Ed Kemper was denied parole, again, on July 9th, 2024, with the prosecution declaring him to still be a danger to society. This comes as no surprise to those familiar with this notorious serial killer, as the heinousness of his crimes is overshadowed only by his lack of both remorse and empathy. Today, Kemper resides in a medical prison where he was moved after several trips to an outside hospital due to complications with his severe diabetes. Other than that, unverified sources say he is otherwise relatively healthy and can still walk though he frequently uses a wheelchair to get around. Another source said that Kemper recently met with a journalist numerous times, in person and over the phone, insinuating that there should be a new book or documentary coming in the near future. Disappointingly, no title or release date was given; but he has been featured in several newer works. As well, since being incarcerated Kemper has recorded thousands of hours of audiobook narration and assisted the FBI in the development of their Behavioural Science Unit, though most recently he’s said to have accosted a female staffer while transferring into his wheelchair. This of course only worked against him at his parole hearing earlier this month, where he was denied (for the twelfth time). His is not my most familiar case, but not for lack of intrigue. I’ve watched some interviews and read a few articles, but I’ve not yet dove into the depths of his mind.
               Now, at seventy-four years old, Ed Kemper is said to be just as paraphilic as ever. One unverified source mentioned him recalling sexual acts with his mother’s severed head to a staff member; the staff at his current facility are not in the habit of engaging in his more insidious fantasies and recollections. Valid. However, because my curiosities are never quite satisfied by the prosecutorial perspective. So, I’ve decided to reach out to Edmund himself. I’ve only just sent the letter, so I’ve not yet much to report. However, I’ve heard that he’s loquacious so unless he is no longer interested or able to respond, I suppose all there is to do now is patiently await his reply.
               I’ve mentioned that I will be writing incarcerated individuals (primarily of the serial killer variety) to a few acquaintances, and there seems to be a common, poorly masked abhorrence of the endeavour. In the interest of transparency, my desire to write violent offenders is not some convoluted infatuation that needs explored in therapy—though I’ve done that, too. What I’ve discovered is that what started as a simple morbid curiosity has evolved into an in-depth exploration of the darker crevices of the human psyche and experience. There’s a strange comfort in that darkness. Something that settles in a sort of reckoning with the fragility of life. Some say that you can’t truly appreciate the good that life has to offer until you’ve been touched by death. I know that my own encounters with death have taught me more about myself and about life than any therapy session or failure ever has. In some ways, I’ve dedicated my life to developing a relationship with death. One that even I don’t completely understand, and still, something sucks me in like gravity. In some strange and possibly disturbing way, it helps me feel grounded. I’ve experienced suicidality and the loss of friends and loved ones, I’ve extinguished the life of another being, and I have worked in hospice. I’ve engaged with legitimate psychopaths and murderers, most of whom I was entirely unaware were holding immense secrets and dark fantasies. At least this way, the interaction is at face value; their records are public record…like their location and inmate number.
               So, I’ll continue to find and write inmates incarcerated for violent crimes, and I will hopefully get some responses that permit conversation of substance. Dennis Rader, better known as BTK, and The Green River Killer, Gary Ridgway, are also on my list; along with lesser known dangers to society.
                

Thanks for Reading!

Noel Rivers-Schutte
Seton Hall Law​

In 1977, the Supreme Court of Washington ruled that in a self-defense case, a woman is entitled to have the jury consider her actions from her perception.
1 in 4 American women will likely experience domestic violence in their lifetime.
Noel Rivers-Schutte
Seton Hall Law
 
Battered woman syndrome. Not included in the DSM, but still a very real pattern of symptoms and behaviours that have been attributed to persistent violence from their male intimate partner(s). In some cases, this can result in a lethal dose of temporary insanity wherein the female victim may retaliate against her abuser. Of course I am paraphrasing my own understanding as it pertains to relevant case exploration. Although I stand by the assertion that there is a clear double standard between the sexes that has been created and fortified by a patriarchal entity, the last quarter of a century has brought some undeniable social progress. Twenty five years ago, society denied that sex workers can be raped altogether – today, women/femmes are still dismissed and derided for the actions of the men in their lives. So, yes, things have improved to a point. Female adults can now own property, and have their own bank accounts and credit cards. However, we’ve also obviously backtracked on reproductive rights and such. This isn’t about women’s rights, though I am certain that the patriarchy has played a role in the skewed perceptions of women who kill their husband(s). Of course not all women who kill their husband(s) are genuine in their claims, as criminals are notoriously dishonest. Betty Lou Beets is just such a controversial case.
Born Betty Lou Dunevant of Roxboro, North Carolina, in 1937. Sources say Betty had a considerably rough childhood, with hearing loss due to the measles at three and allegations of sexual abuse that is alleged to have started when she was the tender age of five years old. There are no medical or police records to support these claims. However, it is documented that her mother was committed to a mental hospital for length(s) of time, leaving her to take on a caregiver role to her younger siblings at the young age of twelve. At the age of fifteen, Betty married her first husband, Robert Franklin Branson.
Now, up to this point in Betty’s life, 1952, I’ve not found any documentation of intellectual capacity or physical abuse resulting in head trauma. However, various documents citing her trial and appeals noted that she had a learning disability and traumatic brain injury(ies). Accounts of their seventeen years long relationship vary ever so slightly, but what is clear that at some point Robert and Betty dissolved their relationship and Betty claimed Robert had abused her. They remained estranged, but they rekindled their relationship after Betty attempted to take her own life. In 1969, this presumably tumultuous relationship, which bore five children, came to an end. By the following year, Betty married her second husband for the first time.
Billy York Lane married Betty in 1970 and, again, in 1972. During her marriage(s) to her second husband, as we see our first documented signs of an escalating cycle of abuse. Their relationship was short-lived, with a perilous end. Charges were against Betty, when she shot Billy in the back. Those charges were subsequently dropped, after Billy confessed to initiating the violence and breaking her nose. Shortly thereafter, in 1973, Betty began dating her third husband, Ronnie Threlkold.
Betty’s relationship with Ronnie lasted a bit longer, but their marriage followed the volatile pattern we see when we look at her previous marriages. I did not uncover any documentation of abuse cited for this relationship, and admittedly, I didn’t dig very deep. However, I feel my experience with abuse/trauma cycles affords me some room to speculate on potential filler for the gaps and inconsistency in evidence of abuse.
Before we get too far, I would like to clarify that I will not be making any claims or allegations of abuse in the case of Betty Lou Beets. I am in no way an expert on Betty, but my combined experience provides some perspective on the subject matter that was Betty Lou Beets. With that, I would like to offer the possibility that Ronnie led a bit of a double life. There is a nuanced understanding of abuse(rs) that exists now that has changed the way we see marital dynamics of the past. When Betty began dating Ronnie in 1973, women could not get a bank account or credit card in their own name. This changed the following year, in 1974, but by then Betty would likely have been invested or even trapped in her commitment to Ronnie.
Abusers don’t enter into a relationship overtly controlling or physically aggressive. This goes without saying I should think. If the disingenuous opinions I’ve observed have taught me anything, it’s that far too many people condemn survivors of abuse:
“Why didn’t you just leave?”
“Maybe you should have picked better”
“Not all men…”
I will acknowledge that many of those who participate in victim-blaming do so indirectly and without malice. Unfortunately, that does little to counter the ingrained social construction designed by patriarchy to subjugate and oppress anyone who does not align with the views of the ruling class. The intricacies of an abusive dynamic rarely occur to those fortunate enough to never experience abuse. Combined with social and legal biases of the time, the documented allegations of abuse throughout Betty’s life may serve as evidence of a cycle of potentially traumatic events.
Near the end of her marriage to Ronnie, Betty ran over Ronnie with the car and they subsequently divorced in 1979. Betty married her fourth husband, Doyle W. Barker, later that same year.  This is where things start to turn for the worse. Sources cite documented domestic violence throughout Ronnie’s previous marriages, as well they show Betty’s son recall his own account of the abuse his mother withstood at the hands of Ronnie. In April of 1980, Betty miraculously survived severe head trauma and bodily injuries sustained in a near -fatal car accident. Not many details were given about the accident it’s, though her injuries are documented in detail. Barker continued to assault Betty, disregarding her broken body and permanent brain damage. At some point after her injuries should have healed, Doyle went missing. I’m sure those who knew Betty best suspected that his disappearance may have been linked to her bruised and swollen face, their concern was for Betty. Over the next few years, Betty turned to alcohol and amphetamine-effects of diet pills. This combination may have led to her psychotic episodes during this time, and in 1982, she met and married her fifth husband, Jimmy Don Beets.
Betty’s relationship with Jimmy Don was short-lived, and I am as yet unsure if overt abuse was present when he disappeared in August of 1983. Sometime shortly thereafter, Jimmy Don’s boat was found capsized on Lake Athens leading authorities to assume he had been lost in a fishing accident. Between his disappearance in 1983 and when his remains were found in 1985, Betty had shot Jimmy Don in the head with a .38 caliber handgun and, with the help of her (son?), buried him in her backyard alongside her fourth husband, Doyle. At no point did she make any attempt to collect insurance or a life insurance policy, yet she committed murder, allegedly for those payouts.
The question is not so much whether she had killed two of her husbands, rather this is about what motivated her to kill. According the all-male jury “of her peers”, prosecution, and court of public opinion, Betty Lou Beets is a Black Widow who killed her husbands for insurance money and sheer malice. Her defense attorney, coerced Betty into signing all of her literary and media rights to his underage son by promising he would testify to the point that she had never pursued insurance policy payouts. I assert that is was coercion; I find I difficult to believe, even at a stretch, that a defense attorney didn’t know he couldn’t be both defense representation and witness. E. Ray Andrews had written into his contract with Betty Lou Beets that he would testify on her behalf that while she pursued a fire insurance claim, she never pursued life insurance policy payouts for either of her deceased husbands. Which is rich, considering the prosecution’s singular focus was that she murdered them for their life insurance and pension. Instead of finding her adequate counsel and acting as her witness, which may well have swayed the jury, Andrews satisfied his own self -interest and forewent acting as her witness.
After the trial ended, and Betty was sentenced to death, E. Ray Andrews's career skyrocketed. He went on to be elected District Attorney of the same jurisdiction that tried Betty, and, later, plead guilty to accepting a substantial bribe to fix a murder case. He was sentenced by the same judge who presided over Betty’s post-conviction appeal, but as poetically just that may be, it is not the end of political intersections with politics. Although she was sentenced to death row in 1985, Betty wasn’t executed until 2000, fifteen years later—an election year.
Some sources suggest that, in an attempt to appear tough on crime, Republican candidate and Texas governor George W. Bush presided over one hundred and twelve executions; one of which was a woman, Betty Lou Beets. A woman who declined her final meal and made no final statement. A woman whose entire family left her alone in her final moments, including the two that had helped her bury the bodies. Doyle's son was present, though he was there for closure; rightfully so. His perception fueled the media fire that painted an obviously battered woman as a black widow. Now, I’m not in anyway diagnosing Betty Lou Beets with anything, nor am I condoning her actions. However, I also cannot help but empathize with her plighted existence. 

​
To learn more about Betty Lou Beets, check out:
 
Buried Memories
https://a.co/d/0b7A2xh
 
Memories of an Execution
https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/lawineq/vol20/iss1/4/?utm_source=scholarship.law.umn.edu%2Flawineq%2Fvol20%2Fiss1%2F4&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages
 
Alcatraz East Crime Library
https://www.alcatrazeast.com/crime-library/famous-murders/betty-lou-beets/

Okay, maybe not all, but an overwhelming number of them would undoubtedly benefit from a Hostel type dark-web service. Think about it. How many people go missing, and how many murder cases run cold? Sure, murder is rare from a grand scheme perspective. By the same logic, so are sexual assault and child abuse. That doesn’t negate the impact of such crimes, especially when you add them all together. Sometimes, they run together into society and get swept under the rug as exaggerations or anecdotal evidence because general awareness is below par. If my criminal justice and psychology classes have taught me anything, the most unexpected people are likely to be questionable. Red flag behaviour is deeply ingrained into our society. So much so that even the most innocuous comments can carry legitimately lethal consequences.
That’s not to say most people are criminals or psychopaths.Still, many more align with the spectrum than most people think. And those same people always like to argue, negating the experience or research being presented to them. Most parents are terrified of losing their children to a stranger in public and don’t think twice about leaving them with a relative of questionable moral direction. Truth be told, most abductions, rapes, and murders are committed by someone we know. Someone we think we know…
Right about now, someone reading this is wondering if I plan to cite my sources. I do not. You have access to the same internet as I do — same search engines, same questions I started with. So, I’m gonna tell you what my family told me when I was growing up a curious little cat: go look it up. I am not here to teach you how to learn things. If you question what I have to say here, dig for yourself — feel free to come back and share what you find; we can speculate together. Because honestly, at the end of the day, no one had a correct answer. We only have the information available to us — what I wouldn’t give for the FBI to provide me with uninhibited access to their vault! — which is gatekept like anything else.
Back to the original point. Why do we not talk about this possibility more often? Social media these days is riddled with people posting predatory garbage and viewers turning them into the authorities. Every time I scroll through TikTok in particular, there is another example from a local newspaper site crime bulletin tied to another user account. I’m not mad about it. Please do your part and help get these people off the internet — that only leaves the smart ones.
People seem to think all criminals are dumb, and the truth is that we can only say that about the criminals that get caught.What of the ones we don’t identify? What of the ones that placate their inner demons with surface manipulations and narcissistic abuse tactics, or the ones that hide in plain sight behind their spouse and community status? Why are we not vetting our board members with the inclusion of extensive psychological evaluations in tandem with their background checks? Are we that trusting, or do we not understand the potential for a manipulative person to fool everyone around them?
Predators rely on their ability to blend in with their chosen community almost as much as their manipulation tactics.These people weave in enough truth to maintain believability, making it all too easy for those around them to brush off socially questionable behaviour as quirks or cultural differences. It’s easy to look for the good in people, it’s not bad, but it is dangerous. Of course, most of you won’t take me seriously. My words will be brushed off as alarmist or conspiracy, which is fine. I suppose if you want to overlook grooming behaviours in your too-friendly uncle or the gaslighting of the strange man on social media, that’s your business.
However, I should recommend exploring the possibility that I’m not off my rocker…
The reality may surprise you.

Thanks for reading!