories countless convicted murderers. Getting inside the mind of a killer to understand how and why he kills, is one of the FBI's most effective ways of helping police bring in killers who are still at large.
Join Ressler as he takes you on the hunt for toady's most dangerous psychopaths. It is a terrifying journey you will not forget.
Just as it happened in The Silence of the Lambs, Ressler used the evidence at a crime scene to put together a psychological profile of the killers. From the victims they choose, to the way they kill, to the often grotesque souvenirs they take with them--Ressler unlocks the identities of these vicious killers of the police to capture.
And with his discovery that serial killers share certain violent behaviors, Ressler's gone behind prison walls to hear the bizarre first-hand stories countless convicted murderers. Getting inside the mind of a killer to understand how and why he kills, is one of the FBI's most effective ways of helping police bring in killers who are still at large.
Join Ressler as he takes you on the hunt for toady's most dangerous psychopaths. It is a terrifying journey you will not forget.
304 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1992
1281 people are currently reading
21732 people want to read
About the author
Robert K. Ressler
14 books241 followersRobert Kenneth Ressler was an FBI agent and author. He played a significant role in the psychological profiling of violent offenders in the 1970s and is often credited with coining the term "serial killer."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 945 reviews
March 2, 2010
An interesting enough book, but I found myself frequently distracted by the desire to make an armchair diagnosis of the author himself, who spent a good 10% of the book either patting himself on the back via cheesy quotes from letter of commendation, or digressing into the settling of petty scores over past slights. (For example, he spends a good page-and-a-half explaining why he was late for his orientation as a new FBI agent, why it wasn't his fault, and why the superior who called him on it was out of line.) Overall, this is a nice introduction to the subject of serial killers and the history of profiling in the FBI.
Read
November 22, 2010This book contains graphic descriptions of horrific crimes, photos of dead bodies at crime scenes, plus a lot of information that would be quite useful to killers wanting to fool those hunting them.
That being said, I find it slightly disturbing that my copy of this book, which has been so well-read that it is falling to pieces, has come through inter-library loan from my local prison. My county doesn't have any other copies of this book.
Some helpful notations have been added by a previous reader. In particular, every time he (or she) considers that the police have had a lucky break in a case, "LUCK" is noted in the margin. Thank you, mystery reader, that significantly clarifies matters. I'm not sure what the distinction is between the double-lines-down-the-side and the crosses-in-the-margin, and maybe I don't want to know. Many pages appear to have been attacked by pasta sauce, but I feel that this does not reflect any kind of scholarly annotation.
Now, would I get reading experiences of this kind if I bought all my books pristine, or downloaded them onto my hygienic Kindle? I think not.
PS. This book's interesting antecedence fails to beat the book I once bought second-hand, called "How Brains Work". This contained, like pressed flowers between its pages, about 20 sheets of tinfoil that had apparently been used to smoke drugs off - blackened underneath, with residues of presumably heroin on the top.
That being said, I find it slightly disturbing that my copy of this book, which has been so well-read that it is falling to pieces, has come through inter-library loan from my local prison. My county doesn't have any other copies of this book.
Some helpful notations have been added by a previous reader. In particular, every time he (or she) considers that the police have had a lucky break in a case, "LUCK" is noted in the margin. Thank you, mystery reader, that significantly clarifies matters. I'm not sure what the distinction is between the double-lines-down-the-side and the crosses-in-the-margin, and maybe I don't want to know. Many pages appear to have been attacked by pasta sauce, but I feel that this does not reflect any kind of scholarly annotation.
Now, would I get reading experiences of this kind if I bought all my books pristine, or downloaded them onto my hygienic Kindle? I think not.
PS. This book's interesting antecedence fails to beat the book I once bought second-hand, called "How Brains Work". This contained, like pressed flowers between its pages, about 20 sheets of tinfoil that had apparently been used to smoke drugs off - blackened underneath, with residues of presumably heroin on the top.
January 18, 2020
“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.” (Nietzsche)
If you’re a fan of Mindhunter, then this is one you need to pick up, especially since Agent Tench in the show is actually based on Robert K Ressler! Incase it isn’t obvious, as is the premise of the show, Whoever Fights Monsters follows the beginning of criminal profiling and its introduction into the FBI. And it’s truly fascinating!
Tonnes of cases are covered, but special attention is given to some criminals, like John Wayne Gacy, Richard Chase, David Berkowitz, Charles Manson, as well as some lesser known cases. It’s very well-written, but as is the case with the majority of true crime books, can be quite dry. That didn’t stop me flipping through the pages though, as it was incredibly readable.
One of my main complaints about the Mindhunter book was how egocentric John Douglas came across, and even though Ressler contributed hugely to the way criminals are profiled today, he seems very humble in comparison. I wasn’t rolling my eyes every 5 seconds, let’s put it that way... There is also no new information past the 1990s, so it’s perhaps slightly outdated in some ways, but for a history of the introduction of criminal profiling, it’s solid.
Keeping this review relatively short as people are either into true crime or they’re not - but if you are, this is worth checking out! As with all true crime, there are graphic descriptions and disturbing scenes, so beware! 4 stars.
If you’re a fan of Mindhunter, then this is one you need to pick up, especially since Agent Tench in the show is actually based on Robert K Ressler! Incase it isn’t obvious, as is the premise of the show, Whoever Fights Monsters follows the beginning of criminal profiling and its introduction into the FBI. And it’s truly fascinating!
Tonnes of cases are covered, but special attention is given to some criminals, like John Wayne Gacy, Richard Chase, David Berkowitz, Charles Manson, as well as some lesser known cases. It’s very well-written, but as is the case with the majority of true crime books, can be quite dry. That didn’t stop me flipping through the pages though, as it was incredibly readable.
One of my main complaints about the Mindhunter book was how egocentric John Douglas came across, and even though Ressler contributed hugely to the way criminals are profiled today, he seems very humble in comparison. I wasn’t rolling my eyes every 5 seconds, let’s put it that way... There is also no new information past the 1990s, so it’s perhaps slightly outdated in some ways, but for a history of the introduction of criminal profiling, it’s solid.
Keeping this review relatively short as people are either into true crime or they’re not - but if you are, this is worth checking out! As with all true crime, there are graphic descriptions and disturbing scenes, so beware! 4 stars.
October 28, 2024
بعد إقدامه على طعن سيدة حتى الموت، أخذ ويليام هايرن أحمر الشفاة وكتب على الحائط "أرجوكم أن تقبضوا عليّ قبل أن أقتل المزيد، لا أستطيع السيطرة على نفسي"
قام ريتشارد تشيس باقتحام العديد من المنازل، قتل ساكنيها، ثم سحب منهم شيئاً من الدماء لحقن نفسه بها. كان تشيس يؤمن بأن أطرافاً مجهولة قد أطعمته سماً يحول دمه إلى مسحوق (بودرة)، لذا فإن عليه أن يحقن نفسه بالدم كي لا تجف عروقه.
يقول روبرت ريسلر أن الجريمة التحقيق في الجرائم أصبح أكثر تعقيداً من ذي قبل. في الماضي كانت دائرة البحث ضيقة، فالقاتل إما زوج أوعشيق، أو شريك، أو جار أو -في أصعب الحالات- لص. أما الآن فالقاتل قد لا يمت للمجني عليه بأي صلة، قد يكون شخصاً مهووساً بقتل الشقراوات، أو ملاحقة السود، أو مجرد مريض يتلذذ بالقتل العشوائي.
بناءً على ماتقدم، يرى مؤلف الكتاب بأنه من الأهمية بمكان إجراء دراسة متعمقة لنفسية القتلة المتسلسلين ومحاولة فهم دوافعهم وكيف تكونت لديهم نزعة العنف. وهكذا وُلد هذا الكتاب لوالديّن هما علم النفس وعلم الجريمة. وكِلاهما مفيد وممتع.
قام ريسلر بزيارة أشهر وأخطر القتلة المتسلسلين في زنزاناتهم وأجرى حوارات مطولة معهم حتى وصل إلى درجة كبيرة من فهم تفكيرهم الحالك والمعقد. أصبح بعد ذلك ضليعاً في مجال التشخيص النفسي للمجرمين، وذلك من مجرد زيارته لموقع الجريمة وإحاطته بملابساتها. فمثلاً يستطيع الخبير أن يفترض بأن القاتل شخص أبيض في العشرينيات من عمره، مطلق أو يعيش لدى والدته، عاطل وقد يكون تم فصله حديثاً من عمله. قصص التشخيص النفسي الواردة في الكتاب كانت على قدر كبير من التشويق.
خصص الكاتب جزءًا من هذا العمل لتوثيق جهوده في تأسيس نظام مخصص في مكتب التحقيقات الفيدرالية، يُعنى بتسجيل كافة الجرائم التي قُيدت ضد مجهود، وذلك من أجل الاستدلال بإحداها على الأخرى والبحث فيها إذا تم إلقاء القبض على مشتبه. يسرد النص أيضاً المتاعب المهنية والمخاطر الشخصية التي تعرض لها الكاتب جراء إصراره على إجراء مقابلات مع أخطر المجرمين في الولايات المتحدة. لم يكن هذا الجانب على قدر من الإمتاع مقارنة بالفصول الأخرى، غير أنه يساعد على رسم صورة متكاملة لأهمية العمل الذي يقوم به روبرت ريسلر وزملاؤه.
يزخر الكتاب بالعديد والعديد من القصص البوليسية، الشخصيات الإجرامية السايكوباثية، بالإضافة إلى بعض التحقيقات الواقعية. يجدر بالذكر أن هذا الكتاب كان الأساس لمسلسل :
Mind Hunters،
وقد شاهدت منه بضع حلقات، لا بأس به، واستطيع القول بأنه مبني حقاً على أحداث الكتاب. أبهرني أداء الممثل الذي يتقمص شخصية السفاح الشهير إد كيمبر، على سبيل المثال، لكنني وجدت أحداثه أبطأ مما يجب.
لمن هذا الكتاب؟ يناسب (من يصارع الوحوش) كل من يهتم بقصص الجرائم الواقعية الموثقة. هذا إلى أنه منجم للمهتمين بعلم النفس المرضي. سيعرف القارئ شيئاً أو اثنين عن علاقة الجريمة بالاضطرابات النفسية كالفصام والرهاب والوساوس. والأهم من هذا وذاك، هو أن هناك معلومات رائعة متعلقة بتنشئة الأبناء، إذ أن أغلب الاضطرابات النفسية- عند السفاحين وغيرهم- تنحفر في نفسيات الفرد منذ طفولته المبكرة. وعليه فإن النص يعمل على ترسيخ أهمية تربية الأطفال في بيئة آمنة تخلق شخصيات متزنة سليمة من الثقوب النفسية، خالية من بذور الخوف والعنف واحتقار الذات.
قام ريتشارد تشيس باقتحام العديد من المنازل، قتل ساكنيها، ثم سحب منهم شيئاً من الدماء لحقن نفسه بها. كان تشيس يؤمن بأن أطرافاً مجهولة قد أطعمته سماً يحول دمه إلى مسحوق (بودرة)، لذا فإن عليه أن يحقن نفسه بالدم كي لا تجف عروقه.
يقول روبرت ريسلر أن الجريمة التحقيق في الجرائم أصبح أكثر تعقيداً من ذي قبل. في الماضي كانت دائرة البحث ضيقة، فالقاتل إما زوج أوعشيق، أو شريك، أو جار أو -في أصعب الحالات- لص. أما الآن فالقاتل قد لا يمت للمجني عليه بأي صلة، قد يكون شخصاً مهووساً بقتل الشقراوات، أو ملاحقة السود، أو مجرد مريض يتلذذ بالقتل العشوائي.
بناءً على ماتقدم، يرى مؤلف الكتاب بأنه من الأهمية بمكان إجراء دراسة متعمقة لنفسية القتلة المتسلسلين ومحاولة فهم دوافعهم وكيف تكونت لديهم نزعة العنف. وهكذا وُلد هذا الكتاب لوالديّن هما علم النفس وعلم الجريمة. وكِلاهما مفيد وممتع.
قام ريسلر بزيارة أشهر وأخطر القتلة المتسلسلين في زنزاناتهم وأجرى حوارات مطولة معهم حتى وصل إلى درجة كبيرة من فهم تفكيرهم الحالك والمعقد. أصبح بعد ذلك ضليعاً في مجال التشخيص النفسي للمجرمين، وذلك من مجرد زيارته لموقع الجريمة وإحاطته بملابساتها. فمثلاً يستطيع الخبير أن يفترض بأن القاتل شخص أبيض في العشرينيات من عمره، مطلق أو يعيش لدى والدته، عاطل وقد يكون تم فصله حديثاً من عمله. قصص التشخيص النفسي الواردة في الكتاب كانت على قدر كبير من التشويق.
خصص الكاتب جزءًا من هذا العمل لتوثيق جهوده في تأسيس نظام مخصص في مكتب التحقيقات الفيدرالية، يُعنى بتسجيل كافة الجرائم التي قُيدت ضد مجهود، وذلك من أجل الاستدلال بإحداها على الأخرى والبحث فيها إذا تم إلقاء القبض على مشتبه. يسرد النص أيضاً المتاعب المهنية والمخاطر الشخصية التي تعرض لها الكاتب جراء إصراره على إجراء مقابلات مع أخطر المجرمين في الولايات المتحدة. لم يكن هذا الجانب على قدر من الإمتاع مقارنة بالفصول الأخرى، غير أنه يساعد على رسم صورة متكاملة لأهمية العمل الذي يقوم به روبرت ريسلر وزملاؤه.
يزخر الكتاب بالعديد والعديد من القصص البوليسية، الشخصيات الإجرامية السايكوباثية، بالإضافة إلى بعض التحقيقات الواقعية. يجدر بالذكر أن هذا الكتاب كان الأساس لمسلسل :
Mind Hunters،
وقد شاهدت منه بضع حلقات، لا بأس به، واستطيع القول بأنه مبني حقاً على أحداث الكتاب. أبهرني أداء الممثل الذي يتقمص شخصية السفاح الشهير إد كيمبر، على سبيل المثال، لكنني وجدت أحداثه أبطأ مما يجب.
لمن هذا الكتاب؟ يناسب (من يصارع الوحوش) كل من يهتم بقصص الجرائم الواقعية الموثقة. هذا إلى أنه منجم للمهتمين بعلم النفس المرضي. سيعرف القارئ شيئاً أو اثنين عن علاقة الجريمة بالاضطرابات النفسية كالفصام والرهاب والوساوس. والأهم من هذا وذاك، هو أن هناك معلومات رائعة متعلقة بتنشئة الأبناء، إذ أن أغلب الاضطرابات النفسية- عند السفاحين وغيرهم- تنحفر في نفسيات الفرد منذ طفولته المبكرة. وعليه فإن النص يعمل على ترسيخ أهمية تربية الأطفال في بيئة آمنة تخلق شخصيات متزنة سليمة من الثقوب النفسية، خالية من بذور الخوف والعنف واحتقار الذات.
July 5, 2018
I’ve read a few of these FBI non fiction murder books now, most noticeably Mindhunter: Inside the FBI's Elite Serial Crime Unit, which I found more interesting than this. Unfortunately I found Robert Ressler not as charismatic as Douglas in his examination and explanation of various cases - although his knowledge is undeniable. He’s just a bit more sedate and academically inclined compared to Douglas’ more sensationalist approach. I will say his personality is slightly less irritating than Douglas though, as he tends not to self congratulate as much (it does happen though). I would have preferred more talk about the various cases rather than Ressler’s personal background too, but understand that it might have been necessary to include it to gain an insight into Ressler’s way of thinking etc.
The book is also obviously dated, with no new chapters referencing anything past the early 1990s. I really need to find more modern texts, but so far nothing is quite as superior as these for definitive facts and information relating to violent crimes etc.
Overall, this was good but historical, and covers a fair few crimes I hadn’t heard of and examined them in a clean analytical way. Any recommendations for something more recent would be appreciated!
The book is also obviously dated, with no new chapters referencing anything past the early 1990s. I really need to find more modern texts, but so far nothing is quite as superior as these for definitive facts and information relating to violent crimes etc.
Overall, this was good but historical, and covers a fair few crimes I hadn’t heard of and examined them in a clean analytical way. Any recommendations for something more recent would be appreciated!
October 29, 2019
Me gustó más que "Dentro del monstruo". Aunque estos libros me interesan personalmente, me cuesta valorarlos muy bien ya que son muy específicos y son más bien ensayos que novelas.
No obstante, a quién le guste esta temática sobre perfiles, asesinos, ciencias de la conducta y demás disfrutará de él.
La parte central se hace un poco repetitiva, pero, aún así, se me hizo ameno. Abstenerse los que busquen una novela de asesino-investigación al uso.
I liked it more than "I have lived in the monster". Although these books interest me personally, I find it difficult to value them very well since they are very specific and are rather essays than novels.
However, who likes this theme about profiles, murderers, behavioral sciences and others will enjoy it.
The central part becomes a bit repetitive, but, even so, I found it enjoyable. Refrain from those looking for a killer-research classic novel.
No obstante, a quién le guste esta temática sobre perfiles, asesinos, ciencias de la conducta y demás disfrutará de él.
La parte central se hace un poco repetitiva, pero, aún así, se me hizo ameno. Abstenerse los que busquen una novela de asesino-investigación al uso.
I liked it more than "I have lived in the monster". Although these books interest me personally, I find it difficult to value them very well since they are very specific and are rather essays than novels.
However, who likes this theme about profiles, murderers, behavioral sciences and others will enjoy it.
The central part becomes a bit repetitive, but, even so, I found it enjoyable. Refrain from those looking for a killer-research classic novel.
May 10, 2019
This book was suggested to me by a friend because I really enjoyed the book Mindhunter: Inside the FBI's Elite Serial Crime Unit and my friend did not disappoint! This was a fantastic read and it only took me 1 day to read it all :)
"Face-to-face with some of America's most terrifying killers, FBI veteran and ex-Army CID colonel Robert Ressler learned form then how to identify the unknown monsters who walk among us--and put them behind bars. Now the man who coined the phrase "serial killer" and advised Thomas Harris on The Silence of the Lambs shows how is able to track down some of today's most brutal murderers.
Just as it happened in The Silence of the Lambs, Ressler used the evidence at a crime scene to put together a psychological profile of the killers. From the victims they choose, to the way they kill, to the often grotesque souvenirs they take with them--Ressler unlocks the identities of these vicious killers of the police to capture.
And with his discovery that serial killers share certain violent behaviors, Ressler's gone behind prison walls to hear the bizarre first-hand stories countless convicted murderers. Getting inside the mind of a killer to understand how and why he kills, is one of the FBI's most effective ways of helping police bring in killers who are still at large.
Join Ressler as he takes you on the hunt for toady's most dangerous psychopaths. It is a terrifying journey you will not forget."
"Face-to-face with some of America's most terrifying killers, FBI veteran and ex-Army CID colonel Robert Ressler learned form then how to identify the unknown monsters who walk among us--and put them behind bars. Now the man who coined the phrase "serial killer" and advised Thomas Harris on The Silence of the Lambs shows how is able to track down some of today's most brutal murderers.
Just as it happened in The Silence of the Lambs, Ressler used the evidence at a crime scene to put together a psychological profile of the killers. From the victims they choose, to the way they kill, to the often grotesque souvenirs they take with them--Ressler unlocks the identities of these vicious killers of the police to capture.
And with his discovery that serial killers share certain violent behaviors, Ressler's gone behind prison walls to hear the bizarre first-hand stories countless convicted murderers. Getting inside the mind of a killer to understand how and why he kills, is one of the FBI's most effective ways of helping police bring in killers who are still at large.
Join Ressler as he takes you on the hunt for toady's most dangerous psychopaths. It is a terrifying journey you will not forget."
July 3, 2017
So I guess I'm on a true crime kick at the moment. Thanks, MY FAVORITE MURDER podcast! It's like I'm sixteen again. This time I read WHOEVER FIGHTS MONSTERS by Robert Ressler, an FBI agent and profiler that has spoken and worked with numerous notorious serial killers over the years. I think that the character of Jack Crawford from THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS is based off of him as well, but don't quote me on that. I got this book on ILL through the library, and settled in for a morbid and fascinating read.
Robert Ressler was an FBI agent and profiler whose work focused on the minds and psychology of violent criminals. He gave input on numerous cases and did a lot to bring attention and education to the pathology of murders, and this is his story and his insights of his time working with the likes of Bundy, Gacy, Kemper, and others.
Ressler really knows what he's talking about when it comes to violent offenders. He had a certain way with them that he could build a rapport with a few of them and get information from the as to what motivated them (when they were willing to cooperate, that is). I liked his insights not only into their minds, but his thoughts on the criminal justice system as a whole. I was put off by his unrepentant crowing about being an undercover plant in anti-war groups during the Vietnam War, but was heartened to hear his thoughts on why the Death Penalty doesn't actually do anything constructive. And yeah, I was super fascinated by his personal stories of interactions with people like Gacy, Dahmer, and Kemper. He did a good job of not glamorizing them, while also reminding the reader that the darkness in these men came from somewhere, and that it's a disservice to merely write them off as monsters.
It didn't really tell me anything new, but it was still a pretty good read for a true crime fan.
Robert Ressler was an FBI agent and profiler whose work focused on the minds and psychology of violent criminals. He gave input on numerous cases and did a lot to bring attention and education to the pathology of murders, and this is his story and his insights of his time working with the likes of Bundy, Gacy, Kemper, and others.
Ressler really knows what he's talking about when it comes to violent offenders. He had a certain way with them that he could build a rapport with a few of them and get information from the as to what motivated them (when they were willing to cooperate, that is). I liked his insights not only into their minds, but his thoughts on the criminal justice system as a whole. I was put off by his unrepentant crowing about being an undercover plant in anti-war groups during the Vietnam War, but was heartened to hear his thoughts on why the Death Penalty doesn't actually do anything constructive. And yeah, I was super fascinated by his personal stories of interactions with people like Gacy, Dahmer, and Kemper. He did a good job of not glamorizing them, while also reminding the reader that the darkness in these men came from somewhere, and that it's a disservice to merely write them off as monsters.
It didn't really tell me anything new, but it was still a pretty good read for a true crime fan.
September 16, 2019
Audio # 26
Beginning in the 70s with the infamous Ted Bundy and ending in the 90s with Jeffrey Dahmer, this is the tale of the burgeoning BSU and the man who made friends with some of the most notorious killers the USA has known. Certain cases are studied and details are provided on how criminal profiles were developed.
This book is a bit dated. At the end one realizes Gacy and Dahmer were still alive; Harris had just released Silence of the Lambs. But it still packs a powerful punch. If you choose audio the narration is excellent.
Beginning in the 70s with the infamous Ted Bundy and ending in the 90s with Jeffrey Dahmer, this is the tale of the burgeoning BSU and the man who made friends with some of the most notorious killers the USA has known. Certain cases are studied and details are provided on how criminal profiles were developed.
This book is a bit dated. At the end one realizes Gacy and Dahmer were still alive; Harris had just released Silence of the Lambs. But it still packs a powerful punch. If you choose audio the narration is excellent.
July 26, 2020
This is one of the classics - for good reason as it turns out - and I was pleasantly surprised by how well it's held up. First published in 1993, by someone whose career was primarily in the 70s and 80s, there are some things you just don't expect to be handled as well as they were. And though some of the phrasing and the occasional idea have definitely dated, there's also a surprising effort here to discount some old prejudices.
Robert Ressler is probably now best known in the Mindhunter context, or as a name said alongside that of John Douglas. There's obviously some common ground between the two when they write, but I found Ressler much more academic and far less prone to the moments of over-inflating ego that punctuate Douglas' books. That can make things slightly dryer in places, as there's no attempt to sensationalise or dramatise any events, but I'll take slightly dry over an overactive ego any day.
Despite it's age, it's still definitely a very informative book, and spans quite a few cases that the reader will most likely have heard of, as well as a couple that were less well-known. Very worth the read if you're interested in this period, but also definitely a book that's withstood the test of time surprisingly well.
Robert Ressler is probably now best known in the Mindhunter context, or as a name said alongside that of John Douglas. There's obviously some common ground between the two when they write, but I found Ressler much more academic and far less prone to the moments of over-inflating ego that punctuate Douglas' books. That can make things slightly dryer in places, as there's no attempt to sensationalise or dramatise any events, but I'll take slightly dry over an overactive ego any day.
Despite it's age, it's still definitely a very informative book, and spans quite a few cases that the reader will most likely have heard of, as well as a couple that were less well-known. Very worth the read if you're interested in this period, but also definitely a book that's withstood the test of time surprisingly well.
August 3, 2021
‘Whoever Fights Monsters’ by Robert K. Ressler and Tom Shachtman, while a True Crime genre detailing the lives and crimes of a few famous serial murderers, is really a history of how Ressler came to believe profiling serial killers would be important to do and how he slowly convinced the FBI to create a profiling department.
Difficult as it may be to believe, almost all police and justice forces never examined perpetrators psychologically or thought it at all important to solving whodunnit until recently. A crime is committed, nearby people are interviewed, suspects are rounded up and questioned based on their likelihood of having a reason to kill - money, jealousy, sex, rage, especially past convictions involving violence - done. Police had no interest in profiling. Indeed, most police were suspicious of profiling, even today. Crime scene facts and physical evidence are what matters, along with witness statements, if any.
Who cares why killings happen if the perpetrators can be convicted by physical evidence and/or confessions?
Serial murderers are a different kind of killer than with whom the police usually deal. Even the FBI, the agency Ressler worked for as an agent, could not grasp how different serial killers are for a long time. Or that even though serial killers are individually quirky, there are psychological categories and subset categories that they each can be fit into. Or that by identifying a killer’s psychological style could help in identifying a serial killer. But most important, knowing how to talk to a serial killer can lead them to confess. Many serial killers have psychological twists that normal people are not able to believe a person could possibly have. Police have allowed serial killers to walk free out of sheer disbelief of their confessions or even the evidence of their own eyes, as in the Jeffrey Dahmer case.
There is the issue that many serial killers move their killing from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, state to state. Police hate sharing cases with other police agencies, and they are reluctant to discuss active investigations with others. If murder A was exactly like murder B in another town, in the past cops would never know it. It still happens today cops in town A are unaware cops in town B have the same kind of crime with the same physical evidence discovered at the scene of the crime.
A lot of new ideas about detecting and collecting evidence, and computers, and police-friendly for-profit genealogical research companies which process DNA kits, have met the challenge of identifying similar styles and physical evidence in murders, as well as tracking cases across state lines from different jurisdictions. But cooperation between police departments, from what I’ve read in newspaper exposés, is sometimes still a problem. Although computers can compile cases with similar attributes from a national or regional database, police departments have to pay to buy access, and not all can afford to buy access. Police also need to hire extra employees to fill out and send in the paperwork forms regional and national databases require to input cases. Police in many small jurisdictions still refuse to participate in sending local crime information to regional or the national FBI and other criminal justice databases.
But how did police agencies begin to accept profiling? That is what this book is about.
I copied the cover blurb below. It is an accurate description:
”Face-to-face with some of America's most terrifying killers, FBI veteran and ex-Army CID colonel Robert Ressler learned from them how to identify the unknown monsters who walk among us--and put them behind bars. Now the man who coined the phrase "serial killer" and advised Thomas Harris on The Silence of the Lambs shows how he is able to track down some of today's most brutal murderers.
Just as it happened in The Silence of the Lambs, Ressler used the evidence at a crime scene to put together a psychological profile of the killers. From the victims they choose, to the way they kill, to the often grotesque souvenirs they take with them--Ressler unlocks the identities of these vicious killers of the police to capture.
And with his discovery that serial killers share certain violent behaviors, Ressler's gone behind prison walls to hear the bizarre first-hand stories countless convicted murderers. Getting inside the mind of a killer to understand how and why he kills, is one of the FBI's most effective ways of helping police bring in killers who are still at large.
Join Ressler as he takes you on the hunt for today’s most dangerous psychopaths. It is a terrifying journey you will not forget.”
Well, ok, the blurb is a little bit more breathlessly dramatic than the book is, actually. The tone of ‘Whoever Fights Monsters’ is closer to a flattened ‘just the facts’ voice of an academic professional. Nonetheless, I thought it fascinating.
There is an Index.
Difficult as it may be to believe, almost all police and justice forces never examined perpetrators psychologically or thought it at all important to solving whodunnit until recently. A crime is committed, nearby people are interviewed, suspects are rounded up and questioned based on their likelihood of having a reason to kill - money, jealousy, sex, rage, especially past convictions involving violence - done. Police had no interest in profiling. Indeed, most police were suspicious of profiling, even today. Crime scene facts and physical evidence are what matters, along with witness statements, if any.
Who cares why killings happen if the perpetrators can be convicted by physical evidence and/or confessions?
Serial murderers are a different kind of killer than with whom the police usually deal. Even the FBI, the agency Ressler worked for as an agent, could not grasp how different serial killers are for a long time. Or that even though serial killers are individually quirky, there are psychological categories and subset categories that they each can be fit into. Or that by identifying a killer’s psychological style could help in identifying a serial killer. But most important, knowing how to talk to a serial killer can lead them to confess. Many serial killers have psychological twists that normal people are not able to believe a person could possibly have. Police have allowed serial killers to walk free out of sheer disbelief of their confessions or even the evidence of their own eyes, as in the Jeffrey Dahmer case.
There is the issue that many serial killers move their killing from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, state to state. Police hate sharing cases with other police agencies, and they are reluctant to discuss active investigations with others. If murder A was exactly like murder B in another town, in the past cops would never know it. It still happens today cops in town A are unaware cops in town B have the same kind of crime with the same physical evidence discovered at the scene of the crime.
A lot of new ideas about detecting and collecting evidence, and computers, and police-friendly for-profit genealogical research companies which process DNA kits, have met the challenge of identifying similar styles and physical evidence in murders, as well as tracking cases across state lines from different jurisdictions. But cooperation between police departments, from what I’ve read in newspaper exposés, is sometimes still a problem. Although computers can compile cases with similar attributes from a national or regional database, police departments have to pay to buy access, and not all can afford to buy access. Police also need to hire extra employees to fill out and send in the paperwork forms regional and national databases require to input cases. Police in many small jurisdictions still refuse to participate in sending local crime information to regional or the national FBI and other criminal justice databases.
But how did police agencies begin to accept profiling? That is what this book is about.
I copied the cover blurb below. It is an accurate description:
”Face-to-face with some of America's most terrifying killers, FBI veteran and ex-Army CID colonel Robert Ressler learned from them how to identify the unknown monsters who walk among us--and put them behind bars. Now the man who coined the phrase "serial killer" and advised Thomas Harris on The Silence of the Lambs shows how he is able to track down some of today's most brutal murderers.
Just as it happened in The Silence of the Lambs, Ressler used the evidence at a crime scene to put together a psychological profile of the killers. From the victims they choose, to the way they kill, to the often grotesque souvenirs they take with them--Ressler unlocks the identities of these vicious killers of the police to capture.
And with his discovery that serial killers share certain violent behaviors, Ressler's gone behind prison walls to hear the bizarre first-hand stories countless convicted murderers. Getting inside the mind of a killer to understand how and why he kills, is one of the FBI's most effective ways of helping police bring in killers who are still at large.
Join Ressler as he takes you on the hunt for today’s most dangerous psychopaths. It is a terrifying journey you will not forget.”
Well, ok, the blurb is a little bit more breathlessly dramatic than the book is, actually. The tone of ‘Whoever Fights Monsters’ is closer to a flattened ‘just the facts’ voice of an academic professional. Nonetheless, I thought it fascinating.
There is an Index.
August 23, 2021
Entretenido, ameno y asequible. Muy aséptico incluso. Me sorprende cómo llega a despojar de casi todo los casos que narra y mantenerse en la línea de explicar muy claramente lo importante, la clasificación, organización, creación... con lo que tuvo que ver y saber ese hombre! No hay chicha morbosa, lo básico para hacerse entender.
Más Ressler, lo tengo claro.
Más Ressler, lo tengo claro.
April 28, 2020
I found this to be informative and in some regards, fascinating. That being said, I could not stand the attitude of the author who spent a great deal of time bragging about his many accomplishments, how much smarter he was than everyone else and on and on. By the end of it I was sick to death of him. I still give it four stars because I learned quite a lot.
June 10, 2018
3- Robert Ressler was an FBI agent who spent the majority of his career profiling murderers. His claim to fame is that he coined the term "serial killer." During his time at the bureau, he worked on many of the top crime cases and interviewed many of the most notorious humans of the 20th century. His career is fascinating, but I found his autobiography to be lackluster.
I wanted (and expected) to like Whoever Fights Monsters, but I had a hard time with Ressler's writing style and the book's formatting. He covers a lot of ground in regards to his career and the cases he created profiles for, but instead of being insightful, it felt disorganized, egocentric, and ungraceful. I understand that he helped catch many violent criminals, but Ressler pats himself on the back a lot for his profiling work throughout the book. He even opens the book with one of his own quotes. Oh brother.
Ressler's autobiography contains many engrossing sections, but for me it just didn't add up to a complete or compelling FBI-based true crime novel. If that's what you are interested in, might I suggest Gary Noesner's Stalling for Time instead?
I wanted (and expected) to like Whoever Fights Monsters, but I had a hard time with Ressler's writing style and the book's formatting. He covers a lot of ground in regards to his career and the cases he created profiles for, but instead of being insightful, it felt disorganized, egocentric, and ungraceful. I understand that he helped catch many violent criminals, but Ressler pats himself on the back a lot for his profiling work throughout the book. He even opens the book with one of his own quotes. Oh brother.
Ressler's autobiography contains many engrossing sections, but for me it just didn't add up to a complete or compelling FBI-based true crime novel. If that's what you are interested in, might I suggest Gary Noesner's Stalling for Time instead?
January 8, 2020
This was closer to a 2.5 stars non-fiction read, if read in post 2010 era. Before 2010, if you read this book, it would be a full 3 or 3.5 star read. The problem is not only core material becoming highly dated, but also in the way it is "told", as well.
First, it could have been far better organized. The last 1/2 of the book read/ felt as all over the place for various profiling past cases and proclivities rationalizations. All types of tangent projections that are difficult to connote as "group" too. NOT in the classes of "organized" and "disorganized" murderers. That parsing to description was excellent. And Ressler was one of the first who described each.
In the autobiographical sense, I think his personal story was above average interesting. Also so representative for the cognition re "education" for his time and generation. For instance, his first application for a Chicago Police Officer Job was rejected because he had 2 years of college. Deemed "too much education, he will cause too many questions". I really did LOL on that one. Now college education is enabled and required in great measure. His early life and especially the progressions of military services, moves, and being supported while both serving and becoming high degree "educated" were excellent. 4 star in specific pertinent information to the development of profiling itself as well. But STILL, the various cases over the years took away the clear cut path to the professional development story itself of Robert K. Ressler, IMHO.
This is super, super dark, gritty and core evil example prone. So anyone who has sensibility to this horrific outcome physical evidence criteria should not read this book. It did teach me more about serial killer pattern of after death deeds that I did not fully know about or understand before reading this. Like the blood drinking fetish.
This although highly dated (even in the language used) and especially in the current forensics fields evidence, this still is worth reading for the history of profiling. He's a crux to its early formation, and was the person who actually was core in using the term "serial" killer and defining criteria for that nomenclature. And he does explain profiling and the progression and early birth (starts in early childhood) of a dark fantasy life that is becoming more and more definitive to the mental structure for this kind of mind. He also defines shades of mental illness better than most who are "high priests" in that field today.
But other than in "history" development for definitions or terms- this book is extremely dated. And no more so than in the case studies used. In some cases, the perpetrator's "aftermath" is incorrect for the last 15 years.
He doesn't at all describe how "wrong" profiling can be either at times. He does state that it is never infallible. But that's not quite the same thing. It's been wrong in some major cases like BTK, Dennis Rader. Not 100% wrong, but just wrong enough to hurt, not help in massive investigations.
It's history- no longer as accurate in definitive practice either, as it once was. Ressler is passed.
First, it could have been far better organized. The last 1/2 of the book read/ felt as all over the place for various profiling past cases and proclivities rationalizations. All types of tangent projections that are difficult to connote as "group" too. NOT in the classes of "organized" and "disorganized" murderers. That parsing to description was excellent. And Ressler was one of the first who described each.
In the autobiographical sense, I think his personal story was above average interesting. Also so representative for the cognition re "education" for his time and generation. For instance, his first application for a Chicago Police Officer Job was rejected because he had 2 years of college. Deemed "too much education, he will cause too many questions". I really did LOL on that one. Now college education is enabled and required in great measure. His early life and especially the progressions of military services, moves, and being supported while both serving and becoming high degree "educated" were excellent. 4 star in specific pertinent information to the development of profiling itself as well. But STILL, the various cases over the years took away the clear cut path to the professional development story itself of Robert K. Ressler, IMHO.
This is super, super dark, gritty and core evil example prone. So anyone who has sensibility to this horrific outcome physical evidence criteria should not read this book. It did teach me more about serial killer pattern of after death deeds that I did not fully know about or understand before reading this. Like the blood drinking fetish.
This although highly dated (even in the language used) and especially in the current forensics fields evidence, this still is worth reading for the history of profiling. He's a crux to its early formation, and was the person who actually was core in using the term "serial" killer and defining criteria for that nomenclature. And he does explain profiling and the progression and early birth (starts in early childhood) of a dark fantasy life that is becoming more and more definitive to the mental structure for this kind of mind. He also defines shades of mental illness better than most who are "high priests" in that field today.
But other than in "history" development for definitions or terms- this book is extremely dated. And no more so than in the case studies used. In some cases, the perpetrator's "aftermath" is incorrect for the last 15 years.
He doesn't at all describe how "wrong" profiling can be either at times. He does state that it is never infallible. But that's not quite the same thing. It's been wrong in some major cases like BTK, Dennis Rader. Not 100% wrong, but just wrong enough to hurt, not help in massive investigations.
It's history- no longer as accurate in definitive practice either, as it once was. Ressler is passed.
December 6, 2017
This is exactly what it says on the tin: Ressler's memoir of being an FBI profiler. He talks about a great many murderers, and has a wonderfully practical, commonsense style, both in writing and in his approach to analyzing homicidal psychotics and psychopaths. In his hands, the "organized/disorganized" schema makes sense and is a useful analytical tool. (He bemoans the fact that all his students want a checklist, a black box they can put their data into and get an accurate profile out of, and I totally see how that desire has shaped a lot of "profiling" since Ressler's retirement.)
He has the same problem that bedevils all the books in this genre; "I did this and this and this was awesome and this got me a commendation and this changed the way we understand sociopaths . . ." I know Ressler isn't bragging--he and Bill Bass are the only two of these guys I've found thus far who will tell stories on themselves--but there's no way he can explain why he's writing this memoir without sounding like he's bragging: because it's a memoir about what he's done, not who he is. Much of who he is shows through in what he does, but the emphasis is most definitely on actions and accomplishments--and how can we possibly know why what he's done is important unless he tells us?
Ressler comes across better than anyone except Bill Bass. I appreciate deeply pragmatic people. And he writes very lucidly about some very murky subjects.
He has the same problem that bedevils all the books in this genre; "I did this and this and this was awesome and this got me a commendation and this changed the way we understand sociopaths . . ." I know Ressler isn't bragging--he and Bill Bass are the only two of these guys I've found thus far who will tell stories on themselves--but there's no way he can explain why he's writing this memoir without sounding like he's bragging: because it's a memoir about what he's done, not who he is. Much of who he is shows through in what he does, but the emphasis is most definitely on actions and accomplishments--and how can we possibly know why what he's done is important unless he tells us?
Ressler comes across better than anyone except Bill Bass. I appreciate deeply pragmatic people. And he writes very lucidly about some very murky subjects.
December 28, 2018
There is a friend of mine who is fascinated with the whole concept of serial killers and we have had long conversations about this topic. A few questions we endlessly debate are : What factors create a serial killer ? Why is society so fascinated with them ? For all their morbid and brutal history, why do people flock to read true crime books, fictional accounts and movies about these characters ? Even after brooding over this for a while now, we have not really arrived at a satisfactory answer to these questions. This was when Mindhunter aired on Netflix and we both discovered Robert Ressler and his book.
When the cover of a book says : ” My Twenty Years Tracking Serial Killers for the FBI”, then I did feel the urge to look for some answers or interpretations here. My interest was not entirely misplaced since the author has some fantastic credentials : he is often credited to have coined the usage “serial killer”, served as an adviser for Thomas Harris while the latter was creating a bare bones outline for Hannibal Lecter, has had face time and multiple interviews with many ruthless serial killers etcetera. But all considered, I still did not have a lot of answers to the questions that brought me to the book and subject matter in the first place.
Not many people can really talk about serial killers and their perverse relationships with humanity in the depth that Robert Ressler can. This is since he has had a career spanning time with the Army and the FBI and was one of the pioneers of employing psychological profiling to track down serial killers. The tone of the book is very much akin to what a professional would write – to the point, concise and clinically detached. In other words, Ressler does not sensationalize his subject even when he had ample opportunities and resources to do so. Even the most grotesque details of the savagery of the murders are mentioned as a law enforcement professional would have and the approach is to always understand why the said killer would have resorted to this behaviour. The author having been one of the forerunners of the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program (ViCAP) in the US also does extensive conversations with incarcerated serial murderers which sheds some light into the minds of these apprehended criminals. Ressler’s classification of the criminal mind is broadly into the organized (planned, canny, adaptive killers) and the disorganized (no effort to cover trails, violent and erratic behaviour patterns etc.) is illustrated by numerous examples that he brings up during the book. Maybe it is the celebrity aspect of these infamous killers but he does extensively take case studies from the lives of Charles Manson, Ed Kemper, Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy more than most others in the book. It is equal parts fascinating and terrifying to behold such labyrinthine minds.
The aspects of this book that did not sit well with me were :
Women : Ressler mentions as an aside and devotes maybe half a page to the topic of female serial killers. Granted that there have not been as many women serial murderers as men but then this would have made a great inclusion into the book. Ressler dissects the psychological undercurrents of men and gives insights into what may have driven some of them along the point of no return and that begs the question, why are there not many women serial killers ? What aspects of their psyche could be different ? It might be too vast a topic but an inclusion of this argument would have made this more well-rounded.
Does not age too well : The book closes by the mid 90’s and there has not been any revisions ever since. This means that the cases discussed and debated close by the time the law apprehends Jeffrey Dahmer. The world has changed significantly in a myriad of ways in the last 27 plus years and how has this changed crime ? Perhaps I am asking too much and this is material for another book.
Americanized : This is a no brainer, being an FBI agent it is only natural that Ressler would stick to the geography he knows best which is the US of A. However, a quick glance around tells you that there have been serial killers in almost every part of the world. So how different are the mentalities of these individuals ? What social, cultural or demographic factors would have caused these individuals to jump off the precipice ?
“I am good and I know it” : Any memoir is about beating your own drum but a skillful writer knows how to mix this along with the events that he/she is describing so that the reader does not feel the narrative to be disjointed. From all that I have written here, it is quite easy to understand that Ressler is a very intelligent and efficient professional and it would have been great to leave it at that. In his version of the stories though he goes a few steps further and congratulates himself every now and then. I did notice these and let a few such instances pass by when I finally reached a point where he had mentioned verbatim a letter of commendation in his name that was sent to the FBI director ! It doesn’t get more explicit than this fellow readers !
All considered, if you are keen to understand the details of the criminal mind and especially of the serial killer kind then this would be a good albeit dated work. The questions that my friend and I were debating has now attained new perspectives but not answered yet. We better get back to our discussion !
When the cover of a book says : ” My Twenty Years Tracking Serial Killers for the FBI”, then I did feel the urge to look for some answers or interpretations here. My interest was not entirely misplaced since the author has some fantastic credentials : he is often credited to have coined the usage “serial killer”, served as an adviser for Thomas Harris while the latter was creating a bare bones outline for Hannibal Lecter, has had face time and multiple interviews with many ruthless serial killers etcetera. But all considered, I still did not have a lot of answers to the questions that brought me to the book and subject matter in the first place.
Not many people can really talk about serial killers and their perverse relationships with humanity in the depth that Robert Ressler can. This is since he has had a career spanning time with the Army and the FBI and was one of the pioneers of employing psychological profiling to track down serial killers. The tone of the book is very much akin to what a professional would write – to the point, concise and clinically detached. In other words, Ressler does not sensationalize his subject even when he had ample opportunities and resources to do so. Even the most grotesque details of the savagery of the murders are mentioned as a law enforcement professional would have and the approach is to always understand why the said killer would have resorted to this behaviour. The author having been one of the forerunners of the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program (ViCAP) in the US also does extensive conversations with incarcerated serial murderers which sheds some light into the minds of these apprehended criminals. Ressler’s classification of the criminal mind is broadly into the organized (planned, canny, adaptive killers) and the disorganized (no effort to cover trails, violent and erratic behaviour patterns etc.) is illustrated by numerous examples that he brings up during the book. Maybe it is the celebrity aspect of these infamous killers but he does extensively take case studies from the lives of Charles Manson, Ed Kemper, Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy more than most others in the book. It is equal parts fascinating and terrifying to behold such labyrinthine minds.
The aspects of this book that did not sit well with me were :
Women : Ressler mentions as an aside and devotes maybe half a page to the topic of female serial killers. Granted that there have not been as many women serial murderers as men but then this would have made a great inclusion into the book. Ressler dissects the psychological undercurrents of men and gives insights into what may have driven some of them along the point of no return and that begs the question, why are there not many women serial killers ? What aspects of their psyche could be different ? It might be too vast a topic but an inclusion of this argument would have made this more well-rounded.
Does not age too well : The book closes by the mid 90’s and there has not been any revisions ever since. This means that the cases discussed and debated close by the time the law apprehends Jeffrey Dahmer. The world has changed significantly in a myriad of ways in the last 27 plus years and how has this changed crime ? Perhaps I am asking too much and this is material for another book.
Americanized : This is a no brainer, being an FBI agent it is only natural that Ressler would stick to the geography he knows best which is the US of A. However, a quick glance around tells you that there have been serial killers in almost every part of the world. So how different are the mentalities of these individuals ? What social, cultural or demographic factors would have caused these individuals to jump off the precipice ?
“I am good and I know it” : Any memoir is about beating your own drum but a skillful writer knows how to mix this along with the events that he/she is describing so that the reader does not feel the narrative to be disjointed. From all that I have written here, it is quite easy to understand that Ressler is a very intelligent and efficient professional and it would have been great to leave it at that. In his version of the stories though he goes a few steps further and congratulates himself every now and then. I did notice these and let a few such instances pass by when I finally reached a point where he had mentioned verbatim a letter of commendation in his name that was sent to the FBI director ! It doesn’t get more explicit than this fellow readers !
All considered, if you are keen to understand the details of the criminal mind and especially of the serial killer kind then this would be a good albeit dated work. The questions that my friend and I were debating has now attained new perspectives but not answered yet. We better get back to our discussion !
September 18, 2024
I picked this up in the true crime section of a bona fide bookstore in Sandusky, Ohio in July—just for a fun read. It was both gruesome and informative, getting me caught up on all the serial killers they caught in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. The author was a founder of the FBI division that developed a method for profiling these nutjobs in the hopes of being able to catch them sooner. He details not just the cases and how the whack-jobs were caught, but also his work on building this new division in the FBI. Very informative.
Written in 1991, the author objected to the tabloidification of these types of criminals in popular culture. It does feel like that tide has ebbed now.
Written in 1991, the author objected to the tabloidification of these types of criminals in popular culture. It does feel like that tide has ebbed now.
November 12, 2024
Powiedziałbym, że dobra pozycja dla osób, które mało interesują się true crime, nie wiedzą jeszcze zbyt wiele.
September 22, 2019
Interesting but clearly dated. I found myself chuckling every time the author said something like “as of 1993…” The book makes a distinction between organized and disorganized murderers and the different traits between each. The rest of the book focuses on the actions of various serial killers such as Edmund Kemper and John Wayne Gacy.
Recommended for those who like Mindhunter on Netflix or are interested in learning more about criminal profiling. I’ll also say that this book isn’t for the faint of heart because it is incredibly graphic in its discussion of various murders. I had to put it down several times and go read something else because it’s so disturbing.
See more of my reviews: Blog // Instagram
Recommended for those who like Mindhunter on Netflix or are interested in learning more about criminal profiling. I’ll also say that this book isn’t for the faint of heart because it is incredibly graphic in its discussion of various murders. I had to put it down several times and go read something else because it’s so disturbing.
See more of my reviews: Blog // Instagram
June 4, 2021
I decided to read this book after watching Criminal Minds. I could tell that many details in the show were based on the work of Robert Ressler and the character of Jason Gideon took a lot of inspiration from him. The first quote in the book is also the quote from Nietzche that Gideon reads in the first episode of Criminal Minds “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you”. Robert Ressler was one of the first criminal profilers who coined the term “serial killers” to refer to killers who not only have multiple victims but also whose victims can be total strangers to them. He set the foundation for the Behavioral Science Unit (BSU, later changed to BAU) in the FBI, interviewed hundreds of murderers to understand their psychology and behavior, how and why they committed their acts, and helped local police to build profiles of the criminals so that they could narrow down the pool of suspects. Since I already watched the show, I am familiar with the terminologies presented in the book. It is still nice to read about them in a more systematic way. I also learn more about infamous cases of serial killers in the US and realize that the crimes in the show are closer to real life than I think.
Some people find the author a bit arrogant and that he often pats himself in the shoulder. That reminds me of the fact that many say the same thing about Jason Gideon. I do think that Mr Ressler sometimes unnecessarily included praises about his work in the book but given that he was so passionate about letting people know more about the good potential of profiling and psychological research on criminals and wanted to advocate for the field he had been working many years for, I feel that it’s reasonable for him to make those notes. After all, he emphasizes that profiling does not catch killers, local police do (which is the one thing that I know for sure not realistic in Criminal Minds). All he wanted was for people to have a clear understanding of the need to have more research and data on criminals especially the kinds that we did not know a lot about and particularly dangerous, serial killers.
The book was written 30 years ago, but I still find it worth reading.
Some people find the author a bit arrogant and that he often pats himself in the shoulder. That reminds me of the fact that many say the same thing about Jason Gideon. I do think that Mr Ressler sometimes unnecessarily included praises about his work in the book but given that he was so passionate about letting people know more about the good potential of profiling and psychological research on criminals and wanted to advocate for the field he had been working many years for, I feel that it’s reasonable for him to make those notes. After all, he emphasizes that profiling does not catch killers, local police do (which is the one thing that I know for sure not realistic in Criminal Minds). All he wanted was for people to have a clear understanding of the need to have more research and data on criminals especially the kinds that we did not know a lot about and particularly dangerous, serial killers.
The book was written 30 years ago, but I still find it worth reading.
August 4, 2014
I literally could not put this book down..AND at the same time wanted to read it slowly so that it would never end. For a lot of people this will seem weird as the book is very gruesome and terrifying but I just found it pretty damn interesting.
Whoever Fights Monsters details Robert Ressler's career with the FBI in his revolutionary quest to fine tune the process of profiling serial killers. If you're not familiar with Ressler then just know this--he actually coined the term 'serial killer' He was also the main point of reference for Thomas Harris when he was writing Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs. He also started that little interviewing project where FBI agents interviewed serial killers around the country to find out more about them in hopes of identifying future serial killers.
The book takes you through actual cases where Ressler's profiles helped the FBI nab the killers, Ressler's actual interviews with serial killers like Charles Manson, Ed Kemper and John Wayne Gacy as well as just some cold hard facts like recognizing the difference between disorganized and organized killers, how and why some serial killers use staging to their advantage among other topics that Ressler's usually covered in his classes.
The book also includes 2 series of photos showing serial killers, crime scenes and in some cases gruesome photos of some victims (although these are tame compared to a regular internet search).
I would give this 5 stars but Ressler occasionally seemed a little braggy about all his awards and accolades.....hmm actually whatever I'm giving it 5 because he deserves it.
Serial killers have always fascinated me mostly on the psychological side of things and this book truly was right up my alley. I found it exciting, terrifying and extremely interesting. A must read for lovers of Thomas Harris or anyone curious to know about inner workings of the FBI and criminal profiling.
Whoever Fights Monsters details Robert Ressler's career with the FBI in his revolutionary quest to fine tune the process of profiling serial killers. If you're not familiar with Ressler then just know this--he actually coined the term 'serial killer' He was also the main point of reference for Thomas Harris when he was writing Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs. He also started that little interviewing project where FBI agents interviewed serial killers around the country to find out more about them in hopes of identifying future serial killers.
The book takes you through actual cases where Ressler's profiles helped the FBI nab the killers, Ressler's actual interviews with serial killers like Charles Manson, Ed Kemper and John Wayne Gacy as well as just some cold hard facts like recognizing the difference between disorganized and organized killers, how and why some serial killers use staging to their advantage among other topics that Ressler's usually covered in his classes.
The book also includes 2 series of photos showing serial killers, crime scenes and in some cases gruesome photos of some victims (although these are tame compared to a regular internet search).
I would give this 5 stars but Ressler occasionally seemed a little braggy about all his awards and accolades.....hmm actually whatever I'm giving it 5 because he deserves it.
Serial killers have always fascinated me mostly on the psychological side of things and this book truly was right up my alley. I found it exciting, terrifying and extremely interesting. A must read for lovers of Thomas Harris or anyone curious to know about inner workings of the FBI and criminal profiling.
July 20, 2017
This is a hard book to review. On the one hand, it was completely fascinating and the author's experience and expertise was a totally new perspective for me.
On the other hand, the author is not very likeable from a modern and liberal standpoint. A couple asides about gay relationships and women making false rape accusations both left a bad taste in my mouth. He places a ton of weight upon confessions extracted under intense questioning, referencing the Central Park Five case with zero skepticism (the book was written in 1991, so you can't blame him for not seeing the future, but it's concerning that he mentioned it as an example of a well-conducted investigation similar to one that he himself was involved with). Even from the beginning when he describes his early work with the army, going undercover to infiltrate anti-war student movements during the Vietnam War, I knew I was not going to agree with his politics.
Nevertheless, his experiences and knowledge can't be dismissed and I learned a ton about serial killers and profiling. I do recommend it despite my distaste for many of the author's positions and biases; just keep that in mind going in.
On the other hand, the author is not very likeable from a modern and liberal standpoint. A couple asides about gay relationships and women making false rape accusations both left a bad taste in my mouth. He places a ton of weight upon confessions extracted under intense questioning, referencing the Central Park Five case with zero skepticism (the book was written in 1991, so you can't blame him for not seeing the future, but it's concerning that he mentioned it as an example of a well-conducted investigation similar to one that he himself was involved with). Even from the beginning when he describes his early work with the army, going undercover to infiltrate anti-war student movements during the Vietnam War, I knew I was not going to agree with his politics.
Nevertheless, his experiences and knowledge can't be dismissed and I learned a ton about serial killers and profiling. I do recommend it despite my distaste for many of the author's positions and biases; just keep that in mind going in.
February 24, 2019
De este libro me esperaba más de lo que en sí me he encontrado.
Está bien, sí, pero me esperaba otra organización de todos los tramos de lo que no cuenta.
Si os gustan las series como C.S.I y Mentes Criminales, debéis de darle una oportunidad a este libro. Nos cuenta qué hay detrás de los grandes asesinos en serie y qué les llevó a hacer eso, así como también el origen del Análisis de Conducta.
Y aquí es donde ha venido mi gran decepción con el libro: me esperaba que me contaran las características de los asesinos de otra forma. Yo esperaba que saliera x asesino con toda su historia en el mismo capítulo, pero no ha sido así. Hay que ir saltando entre capítulos y, cuando estaba metida de lleno en uno, me cambiaban a otro, dentro del mismo capítulo.
En sí, es bastante interesante para la gente que le gusten estos temas.
Está bien, sí, pero me esperaba otra organización de todos los tramos de lo que no cuenta.
Si os gustan las series como C.S.I y Mentes Criminales, debéis de darle una oportunidad a este libro. Nos cuenta qué hay detrás de los grandes asesinos en serie y qué les llevó a hacer eso, así como también el origen del Análisis de Conducta.
Y aquí es donde ha venido mi gran decepción con el libro: me esperaba que me contaran las características de los asesinos de otra forma. Yo esperaba que saliera x asesino con toda su historia en el mismo capítulo, pero no ha sido así. Hay que ir saltando entre capítulos y, cuando estaba metida de lleno en uno, me cambiaban a otro, dentro del mismo capítulo.
En sí, es bastante interesante para la gente que le gusten estos temas.
May 20, 2021
I, me, me , I. I was waiting to read that he had broke his arm from patting himself on the back so much. It's a shame because some of the subject matter was fascinating albeit a little stomach churning. Make that a lot stomach churning. Ressler does do a good job though of interviewing some of these monsters. Maybe it takes an ego to understand an ego?
I think I'll try one of Douglas' books next to see how his perspective is on some of the same subject matter. I'm pretty sure I won't be reading another one by Ressler. While the writing itself is decent I won't be recommending the one either.
I think I'll try one of Douglas' books next to see how his perspective is on some of the same subject matter. I'm pretty sure I won't be reading another one by Ressler. While the writing itself is decent I won't be recommending the one either.
November 4, 2021
This book is an amazing walk into the life of an expert FBI investigator of serial killers. I have read several works of fiction about serial killers and have been interested in how the in-depth psychological knowledge of these monsters is collected. Robert K. Ressler is expert who has made this information available. Everyone should seek out this book. It is amazing.
November 4, 2021
An incredible book full of information, cases and insight. Ressler has achieved a lot in his life and he does his best to stay humble and give credit where credit is due. I did encounter couple passages in the book that I didn't agree with, but otherwise this is a splendid read, nearly entirely focused on serial killers and repeat violent offenders and gives a lot of insight in how profiling actually works. This book is also partially a history of BSU and partially a memoir of Ressler's career in FBI. Not a braggart but rightfully proud of his hard work and those who helped him along the way - Ressler makes a compelling storyteller and lecturer. I can say I learned a lot just from this one book.
May 6, 2020
"What is one allowed to do? ... Whatever one can get away with."
Frighteningly enough, this I think accurately sums up a repetitive violent criminal. Robert Ressler's book surpasses Mindhunter for me. It felt more informational. I love hearing how these types of offenders are pursued and how the current common practices were established for seeking them out.
Frighteningly enough, this I think accurately sums up a repetitive violent criminal. Robert Ressler's book surpasses Mindhunter for me. It felt more informational. I love hearing how these types of offenders are pursued and how the current common practices were established for seeking them out.
March 7, 2024
The author, Robert Ressler served 35 years in the Army (20
in Army Reserve). And 20 years w/ the FBI. Among other
Army assignments, he was a Lt of the MPs & worked in the
Criminal Investigation Division (CID). He concluded his svc
as a Major. He had a Bachelor's in criminology & Master's
degree in police administration. After he retired from the
FBI, Ressler served as an expert witness for trials.
Ressler became a FBI agent & trained fellow agents & various
local and state law enforcement on hostage negotiations. He
interviewed 100 serial killers to see how their minds worked.
He consulted w/ psychologists + psychiatrists. He asked the
FBI to authorize a behavior unit to study behavior patterns of
murderers & the FBI turned him down. A new FBI Director
gave him the 'green light.'
Ressler helped start the FBI Behavioral Science Unit (BSU)
& had 2 mentors in this endeavor. Once up & running the
BSU helped the FBI look at the backgrounds, occupations,
interests, MOs & crime scenes of murderers in a new light.
It was uncanny how accurate Ressler was developing a
murderer profile. This helped police or FBI narrow their
search for the perp. He explained sex murders did not
need to include penetration, but mutilation of the body
(before or after death) was most often involved.
The author stated stats showed serial murderers were:
white males, aged 20s to 30s, who didn't have reliable
relationships at work, home, or in the romance realm.
They dropped out of school or could not keep a job. This
person may have violent fantasies as young as grade
school, where he now has the power over someone
(authority figure, woman). Later these urgent fantasies
resulted in murder.
Ressler looked at the murderer's dysfunctional upbringing.
Did he have an absent parent? A parent who was emotionally
or physically abusive? Did the future murderer feel close to
his sibs? Did he torture, mutilate, or kill animals?
The author defined 1)an organized, 2) disorganized or 3)
mixed murderer.
The organized one: targets stranger(s) (pre-meditated),
brings his own supplies (guns, knife, rope), uses his car/
the victim's for transport, hides the body, keeps a trophy
item of the deceased IE a photo, a ring, necklace. The
disorganized one: disorganized, chooses a random victim,
uses random weapon IE a stick, uses twisted reasoning.
May leave the body in the open. Mixed has factors of both.
The organized one may return to the crime scene or offer
to circulate flyers on the missing person (who he knows is dead).
Ressler and others advocated for the start of VICAP in
1985. Whereby law enforcement had a national database
of unsolved murders ( & their MOs). This tool let them
to connect multiple murders to 1 perp. One serial murderer
lived in 14 states!
I liked how Rossler gave all law enforcement credit for
catching the murderer from beat cop, highway patrol,
DEA, FBI etc. Some of the crime scene details were too
gross IE the woman strangled with her purse handle,
2 women who escaped when they saw the plan to hang
them, those who drank the blood of victims. How could
police or FBI agents ever unwind from all this violence?
in Army Reserve). And 20 years w/ the FBI. Among other
Army assignments, he was a Lt of the MPs & worked in the
Criminal Investigation Division (CID). He concluded his svc
as a Major. He had a Bachelor's in criminology & Master's
degree in police administration. After he retired from the
FBI, Ressler served as an expert witness for trials.
Ressler became a FBI agent & trained fellow agents & various
local and state law enforcement on hostage negotiations. He
interviewed 100 serial killers to see how their minds worked.
He consulted w/ psychologists + psychiatrists. He asked the
FBI to authorize a behavior unit to study behavior patterns of
murderers & the FBI turned him down. A new FBI Director
gave him the 'green light.'
Ressler helped start the FBI Behavioral Science Unit (BSU)
& had 2 mentors in this endeavor. Once up & running the
BSU helped the FBI look at the backgrounds, occupations,
interests, MOs & crime scenes of murderers in a new light.
It was uncanny how accurate Ressler was developing a
murderer profile. This helped police or FBI narrow their
search for the perp. He explained sex murders did not
need to include penetration, but mutilation of the body
(before or after death) was most often involved.
The author stated stats showed serial murderers were:
white males, aged 20s to 30s, who didn't have reliable
relationships at work, home, or in the romance realm.
They dropped out of school or could not keep a job. This
person may have violent fantasies as young as grade
school, where he now has the power over someone
(authority figure, woman). Later these urgent fantasies
resulted in murder.
Ressler looked at the murderer's dysfunctional upbringing.
Did he have an absent parent? A parent who was emotionally
or physically abusive? Did the future murderer feel close to
his sibs? Did he torture, mutilate, or kill animals?
The author defined 1)an organized, 2) disorganized or 3)
mixed murderer.
The organized one: targets stranger(s) (pre-meditated),
brings his own supplies (guns, knife, rope), uses his car/
the victim's for transport, hides the body, keeps a trophy
item of the deceased IE a photo, a ring, necklace. The
disorganized one: disorganized, chooses a random victim,
uses random weapon IE a stick, uses twisted reasoning.
May leave the body in the open. Mixed has factors of both.
The organized one may return to the crime scene or offer
to circulate flyers on the missing person (who he knows is dead).
Ressler and others advocated for the start of VICAP in
1985. Whereby law enforcement had a national database
of unsolved murders ( & their MOs). This tool let them
to connect multiple murders to 1 perp. One serial murderer
lived in 14 states!
I liked how Rossler gave all law enforcement credit for
catching the murderer from beat cop, highway patrol,
DEA, FBI etc. Some of the crime scene details were too
gross IE the woman strangled with her purse handle,
2 women who escaped when they saw the plan to hang
them, those who drank the blood of victims. How could
police or FBI agents ever unwind from all this violence?
Displaying 1 - 30 of 945 reviews