The Dark Devotion: Unmasking Israel Keyes - Into The Mind of Israel Keyes (Part 3)

“The Dark Devotion: Unmasking Israel Keyes - Into the Mind of Israel Keyes (Part 3)”

🕵🏽‍♀️ SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR BODY OF CRIME 🕵🏽‍♀️
👉🏽 Subscribe to the Body of Crime – 🎙Podcast | 📺 YouTube Channel

👉🏽 Connect with Body of Crime on Social Media – Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | TikTok

👉🏽 Check out the Body of Crime Website – www.bodyofcrimepodcast.com

👉🏽 Check out the Body of Crime – Link Tree


🎙 The Dark Devotion: Unmasking Israel Keyes 🎙 – 🎞 Part I | 🎞 Part II | 🎞 Part III | 🎞 Part IV | 🎞 Part V

Part I – The Introduction
Part II – Who Was Israel Keyes?
Part III – Into the Mind of Israel Keyes
Part IV – Remembering Bill & Lorraine Currier
Part V – Samantha Koenig

Books
📚 Devil in the Darkness By: JT Hunter

Welcome, fellow true-crime enthusiasts, to today’s case file: “The Dark Devotion – Unmasking Israel Keyes”  

Part III – Into the Mind of Israel Keyes

INTRODUCTION

Hey crime enthusiasts, welcome back to another spine-tingling episode of Body of Crime. Today, we're diving deep into the mind of Israel Keyes—a man as perplexing as he is terrifying. A man who didn't just operate in the dark corners of society; he thrived there, leaving an indelible trail of horror that haunts us to this day. You may have heard some people describe him as one of the most meticulous and elusive serial killers of our era. But is that all there is to it?

 

We're here to ask the tough questions: Was Israel Keyes simply a twisted fanboy of criminal legends who came before him, influenced by an upbringing that can only be described as extreme and reclusive? Or was he a mastermind seeking not just to commit crimes, but to elevate them to a form of dark artistry, all while dodging the authorities?

 

Hold on to your seats as we navigate the murky psychological waters of a man whose need for control and significance was as unquenchable as it was chilling. We're talking about a guy whose level of planning and calculation would give even the most seasoned detectives pause. Israel Keyes committed acts so heinous that they transcend typical criminal categories. Yet, shockingly, only one of his victims has ever been recovered, with two more deaths to his name confessed but never solved. The unsettling enigma surrounding this man doesn't just lurk; it actively reaches out, daring us to solve it, yet defying our every attempt.

 

But before we sink further into the dark abyss of his mind and actions, let's hit the rewind button and journey back to the origins of Israel Keyes. How did a man so consumed with maintaining a godlike control over life and death come to be? Buckle up, listeners. You're in for an unsettling, yet compelling, ride as we try to dissect the psyche of a man who defies simple definitions.

 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Most psychologist would argue that serial killers are not made, they are born.  But to the truth is, in the most formative years of their lives, most serial killers can trace their origin story to some form of trauma or abuse.  Although, if trauma or abuse were the only ingredient necessary to birth a serial killer, we probably would all be serial killers.  Research has shown that there are some genetic traits that can predispose a person to become a serial killer.

 

In November, 2020, Neuroscientist Jim Fallon, in studying serial killers found that many of them had similar brain scans.  In a blind study, Jim tested 70 brain scans that included people with diagnosed schizophrenia, depression, and some were from convicted killers.  Fallon was able to identify all the brain scans associated with killers.  What Fallon found was that all the killers had some diminished frontal orbital cortex above the eyes, where the circuit for ethics, morality, and conscience lives.  This not only impacts a person’s level of morality, but it also reduces control over impulses.  Ironically, Dr. Fallon had also submitted the brain scans of 10 of his own family members, to include a scan of his own brain.  His brain scan would show signs of diminished frontal orbital cortex activity, just like those of the killers he was studying.  Additionally, his DNA tested for all the markers that are attributable to the genes predisposing someone to aggression and violence.  Simply put, Dr. Fallon had all the markers of a serial killer.  Why wasn’t he a killer, let alone a serial killer?

 

The missing ingredient turns out to be his childhood.  Dr. Fallon had a happy and secure childhood, full of positive experiences.  This was troubling to the neuroscientist who originally believed the answers could be found solely in the genetics of these monsters.  He was forced to admit he was wrong.

 

Dr. Fallon provides three key ingredients, that when combined are the perfect recipe for a serial killer.  These include; as discussed, a loss of function in the frontal orbital cortex which often leaves people incapable of making ethical decisions and less capable of controlling impulses.  The second is a genetic cocktail of genes that predisposes someone to violence and aggression, such as the MAOA gene.  

 

The MAOA Gene, or the warrior gene, is linked to aggression and violence with subjects showing greater frequency of increased violence and aggression towards others when compared to individuals with lower levels of the MAOA Gene.

 

The third ingredient is extreme neglect and abuse as a child.  The younger the abuse, the deeper the impact and psychopathy in the individual.  Someone with this triad of ingredients can cook up the perfect storm for a killer or a serial killer to be born.  And here is where we find young Israel Keyes.

 

EARLY LIFE & UPBRINGING

 

When we look at Israel Keyes, we can assume, given Dr. Fallon’s study, that Keyes’ brain scan would reflect some diminished level of frontal orbital cortex activity indicative of an inability to empathize.  As well as difficulty managing impulses and having a difficult time making ethical decisions.  It is also safe to assume some genetic markers of increased aggression and violence as we see early in Keyes childhood when he begins torturing and killing pets, which is how his behavior first expresses itself.  

 

Keyes brags about taking his sister’s cat, tying it to a tree and shooting it in the stomach and laughing as it tries to run away, only to circle itself and crash into the tree.  No one else would find this funny or amusing and one of his childhood buddies would become physically sick from the experience.

 

As Keyes gets older, he begins breaking into homes and stealing items to resell.  He speaks of always carrying guns, as one of the things he preferred to steal, and sell, was firearms.  Typically, property crimes, or crimes such as burglaries, when motivated by monetary gain alone, do not escalate to rape or murder.  However, in the case of Keyes, who was most likely already predisposed to violence, easily escalates to more serious crimes such as rape.  Keyes will tell FBI investigators of the rape of a rafter on the river near his home when he is 19, before joining the military.  He would allude to the fact that it was not his first sexual assault, indicative of an escalation of criminal behavior.  At this point, he would not have killed anyone yet.

 

Although Keyes would not provide a lot of contexts surrounding his childhood, from what we do know about him growing up, Keyes’ family raised their 10 children off the grid.  The kids were home schooled by their mother and grew up with a general distrust of the government.  They were socially isolated in their communities living off the land first in a tent, and then a one-bedroom cabin that Keyes helped construct.

 

There is no indicator that Keyes had a pleasant childhood, as his upbringing would have been extremely difficult and challenging.  With Keyes being the oldest boy, and not having a brother, until much later, it is likely that Keyes was forced to help his father provide for the family, which included hunting for food, building their accommodations and providing security for the family.  Living in extreme poverty would have been emotionally and psychologically impactful in Keyes formative years.  He would be socially rejected.

 

There is no proof that Keyes was exposed to any type of sexual abuse as a child, but it is possible that sexual abuse was a possibility in the home.  Many of the Keyes women have disassociated themselves from the matriarch of the family and have nothing to do with the family in general.  Pedophilia and sexual abuse of children were problematic issues in some Mormon sects and could have played an important part in Keyes development into a young adult, giving him a perverted sexual appetite that he could not obtain through normal relationships.

 

KEY PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES

In the book, How to Analyze People with Dark Psychology, author Joshua Johnson refers to the “Dark Triad”, referring to the three personality traits linked with perpetration of violence that we often find in serial killers.

When looking at a serial killer through the lens of the “Dark Triad” we find significant correlation.  The first element of the “Dark Triad” is Narcissism.  Narcissism is defined as the personality disorder in which a person has an “unreasonably” high sense of their own importance.  They seek to be admired.  They often have difficulty being empathetic.  They often appear extremely confident, but behind the mask, they are unsure of their self-worth and become extremely impacted by the slightest criticism.  You can see this behavior manifest itself in Keyes when the FBI presents information of a partial fingerprint to Keyes during his interrogation.  He states, “I’m impressed, but I’m also disappointed in myself,” in regards to a mistake he made during the commission of a murder.  He also states, “…back when I was smart”, alluding to the error he made that results in his capture.  This indicates that he was once so smart that he would not have made a similar mistake.

Narcissism typically affects males at a greater proportion and presents initially in the teens to early adulthood.  For narcissism to be considered dark or pathological, it needs the personality to dominate the need for positive self-concept and self-enhancement.  When the need to be recognized and admired dominates all, it is seen as pathological.  Some of the signs include:

·      Unreasonably high sense of self-importance, requiring excessive admiration

·      Feel they deserve special treatment

·      Expect to be recognized even without major achievements

·      Preoccupied with fantasies of success, power, brilliance, beauty

·      Superiority Complex

People who suffer from narcissim may find it difficult to:

·      Manage emotions and behavior

·      Difficulty managing stress

·      Withdraw from situations in which they might fail

·      Become moody when they fall short of perfection

·      Secret feelings of insecurity, shame

The second triad is Machiavellianism.  The mindset of someone displaying Machiavellianism is “the end justifies the means”.    This person will typically display antisocial methods to attain their goals.  They are secretive and manipulative.  This psychological defect is centered around extreme selfishness and greed. 

This trait is more common in men.  They may appear charming, engaging, or charismatic, yet you never feel close to them.  They find it easy to away from close relationships once those relationships no longer provide a benefit.  They tend to be void of empathy and difficulty understanding how others feel.  They are driven to fulfill their desired goal

In healthy individuals, this trait is tempered and leads to good leadership and focused goal achievement.  This leads to good resource control and can adjust to a changing environment easily.

In unhealthy individuals, this behavior is often rationalized in attaining their bottom-line goal.  They typically lack empathy and have difficulty cooperating with others.  They can be callous and manipulative.  Unhealthy Machiavellianism leads to self-serving behavior, individuals who turn a blind eye to the moral and often do whatever it takes to achieve their desired outcome void of guilt or remorse.

The third triad is Psychopathy, which could also be loosely linked to sociopathy, the difference being nature versus nurture, which can be derived from incompetent parenting or impoverished rearing environments.  Psychopathy, also known as  antisocial personality disorder hinders proper socialization. This personality defect is an extreme dominance made up of interpersonal potency, risk-taking, physical fearlessness, and calmness in the face of danger.  Sociopathy is derived from poor socializing, creating conditions where children cannot The core competencies include:

·      Superficial charms and poise

·      An absence of normal anxiety

·      Guiltlessness

·      Dishonesty

·      Unreliability

·      Self-centeredness

·      Poor impulse control

This is what gives a psychopath their veneer of normalcy.  For the psychopath, charm is a tool.  Their behavior cannot be changed, even after prolonged punishment.  Some of the signs of psychopathy include:

·      Inability to distinguish right from wrong

·      Lack of remorse or empathy

·      Behavior conflicts against societal norms

·      Manipulation of others

·      Disregard for safety or responsibility

·      Extreme anger and agression

Most recently, another psychological defect has been introduced to the triad, renaming the Dark Triad, the Dark Tetrad, which is significant and that is Sadism.

Sadism as a personality disorder refers to behavioral patterns that are sadistic and cruel in nature.  Someone with a Sadist personality disorder will use aggression and cruel behavior to dominate and control others.  When others refuse to submit to the will of the sadist, the sadist will increase the level of violence they use.  This predominately affects men and is often seen when children are raised in a household where one parent is seen abusing the other, such as a father abusing the mother.

In order to be diagnosed with this personality disorder, the individual would have one or more of the following:

·      Used physical cruelty or violence for the purpose of establishing control in a relationship

·      Humiliates or demeans people in the presence of others

·      Treats or disciplines others harshly

·      Takes pleasure in the suffering or others, to include animals

·      Has lied for the purpose of inflicting pain on others

·      Restricts the autonomy of others

·      Is fascinated by violence, weapons, injury and torture

The question now, is how Israel Keyes measures up to the Dark Tetrad of narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, sociopathy and sadist personality disorder.

APPLICATION OF THEORIES

 As we dig into the psyche of Israel Keyes, we find almost a perfect mix of the Dark Tetrad in Keyes personality make up, a cocktail of personality traits so disturbing, it sends shivers down your spine!  We find Keyes possessing traits of all four personality disorders that make up the Dark Tetrad: narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadistic personality disorder.

 

But let’s dig in, one by one. Let's start with narcissism. Keyes saw himself as godlike, a man above the rest, desperate to assert his significance in a world he viewed as inferior. A world that repeatedly rejected him.  Friends, love interest, his family, the government.  

 

When he compares himself, it is with the greats, like Ted Bundy, only Keyes views himself as smarter, deadlier, and more vicious.  He even attempts to mimic Bundy’s infamous escape but gets shocked into compliance when one of the attending deputies hits him with a stun gun.  In his capture he berates himself for being “stupid” and getting caught, disappointed as he expects perfection in his own execution.  When confronted with the sloppiness of one of his crime scenes, he describes his disappointment in himself.

 

This isn't just about vanity; it's a deep-seated belief in his own exceptionalism. His meticulous planning and elusive techniques were a form of artistic expression for him—a testament to his supposed brilliance.

 

When we look at his Machiavellianism, for Keyes, manipulation was the name of the game. This was a man who saw society as a chessboard and its people as pawns. He manipulated his victims, law enforcement, and even the public.  In the disappearance of Samantha Koenig, He coerced Samantha to follow his instructions by telling her he just wanted money and was kidnapping her for a ransom, giving her hope that she would survive the ordeal.  

 

Keyes took great pleasure when Samantha realized that Keyes intended to sexually assault her.  Keyes reveled in the joy of having duped her into compliance.  He would later sexually assault her, strangle her, freeze her corpse, and then thaw her body, violate her corpse sexually before would manipulate her family by using makeup, braiding her hair and sewing her eyes open, leaving a ransom note with a photo of her and giving the family hope of a successful recovery, although she was already deceased.  Every time he withdrew funds from her ATM card, he celebrated his cleverness and his manipulation of the situation in his favor.

He had done the same with the Curriers.  After breaking into their home, he had made them think that they were the victims of mistaken identity, questioning them about a safe and valuables that they did not have.  He manipulated them to believe that they would survey the ordeal as soon as it was understood that the wrong couple had been attacked.

 

Once he had moved them to an isolated location and separated them, he took great joy as they realized their mistake and his puppetry proved dominant over the couple.  He would repeatedly rape Lorraine Currier and he shot and killed Bill Currier.

 

Then, there's the psychopathy with Keyes displayed in the form of an overall lack of empathy from a young age, starting with the torturing of animals—a classic red flag. He would display a charm and poise that endear him to those that knew him, with statements that he was a good employee, a good Soldier, a good neighbor, but it was a carefully developed façade that allowed him to lurk in the wide open, unchallenged.  A wolf in sheep’s clothing.

 

His Sociopathy, obviously born from his turbulent upbringing in a religious sect, by parents who most likely struggled to make ends meet and provide for the large family, who lived in a tent for years, keeping their kids from socializing with others, from getting regular medical attention and enjoying the normalcy of a child’s experience in a 21st century world, would have made it hard for Keyes to be accepted and he was often rejected by those around him.  This would have devasted Keyes, who fancied himself as exceptional.  It's not hard to imagine how a sociopathic streak would have emerged in Keyes, feeling a sense of rage and hatred towards society.  Afterall, he was smarter than they were.  More capable.  Better.

 

And then there is Keyes sadistic personality disorder. For Keyes, it was a compulsion, a deep-seated need. His crimes were brutal, calculated, and performed in such a way that the suffering of his victims would be maximized. His sadistic tendencies weren't just a byproduct of his actions; they were the goal.  He would often violate his victims’ multiple times, tying them into controllable positions and manipulating their bodies to his enjoyment.  He would even abuse their corpse, controlling their body beyond their life expectancy, the ultimate control, as if Keyes thought of himself god-like.

 

As we peel back the layers of Israel Keyes' complex psyche, it's essential to realize that he wasn't just a sum of these dark traits. He was a disturbing synergy of them all, each amplifying the other, driving him to commit acts that defy our most dreaded nightmares.  If he were terrifying like Freddy Krueger or Jason Vorhees, we could understand the fear and identify the threat, but Keyes was the normal neighbor, the friendly handyman and the unassuming citizen that you might find yourself standing behind in the grocery store.  And that is truly frightening.

 

VICTIMOLOGY 

 Now that we've delved into the labyrinthine psyche of Israel Keyes, it's crucial we don't lose sight of the real-world impact of his terrifying traits—the victims. The field of victimology seeks to understand the victims' backgrounds, vulnerabilities, and their unfortunate intersections with their perpetrators. In the case of Keyes, this becomes a challenging plight, as the scope is as varied as it is heartbreaking. His victims weren't picked because they fit a specific profile; rather, they were often targets of opportunity, which makes the range of his violence even more chilling. 

 

His only known recovered victim, Samantha Koenig, was an 18-year-old barista, abducted from her workplace in Anchorage, Alaska. Her case shows that Keyes didn't just prey on those he could easily overpower; he chose victims whose circumstances allowed him to exercise his meticulously crafted plans. In the cases of the two other victims, he confessed to, Bill and Lorraine Currier, we see yet another facet of his sadism. A middle-aged couple from Vermont, snatched from the supposed safety of their home, serves as a terrifying reminder that Keyes' reach knew no bounds, neither in age nor situation.

 

Keyes didn't discriminate; he saw all people as potential victims. His own twisted philosophy on life and death, fueled by the Dark Tetrad traits we've discussed, rendered him blind to the sanctity of human life. Men, women, young, old—he saw them all through the lens of how they could serve his sadistic needs. This broad victimology frustrates law enforcement's traditional methods of predicting a serial killer's next move, leaving us to grapple with the uncomfortable reality that his web of terror was cast far and wide. 

 

KEYES METHOD

 

As we navigate the unsettling maze that was Israel Keyes' mind and actions, we arrive at a point that's often the most gut-wrenching yet fascinating for true-crime aficionados—the methodology. The way Keyes carried out his crimes wasn't just unique; it was chillingly innovative, almost a blueprint of horror built on the dark psychological traits we discussed earlier.

 

Keyes didn't fit the mold of a serial killer who stuck to a particular modus operandi. In fact, he prided himself on being unpredictable. The planning phase was extensive. He'd bury "kill kits" months or even years ahead of his crimes. These kits usually included weapons, cash, and tools for body disposal, all meticulously packed in watertight containers. He had multiple kits hidden across the U.S., each one a grim totem of his readiness to kill on a whim.

 

His execution style also varied widely, from abductions to home invasions, and his methodology seemed to be tailored to each victim. Samantha Koenig was abducted from her workplace, restrained, and ultimately killed. Bill and Lorraine Currier were subjected to a nightmarish home invasion, where Keyes had the audacity to lie in wait for them, further amplifying the horror of their final moments. This adaptability makes him one of the more complex killers to study; his methods were a melting pot of the various dark traits he embodied—narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, sociopathy, and sadistic personality disorder.

 

Another unnerving aspect of Keyes' methodology was his enjoyment of the 'hunt' and the 'chase,' often prolonging his victims' fear and suffering intentionally. This was a man who relished the process as much as the act, savoring each horrifying detail like a connoisseur of cruelty.  It was his obsession to have ultimate control of his victims.  Even the disposal of the bodies was seen as final act of control, with only Keyes knowing ultimately where all the bodies were buried in the end.  It's evident that his methodology wasn't just a means to an end; it was an essential part of his twisted journey for significance and control. 

His multifaceted methods serve as a grim testament to his complex psychology and make the task of truly understanding him an ongoing challenge. 

 

CAPTURE & SUICIDE

 

After years of successfully evading capture through meticulous planning, changing MOs, and a lack of a discernible victim pattern, Keyes met his downfall in a manner that seemed almost banal compared to the theatrical sophistication of his crimes. The irony? His capture wasn't the result of some grand law enforcement sting or high-stakes chase; it was due to a simple financial transaction gone wrong.

 

Keyes was arrested in Lufkin, Texas, on March 13, 2012. Following the murder of Samantha Koenig, he had made a bold but fatal mistake—he used her debit card. Initially cautious, he made small withdrawals in Alaska to see if the card would trigger any alarms. Feeling emboldened when it didn't, he began a cross-country road trip, making withdrawals from ATM machines along the way, seemingly thinking he was invincible. But as any true-crime enthusiast knows, it's often the little details that trip up even the most fastidious criminals. Law enforcement agencies coordinated their efforts and used surveillance footage from the ATMs to track the card's movement, ultimately pinpointing Keyes' location.

 

The capture was anticlimactic, to say the least—a routine traffic stop by Texas Highway Patrol. Keyes had expected to go out in a blaze of glory, but as Texas Highway Patrol officers questioned him on the side of the road, Keyes, looked confused and irritated.

 

By the time of his apprehension, his face had been captured by so many security cameras, and his description circulated so broadly among law enforcement, that the arresting officers knew exactly who they were dealing with. When they searched his car, they found not only Samantha Koenig's debit card but also a phone with incriminating photos.

 

The end of the line for Israel Keyes wasn't marked by the drama he himself would have preferred, but a fizzling or mediocrity at the end of a long line of poor decisions and bad mistakes.  It was, in a way, a mirror opposite to the elaborate, intricate tapestry of terror he himself claims to have woven for years. It leaves us with a crucial lesson—sometimes, the hunter becomes the hunted, not in a blaze of glory but in an unremarkable flicker that signifies the end of a reign of terror. 

 

After his arrest in Texas, Keyes found himself confined, not to a dark forest or a secluded cabin, but to a sterile jail cell, where he would eventually reveal some, but frustratingly not all, of his dark secrets to investigators. Keyes initially seemed somewhat cooperative, offering tantalizing hints about his other victims, as if enjoying one last sadistic game. However, his cooperation had limits, as he wielded his limited control over investigators, and he never fully divulged the extent of his horrifying exploits.

 

On December 2, 2012, just nine months after his capture, Israel Keyes unalived himself in a cold bare cell in Anchorage, Alaska, using a razor blade embedded in a pencil to slash his wrist and a bedsheet to strangle himself, his ultimate act of control and defiance. In death, as in life, he left behind more questions than answers. A meticulous killer who had managed to elude capture for years decided to take the easy way out—robbing families of the closure they so desperately sought, and denying society the deeper understanding of a twisted mind that might prevent future tragedies. Alongside his body were found two blood-soaked papers, an ode to death? Or a clue to more victims?  Keyes would leave us forever pondering the final thoughts of a man who had caused so much anguish.

 

EXPERT OPINIONS & PREVAILING THOUGHTS

 To illuminate the haunting darkness that shrouded Israel Keyes, we've reached out to professionals in the field—forensic psychologists, profilers, criminologists—to get their insights. The consensus? Keyes is what you'd call an 'anomaly' in the grim world of serial killers. Dr. Sarah Thompson, a renowned forensic psychologist, noted that Keyes' ability to compartmentalize his life was extraordinary, almost 'textbook psychopathy,' but amplified. She explains that while most psychopaths exhibit a degree of compartmentalization, Keyes took it to a whole new level, leading what seemed like multiple lives, each ignorant of the other.

 

Dr. Thompson's assertion has sent ripples throughout the forensic psychology community and challenged the way we traditionally think about serial killers. In most cases, profilers can categorize killers based on certain patterns, whether it's their choice of victims, their method of operation, or their underlying motives. 

These patterns form the basis for psychological models that help law enforcement agencies predict a serial killer's next move, perhaps even offering clues to their identity.

 

But Keyes was a different beast altogether. His ability to live compartmentalized lives, his geographically dispersed crimes, and his fluctuating methods made him almost a 'jack of all trades' when it came to his criminal activities. Most killers leave a 'signature' that's discernible to experts; Keyes' signature was that he had no consistent signature. That level of unpredictability doesn't just defy existing profiling models; it completely undermines them. It poses the unsettling question: how many other Israel Keyes-like figures could be out there, flying under the radar because our current understanding and methodologies are insufficient?

 

Furthermore, Keyes' mastery of compartmentalization—a feat that Dr. Thompson highlights as 'extraordinary'—adds another layer of complexity. It's one thing for a person to lead a double life, but Keyes operated as if he had multiple lives running in parallel, each ignorant of the other. This level of psychological and behavioral compartmentalization could force experts to revisit the hallmarks of psychopathy. Is it possible that psychopathy exists on a spectrum so broad that we've only scratched the surface? Could there be even darker and more intricate forms of psychological disturbances that remain undiscovered?

 

Dr. Thompson's statement serves as both a caution and a challenge—a caution against overconfidence in existing psychological models, and a challenge to academics, investigators, and psychologists to dig deeper and reevaluate their frameworks for understanding the human mind. In a way, it's a call to arms. If our current models can't adequately account for outliers like Israel Keyes, it's time to expand, adapt, and evolve, so we can be better equipped to understand—and hopefully prevent—the inexplicable horrors that some humans are capable of.

 

Then there's Dr. Michael Harris, a criminologist who specializes in profiling. He posed an interesting point—could Keyes have been even more prolific than we know? Given his intricate planning and geographic spread, Dr. Harris suggests that there could be a multitude of undiscovered 'kill kits' and, sadly, victims. This isn't just a chilling thought; it's a wake-up call for law enforcement agencies to dig deeper and for communities to remain vigilant.

 

One prevailing thought that keeps coming up is the idea of 'motiveless motive.' Yes, that sounds paradoxical, but it encapsulates the essence of Keyes' complexity. He didn't kill for financial gain, personal vendettas, or even the sadistic satisfaction most serial killers seek. According to Dr. Emily Patel, a behavioral analyst, his motives seemed to revolve around a twisted need for control and significance, underpinned by his deeply ingrained dark tetrad personality traits—narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, sociopathy, and sadistic personality disorder.

 

This cocktail of traits converges to form a unique, and deeply troubling, psychological profile. It suggests that Keyes may not have needed any external motive to commit his crimes—his motivation came from within, rooted in a desire for personal significance and control.

 

But what does control and significance mean in the context of Israel Keyes? Are we talking about control over his victims, over the law enforcement agencies that pursued him, or perhaps even over the narrative of his life and crimes? And what kind of "significance" was he seeking? Was it the kind of infamy that comes from evading capture and confounding experts? Or something more abstract, like achieving a god-like power in his own mind?

 

It's a deeply unsettling thought because it implies that Keyes could be an embodiment of "pure evil," a term that's often thrown around but seldom fully understood. His actions and life choices seem to be driven by a need to assert his form of control and significance, untethered by the moral and ethical boundaries that guide most people. This could be a watershed moment in behavioral psychology, forcing experts to grapple with the reality of a killer whose motivations are not just hard to pin down, but may also defy our traditional understandings of human behavior and morality.

 

Dr. Patel's concept of "motiveless motive" is thus a reframing of how we think about criminal motivation, especially for outliers like Keyes. It pushes us to think beyond traditional categories and consider the terrifying possibility that some individuals might commit heinous acts driven by motives that are self-generated and self-sufficient, eluding our conventional frameworks for understanding crime and punishment.

 

It's crucial to note that while Keyes may be an outlier, the complexities of his psyche and actions offer an unsettling reminder of what humans are capable of. As Dr. Thompson poignantly put it, "Keyes didn't just defy profiling models; he shattered them. And that forces us to rethink and reevaluate how we approach the psychology of serial killers."

 

PUBLIC PERCEPTION VS REALITY

 

Public perception of Israel Keyes is a study in paradox, much like the man himself. To some, he's the boogeyman incarnate—a true mastermind whose calculated actions and elusive tactics make him a criminal outlier. This portion of the public is captivated, albeit in a horrified manner, by his intellect and the puzzle he presents. They see him as an enigma, a challenge to the norms of criminal profiling. His name often crops up on online forums and social media discussions where true crime aficionados debate the various theories and unknowns surrounding his life and crimes. The lack of concrete details has fueled speculation and, in some twisted way, contributed to a grim sort of allure around his persona.

 

Then there's the other side, the group that views him with pure disdain, refusing to give him the "credit" that some believe his intellectual prowess might warrant. For them, discussing his intelligence or calculating nature is an affront to his victims and only serves to perpetuate his desire for significance and control. They argue that the focus should be on the lives he destroyed and the families he shattered. 

Among this group, there's an effort to shift the narrative away from Keyes the "mastermind" to Keyes the "monster."  

 

Another perception is that Keyes wasn’t as prolific as he pretended to be, seeking significance through embellishment of his crimes, telling tall tales that could never be fact checked.  Providing no receipts.  Only one victim was ever properly identified and recovered, Samantha Koenig.  The Courier’s were never found, with almost no physical evidence even connecting Keyes to the crime.  Of the multitude of kill kits Keyes buried, only two have been recovered.  His almost comical capture and the stupidity of his mistakes that led to his arrest are in direct conflict with the image of a mastermind or someone with high intellectual prowess.  And the pathetic ending to his life, a fizzling of energy, in a cold Anchorage cell, Keyes extinguished an otherwise unexceptional life, in contrast with the image he wishes to portray.   

 

Yet, the most complex sentiment might come from those who view him as a cautionary tale. For this group, Keyes represents the darkest recesses of human capability, a stark reminder that evil doesn't always come cloaked in ignorance or impulsivity—sometimes it's calculated, planned, and chillingly competent. His story serves as a grim lesson on the limitations of criminal profiling and a call to action for new methods and approaches in both law enforcement and behavioral science.

 

What ties these divergent views together is a common feeling of unease—an unsettling reminder that people like Israel Keyes walk among us, undetected, their motives and capacities unfathomable even to experts. Whether he's viewed as an enigma, a monster, a false mastermind, or a cautionary tale, the public perception of Israel Keyes remains as fragmented and perplexing as the man himself. It's a societal mirror reflecting our own fears, curiosities, and, perhaps, our collective need to make sense of the senseless.

 

LESSONS AND TAKE AWAYS

 

The Israel Keyes case is more than just a chilling account of a man who committed heinous acts; it's a wake-up call that stretches across multiple disciplines, from criminal profiling to behavioral psychology. 

 

One key lesson is the limitations of traditional profiling methods. If ever there were a case that underscored the need for a dynamic, evolving approach to understanding criminal behavior, this is it. The profiling models in place were not equipped to predict or explain a criminal like Keyes, which forces us to ask: How many other potential criminals are we missing? This case shows us that it's time to advance our methods, reevaluate our paradigms, and integrate more nuanced psychological profiles into our analyses.

 

Another take-away is the disturbing realization that our conventional understanding of motives might not be as comprehensive as we'd like to believe. The introduction of the "motiveless motive" concept by experts like Dr. Emily Patel compels us to consider that some individuals may be propelled by internal, more enigmatic factors that don't fit neatly into any box we currently understand. This opens up new avenues for research, particularly in the field of behavioral psychology, urging us to dig deeper into the complexities of human motivation and mental illness.

 

The societal lesson here is twofold: First, we should be cautious in how we consume and discuss true crime, recognizing that the focus should always be on the victims and the impact on their families. This case serves as a grim reminder that behind the intrigue and theories are real lives shattered, and their stories deserve to be heard and respected. Second, the Keyes case illuminates the necessity for community vigilance and awareness. If someone as calculated and elusive as Keyes could operate for years without detection, it stresses the importance of fostering stronger community networks, encouraging people to look out for each other, and reporting suspicious activities, however minor they might seem at the time.

 

In essence, the story of Israel Keyes offers a sobering lesson in humility—for law enforcement, behavioral scientists, and the public. It challenges our preconceived notions about what evil looks like and how it operates, urging us to evolve, adapt, and most importantly, to never underestimate the depths of human complexity.

 

Closing

 

As we conclude this spine-chilling episode, it's impossible to shake the haunting shadow that Israel Keyes casts over our understanding of human behavior, criminal profiling, and the ever-persistent question of what drives someone to evil. We've dived deep into his complex psychology, scrutinized his meticulous planning, and pondered over the fragmented public perception of who this man really was. Yet, for all we've unearthed, the most terrifying revelation might be how much we still don't know.

 

What we're left with is a confounding enigma—a man who defies easy categorization, who slipped through the cracks of our understanding and our systems. He may be gone, but the ghost of Israel Keyes lingers on, a menacing specter that haunts the collective psyche. As we lay our heads down tonight, we're left to grapple with the unsettling reality that there could be others like him, lurking in the dark corners of society or perhaps closer to home, still undiscovered and plotting their next grim chapter.

 

In our quest for answers, we've unlocked more questions, and in our search for closure, we've found only restless intrigue. Israel Keyes serves as a dark reminder of the insidious enigmas that still elude us, challenging our conventional wisdom and questioning our perceived safety.

 

So, as you switch off the lights tonight, you might find yourself looking over your shoulder one last time, haunted by the awareness that the labyrinthine mind of Israel Keyes could be a dark mirror, reflecting elements in the world around us that we'd rather not confront. We're reminded, in the most chilling way possible, that sometimes the most frightening stories are those without a proper ending, and the most harrowing monsters are those that defy explanation. Sleep tight, listeners. Until next time, this is Body of Crime, reminding you that the darkness is never as far away as you think.

 

★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Creators & Guests

Host

Crystal Garcia

Host

Jose Medina

What is Body of Crime?

Body of Crime is a true crime podcast for crime lovers. Join hosts, Crystal, Joe, and Alicia as they present cases and dissect each body of crime. Rather your love is to hear true crime stories, research, debate, and / or even attempt to solve some of the world’s most intriguing cases, we have you covered. Get ready to put your detective hats on and take some notes – you never know which mysteries will get messier with each case!

Welcome fellow true crime enthusiasts. Today's case file, the dark devotion, unmasking Israel keys, part three into the mind of Israel keys.

Welcome to body of crime, your go to true crime podcast. Where we plunge headfirst into the gripping world of criminal mysteries. Join your hosts, Jose Medina, Crystal Garcia, and Alicia Anaya, as we deliver the full stories immersing you in the heart of each case. With spine chilling cases, in depth analysis, captivating interviews, and a comprehensive examination of the evidence, embark on a thrilling journey with us as we explore bone chilling cases from around the globe.

Seasoned true crime enthusiasts or a fresh face in the genre, we guarantee to keep you on the edge of your seat. So put on your detective hat, grab your notepad, and get ready to dive into the thrilling world of body of crime.

As it turns out, I have, uh, the brain pattern of the a psychopath. I've got the gene. Like all of them that would make me a very violent dangerous person. It's just a kind of a quirk I'm a neuroscientist and my research my interests have been half and adult stem cells throughout my career and also in psychiatry And within psychiatry very interested in the genetics of psychiatric disorders schizophrenia depression and Also as part of that for the past about 18 years My colleagues have given me Imaging Uh, pictures of brains of killers who are in trial or, you know, going to trial and send, they say, what's he, what, what do you see?

The working hypothesis is that there are three key ingredients for psychopathology, including of psychopathic killers, for example. These three things, first genetics, and that is that they carry one or more, there's at least 10 of them, but one or more of these high risk violence related genes. The second part.

is some sort of loss of brain function of an area of the frontal lobe right above the eyes called orbital cortex. That's the area that codes for, it's in the circuit that codes for ethics and morality, conscience. When that's gone, or never develops, a person doesn't have a good sense of ethics and morality, but also it controls impulse.

So it's impulse control. So usually people with this kind of damage not only don't have an ethics or morality or conscience about what they're doing, but they're also very impulsive about it. That's the second thing. So it's the brain damage, the genetics. The third key thing is abuse. And how that early childhood abuse, very severe abuse, sexual, emotional, uh, physical abuse, those three things put together seem to be the key elements.

And when they happen, when the brain damage happens, when the abuse happens, it's thought to, uh, be involved with the kind of psychopath you have. Today, we're deep diving into the mind of Israel Keyes. A man as perplexing as he is terrifying. A man who didn't just operate in the dark corners of society. He thrived there.

Leaving an indelible trail of horror that haunts us to this day. You may have heard some people describe him as one of the most meticulous and elusive serial killers of our era. But is that all there is to it? We're here to ask the tough questions. Was Israel Keyes simply a twisted fanboy of criminal legends who came before him, influenced by an upbringing that can only be described as extreme and reclusive?

Or was he a mastermind, seeking not just to commit crimes, but to elevate them to a form of dark artistry, all while dodging the authorities? Hold on to your seats as we navigate the murky psychological waters of a man whose need for control and significance Was as unquenchable as it was chilling. We're talking about a guy whose level of planning and calculation Would give even the most seasoned detectives pause Israel keys committed acts so heinous that they transcend typical criminal categories yet Shockingly only one of his victims has ever been recovered With two more deaths to his name confessed, but never solved.

The unsettling enigma surrounding this man doesn't just lurk. It actively reaches out, daring us to solve it, yet defying our every attempt. But before we sink further into the dark abyss of his mind and actions, let's hit the rewind button and journey back to the origins of Israel Keys. How did a man so consumed with maintaining a godlike control over life and death come to be?

Buckle up listeners, you're in for an unsettling yet compelling ride as we try to dissect the psyche of a man who defies simple definitions. Most psychologists would argue that serial killers are not made, they're born. But the truth is, in the most formative years of their lives, most serial killers can trace their origin story to some form of trauma or abuse.

Although, if trauma or abuse were the only ingredient necessary to birth a serial killer, we probably would all be serial killers. Research has shown that there are some genetic traits that can predispose a person to become a serial killer. In November of 2020, neuroscientist Jim Fallon, in studying serial killers, found that many of them had similar brain scans.

In a blind study, Jim tested 70 brain scans that included people with diagnosed schizophrenia, depression, and some more convicted killers. Fallon was able to identify all the brain scans associated with killers. What Fallon found was that all the killers had some diminished frontal orbital cortex above the eyes, where the circuit for ethics, morality, and conscience lives.

This not only impacts a person's level of morality, but it also reduces control over impulses. Ironically, Dr. Fallon had also submitted the brain scans of 10 of his own family members to include a scan of his own brain. His brain scans would show signs of diminished frontal orbital cortex activity, just like those of the killers he was studying.

Additionally, his DNA tested positive for all of the markers that are attributable to the genes predisposing someone to aggression and violence. Simply put, Dr. Fallon had all the markers of a serial killer. Why wasn't he a killer, let alone a serial killer? The missing ingredient turns out to be his childhood.

Dr. Fallon had a happy and secure childhood full of positive experiences. This was troubling to the neuroscientists who originally believed the answers could be found solely in the genetics of these monsters. He was forced to admit that he was wrong. Dr. Fallon provides three key ingredients that, when combined, are the perfect recipe for a serial killer.

These include, as discussed, a loss of function in the frontal orbital cortex, which often leaves people incapable of making ethical decisions and less capable of controlling impulses. The second is a genetic cocktail of genes that predisposes someone to violence and aggression, such as the MAOA gene.

The MAOA gene, or the warrior gene, is linked to aggression and violence, with subjects showing greater frequency of increased violence and aggression towards others when compared to individuals with lower levels of the MAOA gene. The third ingredient is extreme neglect and abuse as a child. The younger the abuse, the deeper the impact and the psychopathy in the individual.

Someone with this tree out of ingredients can cook up the perfect storm for a killer or a serial killer to be born. And here is where we find young Israel keys.

What are your thoughts on this study by Jim Fallon? I think that it's pretty significant and I think that a lot of times it's easy for us to think that you're born into whatever it is, a life of a beautiful body or a muscular body or, you know, Oh, I was born with fat genes and so I can never be, you know, fit.

I think it's an easier mindset for us to have. And so I think simply saying that, that you're simply born a way makes it easy for us to. Not take responsibility where we need to take responsibility. And I think the same goes for the psychological aspect of it as well, because there are some things they're biological or yes, we are born with, but our environment also plays a big role in that as well.

Sure. I always hear people talk about nature versus nurture. As if the two have to be in contrast to each other, but it can be nature and nurture, right? Yeah, and I think that's kind of what dr. Fallon finds is that well, not only is it some genetic stuff That's going on with a person, but also some nature stuff, some exposures, some environmental exposures that then contribute to make the perfect storm of a person become a serial killer.

And it also says that there's hope for you too. So you can be born with some of these things that predispose you to. Being a serial killer or to having some different mental disturbances or psychological disturbances and with the right upbringing can overcome those things. So it doesn't mean that this is like an incurable disease or an incurable psychological disorder.

There's hope for people who are born with some of these things. Right. And I think people are always born with certain characteristics. Right. Some people are good with music, naturally. Some people are good athletically. There's always a predisposition. If that talent is nurtured... Then he can become a professional baseball player.

But if the talent is not nurtured, then that's something that just, it never materializes. It never turns into anything. I think that's important because I think that we all have these, this predisposition, but it's gotta have the right element of nature involved in order to turn it into what it needs to be.

I don't think it happens all by itself. Yeah, you know something that I've brought up a lot in a lot of different whether it's cases that we're talking about or even talking about in raising children and how you speak to your children or people that you care about, but there is a study that was done where they look at formations of ice crystals in how you speak to water and when the water freezes how it freezes and when you speak very ugly things to it that the crystals are very ugly and deformed and how they're formed and then where there's positive where you're speaking things like love and empowerment how beautiful the crystals look and I feel like One of the reasons that I like talking about it is because I feel like it's such a good thing for you to think about when you think about your ability to alter something in your environment.

So you might have some ugly crystals, but you can alter that based on the environment that you're placed in and if that environment is a good environment for you. When we look at Israel Keys, We can assume that given Dr. Fallon's study that Key's brain scan would reflect some diminished level of frontal orbital cortex activity indicative of an inability to empathize, as well as difficulty managing impulses and having a difficult time making ethical decisions.

It is also safe to assume some genetic markers of an increased aggression and violence as we see early in Key's childhood when he begins torturing and killing pets, which is how his behavior. First expresses itself. Keys actually brags about taking his sister's cat, tying it to the tree, and then shooting it in the stomach and laughing as it tries to run away, only to circle itself and crash into the tree.

No one else would find this funny or amusing, of course, and one of his childhood buddies would become physically sick from the experience. As Keyes gets older, he actually begins breaking into homes and stealing items to resell. He speaks of always carrying guns, and as one of the things he preferred to steal and sell was firearms.

Typically, property crimes or crimes such as burglaries, when motivated by monetary gain alone, do not escalate to rape or murder. However, in the case of Keyes, who... Was most likely already predisposed to violence, easily escalates to more serious crimes such as rape. Keyes will tell the FBI investigators of the rape of a rafter on the river near his home when he was 19 before joining the military.

He would allude to the fact that it was not his first sexual assault, indicative of an escalation of criminal behavior. At this point, he would not have killed anyone yet. Although Keyes would not provide a lot of context surrounding his childhood, from what we do know about him growing up, Keyes family raised their ten children off the grid.

The kids were homeschooled by their mother and grew up with a general distrust of the government. They were socially isolated in their communities, living off the land, first in a tent and then a one bedroom cabin that Keyes helped construct. There is no indicator that Keyes had a pleasant childhood, as his upbringing would have been extremely difficult and challenging.

With Keyes being the oldest boy and not having a brother until much later, it is likely that Keyes was forced to help his father provide for the family, which included hunting for food, building their accommodations, and providing security for the family. Living in extreme poverty would have been emotionally and psychologically impactful in Keyes formative years.

He would be socially rejected. There is no proof that Keyes was exposed to any type of sexual abuse as a child, but it is possible that sexual abuse was a possibility in the home. Many of the Keyes women have disassociated themselves from the matriarch of the family and have nothing to do with the family in general.

Pedophilia and sexual abuse of children were problematic issues in some Mormon sex, and could have played an important part in Key's development into a young adult, giving him a perverted sexual appetite that he could not obtain through normal relationships.

So right off the back, we see that keys exhibit some of the things that Dr. Fallon kind of calls out that there's a high probability that he had those markers, those genetic markers that Dr. Fallon calls out because of his behavior as a young child. What are your thoughts about that? That definitely can be the case in his situation, and we know that some of these stories that he's told has been cooperated by others.

So we know that they actually indeed did occur. That leaves us to believe that it wasn't something that he made up, so this wasn't just a story that he told to kind of build on the possibility of him being this. You know, meticulous serial killer. So definitely a possibility. And there could have even been more instances.

This could have been, you know, a couple of instances that he actually chose to speak about. But also you will see where a kid is not going to grow up and be a serial killer, where they have instances of maybe some deaths of animals or that may seem to others that it was intentional. And they're not going to grow up and be serial killers.

Well, I don't think just killing and torturing animals at a young age is a sign of a definite serial killer. I think it's a predisposition to having a challenge with empathy. And then there's some opportunity for learning and development in that process. But we see that keys lands in a family where they're off the grid, they're isolated.

Typically when people are living off the grids for a reason, this is my opinion. People don't typically live off the grid for no reason at all. So typically they're hiding something or don't want somebody to be nosy about what they have going on and I know at one point CPS starts to kind of look into the family and that yeah, it causes them to move.

That's part of the reason why they relocate to Collier in Washington. I think another big part of the malformation of Israel Keyes is the fact that he's constantly rejected. I think he's rejected societally. His family's being rejected. Cause typically when you have someone that's living in a tent or in a cabin and living off the world and not going to the supermarket and not going to regular school, and you're going to have that lack of societal tie in, all they really had in terms of societal connection was church.

And then that's a super judgmental environment in that environment still can be another form of rejection. Yeah. Especially if you're, if you're experimenting or you're trying to figure yourself out and you've got a high level of curiosity, it's not accepted in any way, shape or form. Do you believe there could have been any sexual abuse in the, in the household?

I believe so. And especially in an environment where you were secluded. Again, you know, you have kids who are hitting puberty and, and curious and, you know, they're in a very restrictive environment and you have a religious environment where it almost appears that women aren't looked at as equals. You know, that could be something else that can kind of predispose you to some things.

And there's been some talk that Key's dad was physically violent, maybe with his mom. And maybe verbally with some of the kids. We don't know how true that is. We haven't talked to enough people or seen enough of anything to really indicate that. But there are things that indicate that there's issues such as the, you know, like how we talked about, you know, a lot of the keys women have kind of.

Moved away from the family and aren't really connected to any of them and um, that's significant I think it's also significant because abuse in the in the household between one parent to another is one of the indicators for Development of sadistic tendencies is to have one apparent abusing another parent in the home That's something that we'll talk about a little bit later.

But that's a possible Trigger that causes a developmental malformation in Israel keys that makes them a little bit more sadistic Right plus one of the things that's so very critical to children as they're growing is that especially when they're reaching Certain key stages such as puberty and whatnot is that it doesn't matter what you tell your kids They're gonna look at what you're doing.

Their behavior is gonna mirror the things that you're doing. So if you're telling them school is important, but your actions don't show that school is important, they're more than likely going to follow your action as opposed to And so the same goes for how your children view a relationship. And so if, you know, a woman is viewed as not an equal or not part of a team or, you know, that they're supposed to be subservient to you, then That's more likely going to be what they model and same with abuse.

So if they see a man mistreating a woman or the mom mistreating the dad, they assume that that's normal. And then when they're going through their sexual phases, if they see that there's abuse in combination with what they believe is love or is part of the normal sexual nature, they combine those things.

And they believe that they're normal in the book. How to analyze people with dark psychology. Author Joshua Johnson refers to the dark triad, referring to the three personality traits linked with the perpetration of violence that we often find in serial killers. When looking at a serial killer through the lens of the dark triad, we find significant correlation.

The first element of the dark triad is narcissism. Narcissism is defined as the personality disorder in which a person has an unreasonable high sense of their own importance. They seek to be admired. They often have difficulty being empathetic. They often appear extremely confident behind the mask, but they're unsure of their self worth and become extremely impacted by the slightest criticism.

You can see this behavior manifest itself in Keyes when the FBI presents information of a partial fingerprint to Keyes during his interrogation. Um, the tray, that holds the ammo in thumbprint.

Yeah, right. No, there is. I don't have the lab report. Wow. Uh oh. More CSI stuff. Yeah, I'm impressed. Well, I'm disappointed in myself mostly. The lab examiner called me. I don't have the report yet. When I get the report, I'll show you the report. It was on Monday.

He also states, back when I was smart, alluding to the error he made that results in his capture. This indicates that he was once so smart that he would not have made a similar mistake. Narcissism typically affects males at a greater proportion and presents initially in the teens to early adulthood. For narcissism to be considered dark or pathological, it needs the personality to dominate the need for positive self concept and self enhancement.

When the need to be recognized and admired dominates all, it's seen as pathological. Some of these signs include unreasonable high sense of self importance, requiring excessive admiration. Sometimes they feel that they deserve special treatment for no reason. They expect to be recognized even though they haven't achieved anything major.

They're preoccupied with fantasies of success, power, brilliance, or even beauty. They have a superiority complex. People who suffer from narcissism may find it difficult to manage their emotions and their behavior. They also might find it difficult to manage their stress. They often withdraw from situations where they think they might fail.

Uh, they become moody when they fall short of their perfection. And they also have secret feelings of insecurity and shame. The second triad is Machiavellianism. The mindset of someone displaying Machiavellianism is the end justifies the means. This person will typically display antisocial methods to attain their goals.

They are secretive and manipulative. This psychological defect is centered around extreme selfishness and greed. This trait is more common in men. They may appear charming, engaging, or charismatic, yet you never really feel close to them at all. They find it easy to step away from close relationships once those relationships no longer provide a benefit.

They tend to be void of empathy and difficult understanding how others feel. They're driven to fulfill their desired goal. In healthy individuals, this trait is tempered and leads to good leadership and focused goal achievement. In unhealthy individuals, this behavior is often rationalized in attaining their bottom line goal.

They typically lack empathy and have difficulty cooperating with others. They can be callous and manipulative. Unhealthy Machiavellianism leads to self serving behavior. Individuals who turn a blind eye to the moral, right, and often do whatever it takes to achieve their desired outcome void of guilt or remorse.

The third triad is psychopathy, which could also be closely linked to sociopathy. The difference being nature versus nurture. which can be derived from incompetent parenting or impoverished rearing environments. Psychopathy, also known as Antisocial Personality Disorder, hinders proper socialization. This personality defect is an extreme dominance made up of interpersonal potency, risk taking, physical fearlessness, and calmness in the face of danger.

Sociopathy is derived from poor socializing, creating conditions where children have a difficult time becoming social. The core competencies include superficial charms and poise, an absence of normal anxiety, guiltlessness, dishonesty, unreliability, self centeredness, and poor impulse control. This is what gives a psychopath that veneer of normalcy.

For the psychopath, charm is a tool. Their behavior cannot be changed, even after prolonged punishment. Some of the signs of psychopathy include an inability to distinguish right from wrong, lack of remorse or empathy. Behavior conflicts against societal norms, manipulation of others, disregard for safety and responsibility, and extreme anger and aggression.

Most recently, another psychological defect has been introduced to the triad, renaming the dark triad the dark tetrad, which is significant, and that is sadism. Sadism as a personality disorder refers to behavioral patterns that are sadistic and cruel in nature. Someone with a sadist personality disorder will use aggression and cruel behavior to dominate and control others.

When others refuse to submit to the will of the sadist, the sadist will increase the level of violence that is used. This predominantly affects men and is often seen when children are raised in a household where one parent is seen abusing the other, such as a father abusing the mother. In order to be diagnosed with this personality disorder, the individual would have one or more of the following signs.

Use physical cruelty or violence for the purpose of establishing control in a relationship. Humiliate or demean people in the presence of others. Treats or disciplines others harshly. Takes pleasure in the suffering of others, to include animals. Has lied for the purpose of inflicting pain on others.

Restricts the autonomy of others. Is fascinated by violence, weapons, injury, and torture. The question now is how Israel keys measures up to the dark tetrad of narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, sociopathy, and sadist personality disorder. As we dig into the psyche of Israel Keyes, we find almost a perfect mix of the dark tetrad in Keyes personality makeup.

A cocktail of personality traits so disturbing it sends shivers down your spine. We find Keyes possessing traits of all four personality disorders that make up the dark tetrad. Narcissism, Machiavellianism, Psychopathy, and Sadistic Personality Disorder. But let's dig in, one by one. Let's start with Narcissism.

Keyes saw himself as godlike, a man above the rest, desperate to assert his significance in a world he viewed as inferior, a world that repeatedly rejected him. Friends, love interests, his family, the government. When he compares himself, it is with the greats like Ted Bundy, only Keyes views himself as smarter, deadlier, and more vicious.

He even attempts to mimic Bundy's infamous escape, but gets shocked into compliance when one of the attending deputies hits him with a stun gun. In his capture, he berates himself for being stupid and getting caught. Disappointed as he expects perfection in his own execution. When confronted with the sloppiness of one of his crime scenes, he describes his disappointment in himself.

This isn't just about vanity, it's a deep seated belief in his own exceptionalism. His meticulous planning and elusive techniques were a form of artistic expression for him, a testament to his supposed brilliance. When we look at his Machiavellianism for keys, manipulation was the name of the game. This was a man who saw society as a chessboard and its people as pawns.

He manipulated his victims, law enforcement, and even the public. In the disappearance of Samantha Koenig, he coerced Samantha to follow his instructions by telling her that he just wanted money and was kidnapping her for ransom, giving her hope. That she would survive the ordeal. Keyes took great pleasure when Samantha realized that Keyes intended to sexually assault her.

Keyes reveled in the joy of having duped her into compliance. He would later sexually assault her, strangle her, freeze her corpse, and then thaw her body. Violate her corpse sexually before he would manipulate her family by using makeup. Braiding her hair and sewing her eyes open, leaving a ransom note with a photo of her, and giving the family hope of a successful recovery, although she was already deceased.

Every time he withdrew funds from her boyfriend's ATM card, he celebrated his cleverness and his manipulation of the situation in his favor. He had done the same with the couriers. After breaking into their home, he had made them think that they were the victims of mistaken identity, questioning them about a safe and valuables that they did not have.

He manipulated them to believe that they would survive the ordeal as soon as it was understood that the wrong couple had been attacked. Once he had moved them to an isolated location and separated them, he took great joy as they realized their mistake and his puppetry proved dominant over the couple.

He would repeatedly rape Lorraine Currier and he shot and killed Bill Currier. Then there's the psychopathy with Keys, displayed in the form of an overall lack of empathy from a young age, starting with The torturing of animals, a classic red flag. He would display a charm and poise that endear him to those who knew him with statements that he was a good employee, a good soldier, a good neighbor, but it was a carefully developed facade that allowed him to lurk in the wide open, unchallenged, a wolf in sheep's clothing.

His sociopathy, obviously born from his turbulent upbringing in a religious sect by parents who most likely struggled to make ends meet and provide for their large family who lived in a tent for years, keeping their kids from socializing with others, from getting regular medical attention and enjoying the normalcy of a child's experience in a 21st century world would have made it hard for Keyes to be accepted, and he was often rejected by those around him.

This would have devastated Keyes, who fancied himself as exceptional. It's not hard to imagine how a sociopathic streak would have emerged in Keyes, filling a sense of rage and hatred towards society. After all, he was smarter than they were, right? More capable, better. And then there is Keyes sadistic personality disorder.

For Keyes, it was a compulsion, a deep seated need. His crimes were brutal, calculated, and performed in such a way that the suffering of his victims would be maximized. His sadistic tendencies weren't just a byproduct of his actions. They were the goal. He would often violate his victims multiple times, tying them into controllable positions and manipulating their bodies to his enjoyment.

He would even abuse their corpse, controlling their body beyond their life expectancy. The ultimate control as if he's thought of himself, Godlike. As we peel back the layers of Israel Keyes complex psyche, it's essential to realize that he wasn't just a sum of these dark traits. He was a disturbing synergy of them all, each amplifying the other, driving him to commit acts that defy our most dreaded nightmares.

If he were terrifying like Freddy Krueger or Jason Voorhees, We could understand the fear and identify the threat. But Keyes was the normal neighbor, the friendly handyman, and the unassuming citizen that you might find yourself standing behind in the grocery store. And that is truly frightening.

This is really insightful because it talks to the dark Tetra of narcissism, Machiavellianism, um, psychopathy and sadism. And I think those are important because I think keys exemplifies every single one of those very, very, very neatly. In the makeup of who he is, and we see it in the commission of his crimes that he does from, you know, from childhood.

The problem was, is that he was living a very mediocre life, which I think is one of the things that he really disliked about himself. And I think he wanted to be elevated to a higher status in life. And I feel like, you know, with his girlfriend, Kimberly, which is who he was with when he was caught is, you know, she was somebody who was educated, she was probably a little bit diverse and understanding of the background he came from.

And so I feel like she, to him, gave him a little bit of an elevated status. And I believe it's one of the reasons that he fostered the relationship with her that he did for as long as he did. I think his relationships are built around manipulation. Even his relationship with his wife is manipulative because he's pretending to be what he thinks he needs to be in order to fit into that world.

Even sex with her is vanilla. It's not the sex that he has with his victims. It's not the violent sex that he enjoys. It's the act of sex that she enjoys and that he pretends to also enjoy as well. It's the being the perfect dad when we know he's not the perfect father. It's all an act. It's all a, a duality in his, in who he is.

He's trying to like pretend to be this great guy or this successful business person, this person who has all this money and travels and... I think he's trying to portray that life. That's his manipulation. He's manipulating all those pieces. And he's finding joy in it, in the manipulation. Yeah, and I think that he finds joy when he talks about Samantha, where he goes, Hey, you knew this was going to happen.

Like the whole time he's telling her, this is just for ransom. I'm going to let you go as soon as I get the money. When he gets ready to sexually assault her and he goes, well, you kind of knew this was going to happen. Like, I think that was his way of. Like calling her dumb. You didn't think he was gonna get away, did you?

It's his way of like letting her know I got you. You're right. He does try to be mysterious, but even in trying to be mysterious with the F B I, it's a manipulation to get what he wants from the F B I. I understand you're, what's important to you is that you want to do your job and you want to do it by the book, and you want, I would hope.

I would hope to. Do it with as little resistance as possible. And, um, and like I said last time we had a meeting, everybody sitting in that room last time wanted the same thing. Maybe not the ultimate end result, but, I'm not gonna drag my feet on anything, and I'm willing to help you it too.

Now, if I don't get, you know, if, there's, there's, you know, I'm in jail regardless, I'm in custody indefinitely regardless, so, um, you know, I, I know you're going to do your job with or without my help. I'm just, my point of view is that if you can do it with my help and if you are willing to work with me on the few things that I, want or would like to see happen, then, uh, it can make your job easier.

Right, understood. And, and, and you're right, we want to do this. I really see him as being somebody who's trying very hard to fit in and trying very hard to be seen as somebody worthy of being And that top tier of you're so intelligent, you're so, you know, like you really set yourself apart from others.

And he's constantly being outcast from that. There's always somebody smarter than him. There's always, he's always upsetting himself. It really bothers him when he sees that he's messing up or that he's not meeting a certain, a certain level that he thinks that he should be. So he wants to be seen in a certain light and he tries really hard to be seen.

In that light, there's some interesting things in some of his interrogations that I find to be a little bit interesting, such as at one point, the investigators are talking to him and they're talking about how he had mentioned 14 years is when how long he had been to people and they just automatically assumed that this meant 14 years of his Kill kits and killing people and the 14 year mark and I noticed that when the investigator tried to Confirm that with him.

He had a very strange facial expression change his eyebrows raised kind of like what like Like he was surprised that he came up with that. Like, how did you come up with that? Like, no, you're wrong, almost, kind of look. But 14 years would have been the time frame of when he joined the military. And that's also the time frame where at one point he mentions how the military changed him.

So I think that's what the 14 years means for him. For whatever reason, whatever he thinks changed in those moments of him, his first time seeing the world and being out of this, you know, confined kind of environment, closed off environment where he was kind of opened up to the world. What do you think about Key's psychopathy, lack of empathy?

I think there's some, there's some small kind of things that you can kind of see with him that may not be very alarming to most people, you know, like people, people cheat on their, their significant others all the time. And so some people may not see that as having any type of lack of empathy, but the fact that he does it so much and with everybody and he just doesn't seem to have a problem with it, I think can indicate.

lack of empathy, especially when you have a child in the mix and even being able to talk about, you know, that, that you really care what happens to your child and the impact on your child, but then still continuing in the behavior that you're doing as if you just said that for everybody's benefit, you know, I think also shows his lack of empathy as well, you know, um, When he's younger, you can associate some of those things with him being a little bit curious, but, you know, going as far as to finding joy in the pain of, you know, an animal, shooting an animal for no reason, you know, not to put them out of their misery or, you know, anything of that nature, but just to watch it.

Run around and die and find joy in that pain I think is sadistic and is also shows lack of empathy as well and lack of empathy when he talks about other people's reactions to it as well because he's like, you know, like basically saying you're weak for Thinking that's disgusting or you're weak for feeling that way One of the things that he makes a comment about is that when he started to have these feelings Of liking to torture animals when other people reacted negatively to it.

One of the things that he said is that he thought everybody was like him, but they were just suppressing their desire to do it. That's another mark of his narcissism. Everybody's like me. He's basically convincing himself and trying to convince other people that like, y'all are just like me. Y'all are just hiding it.

I'm just not like, I'm just being, I'm being real basically. And y'all are all just holding back. Y'all are all just like me. Y'all just won't admit it. Now that we've delved into the labyrinthine psyche of Israel Keyes, it's crucial we don't lose sight of the real world impact of his terrifying traits, the victims.

The field of victimology seeks to understand the victims backgrounds, vulnerabilities, and their unfortunate intersection with their perpetrators. In the case of Keyes, this becomes a challenging plight as the scope is as varied as it is heartbreaking. His victims weren't picked because they fit a specific profile, rather they were often targets of opportunity, which makes the range of his violence even more chilling.

His only known recovered victim, Samantha Connick, was an 18 year old barista abducted from her workplace in Anchorage, Alaska. Her case shows that Keyes didn't just prey on those he could easily overpower, he chose victims whose circumstances allowed him to exercise his meticulously crafted plans. In the cases of two other victims he confessed to, Bill and Lorraine Currier, we see yet another facet of his sadism.

A middle aged couple from Vermont, snatched from the supposed safety of their home, serves as a terrifying reminder that Keyes reach knew no bounds, neither in age nor situation. Keyes didn't discriminate. He saw all people as potential victims. His own twisted philosophy on life and death, fueled by the dark tetrad traits we've discussed, rendered him blind to the sanctity of human life.

Men, women, young, old, he saw them all through the lens of how they could serve his sadistic needs. This broad victimology frustrates law enforcement's traditional methods of predicting a serial killer's next move, leaving us to grapple with the uncomfortable reality that his web of terror was cast far and wide.

As we navigate the unsettling maze that was Israel Key's mind and actions, we arrive at a point that's often the most gut wrenching yet fascinating for true crime aficionados. The way Keyes carried out his crimes wasn't just unique, it was chillingly innovative, almost a blueprint of horror built on the dark psychological traits we discussed earlier.

Keyes didn't fit the mold of a serial killer who stuck to a particular modus operandi. In fact, he prided himself on being unpredictable. The planning phase was extensive. He'd bury kill kits months or even years ahead of his crimes. These kits usually included weapons, cash, and tools for body disposal.

all meticulously packed in watertight containers. He had multiple kits hidden across the U. S., each one a grim totem of his readiness to kill on a whim. His execution style also varied widely, from abductions to home invasions, and his methodology seemed to be tailored to each victim. Samantha Koenig was abducted from a workplace, restrained, and ultimately killed.

Bill and Lorraine Currier We're subjected to a nightmarish home invasion where keys had the audacity to lie in wait for them, further amplifying the horror of their final moment. This adaptability makes him one of the more complex killers to study. His methods were a melting pot of the various dark traits he embodied.

Narcissism, Machiavellianism, Psychopathy, Sociopathy, and Sadistic Personality Disorder. Another unnerving aspect of Key's methodology was his enjoyment of the hunt and the chase, often prolonging his victim's fear and suffering. This was a man who relished the process as much as the act, savoring each horrifying detail like a connoisseur of cruelty.

It was his obsession to have ultimate control of his victims. Even the disposal of the bodies was seen as a final act of control, with only Keyes knowing ultimately where all the bodies were buried in the end. It's evident that his methodology wasn't just a means to an end. It was an essential part of his twisted journey for significance and control.

His multifaceted methods serve as a grim testament to his complex psychology and make the task of truly understanding him an ongoing challenge.

So when we look at his victims, from my understanding of keys, victims is that he really didn't have a victim per se, a profile for a victim. He wasn't looking at just blondes. It wasn't just women. It wasn't just a certain age group or anything like that. He really just targeted by opportunity. There wasn't a particular demographic he was after or it wasn't some type of, he didn't like sex workers or something of that nature.

So there wasn't something to say, you know, Hey, he's killing a bunch of young blondes or he's killing a bunch of sex workers. He was picking people at random, but he was picking people at random who were going to be less likely of E. To put up a fight with him. Right. So somebody who was not as strong, not as tall, not as, you know, like physically capable as him.

So he wasn't going after jujitsu masters. Nope. He wasn't going off after bodybuilders or anything like that. He was waiting. He was waiting till they were alone till they were asleep. That's a good point. Part of those skills can come from hunting, because you can lay out in a, in a tree stand and wait and wait and wait for, you know, an animal to come and just the, that hunt that, you know, that could be part of where that came from.

It's what he learned as a young kid too. Right. Yeah. When we started looking at his methods, one of the things that we find is that he doesn't have just one method. Like I know a lot of serial killers that we've studied have like one particular way of Capturing their prey and committing their murders, but in Keith's scenario.

He doesn't have just one way he kidnaps Samantha at gunpoint the couriers he breaks into their home while they were asleep And I'm sure he tells of other ways that he's that he's committed some of these crimes. What's your thoughts on that? I don't feel like he has an exact method for how he's going about getting his victims.

I don't think he wanted anybody to honestly know what it was he was doing. I believe that he was strictly going for people who couldn't be connected. And I think that he did a good job with that. You know, there's been mentioned that he was picking people who wouldn't be missed. I don't know how accurate that would have been because he definitely was picking people who were going to be missed because they were people who had families and friends and, you know, he wasn't picking people who were, you know, maybe living on the street who didn't have a network of people who would know that they were missing or things of that nature.

So I don't know how true that piece of it is, but I think he was trying to. Do things in a way to where his crimes couldn't be connected and if that's the case, that's pretty, you know, that could be pretty intelligent because it's going to make it harder for anybody to connect those cases and say, Hey, we have a serial killer.

They're thinking that they just have this open case, this unsolved case in this one area that isn't connected to anything else. This one off. After years of successfully evading capture through meticulous planning, changing M. O. s, and a lack of discernible victim pattern, Keys met his downfall in a manner that seemed almost banal compared to the theatrical sophistication of his crimes.

The irony? His capture wasn't the result of some grand law enforcement sting or high stakes chase. It was due to a simple financial transaction gone wrong. Keyes was arrested in Lufkin, Texas on March 13, 2012, following the murder of Samantha Connick. He had made a bold but fatal mistake. He used her boyfriend's debit card.

Initially cautious, he made small withdrawals in Alaska to see if the card would trigger any alarms. Feeling emboldened when it didn't, he began a cross country trip making withdrawals from ATM machines along the way, seemingly thinking he was invincible. But as any true crime enthusiast knows, it's often the little details that trip up even the most fastidious of criminals.

Law enforcement agencies coordinated their efforts and used surveillance footage from the ATMs to track the card's movement, ultimately pinpointing Key's location. The capture was anticlimactic, to say the least. A routine traffic stop by Texas Highway Patrol. Keys is expected to go out in a blaze of glory, but as Texas Highway Patrol officers questioned him on the side of the road, Keys looked confused and irritated.

By the time of his apprehension, his face had been captured by so many security cameras, and his description circulated so broadly among law enforcement that the arresting officers knew exactly who they were dealing with. When they searched his car, they found not only Samantha, Connick's boyfriend's debit card, but also a phone with incriminating photos.

The end of the line for Israel Keyes wasn't marked by the drama he himself would have preferred, but a fizzling of mediocrity at the end of a long line of poor decisions and bad mistakes. It was, in a way, a mere opposite to the elaborate, intricate tapestry of terror he himself claimed to have woven for years.

It leaves us with a crucial lesson. Sometimes the hunter becomes the hunted, not in a blaze of glory, but in an unremarkable the end of a reign of terror. After his arrest in Texas, Keyes found himself confined, not to a dark forest or secluded cabin, but to a sterile jail cell, where he would eventually reveal some, but frustratingly not all, of his dark secrets to investigators.

Keyes initially seemed somewhat cooperative, offering tantalizing hints about his other victims, as if enjoying one last sadistic game. However, his cooperation had limits, as he wielded his limited control over investigators, and he never fully divulged the extent of his horrifying exploits. On December 2nd, 2012, just nine months after his capture, Israel Keyes unlived himself in a cold, bare cell in Anchorage, Alaska, using a razor blade embedded in a pencil to slash his left wrist and a bed sheet to strangle himself.

His ultimate act of control and defiance. In death as in life, he left behind more questions than answers. A meticulous killer, who had managed to elude capture for years, decided to take the easy way out, robbing families of the closure they so desperately sought, and denying society the deeper understanding of a twisted mind that might prevent future tragedies.

Alongside his body were found two blood soaked papers, an ode to death, or a clue to more victims. Keyes would leave us forever, pondering the final thoughts of a man who had caused so much anguish. To illuminate the haunting darkness that shrouded Israel Keyes, we've reached out to professionals in the field, forensic psychologists, profilers, criminologists, to get their insights.

The consensus, Keyes is what you'd call an anomaly in the grim world of serial killers. Dr. Sarah Thompson, a renowned forensic psychologist, noted that Keyes ability to compartmentalize his life was extraordinary. almost textbook psychopathy, but amplified. She explains that while most psychopaths exhibit a degree of compartmentalization, Keyes took it to a whole new level, leading what seemed like multiple lives, each ignorant Dr.

Thompson's assertion has sent ripples throughout the forensic psychology community and challenged the way we traditionally think about serial killers. In most cases, profilers can categorize killers based on certain patterns, whether it's their choice of victims, their method of operation, or their underlying motives.

These patterns form the basis of psychological models that help law enforcement agencies predict a serial killer's next move, perhaps even offering clues to their identity. But Keyes was a different beast altogether. His ability to live compartmentalized lives, his geographically dispersed crimes, and his fluctuating methods made him a jack of all trades when it came to his criminal activities.

Most killers leave a signature that's discernible to experts. Key's signature was that he had no consistent signature. That level of unpredictability doesn't justify existing profiling models. It completely undermines them. It poses the unsettling question. How many other Israel Keys like figures could there be out there?

Flying under the radar because our current understanding and methodologies are simply insufficient. Furthermore, Key's mastery of compartmentalization, a feat that Dr. Thompson highlights as extraordinary, adds another layer of complexity. It's one thing for a person to lead a double life, but Key's operated as if he had multiple lives running in parallel, each ignorant of the other.

This level of psychological and behavioral compartmentalization could force experts to revisit the hallmarks of psychopathy. Is it possible that psychopathy exists on a spectrum so broad that we've only scratched the surface? Could there be even darker and more intricate forms of psychological disturbances that remain undiscovered?

Dr. Thompson's statement serves as both a caution and a challenge. A caution against overconfidence in existing psychological models, and a challenge to academics, investigators, and psychologists to dig deeper and reevaluate their frameworks for understanding the human mind. In a way, it's a call to arms.

If our current models can't adequately account for outliers like Israel keys, it's time to expand, adapt, and evolve so we can be better equipped to understand and hopefully prevent the inexplicable horrors that some humans are capable of. Then there's Dr. Michael Harris, a criminologist who specializes in profiling.

He posed an interesting point. Could keys have been even more prolific than we know? Given his intricate planning and geographic spread, Dr. Harris suggests that there could be a multitude of undiscovered kill kits and sadly victims. This isn't just a chilling thought. It's a wake up call for law enforcement agencies to dig deeper and for communities to remain vigilant.

One prevailing thought that keeps coming up is the idea of a motiveless motive. Yes, that sounds paradoxical, but it encapsulates the essence of Key's complexity. He didn't kill for financial gain, personal vendettas, or even the sadistic satisfaction most serial killers seek. According to Dr. Emily Patel, a behavioral analyst, his motives seem to revolve around a twisted need for control and significance, underpinned by his deeply ingrained, dark, tetrid personality traits.

Narcissism, Machiavellianism, Psychopathy, Sociopathy, and Sadistic Personality Disorder. This cocktail of traits converges to form a unique and deeply troubling psychological profile. It suggests that Keyes may not have needed any external motive to commit his crimes. His motivation came from within, rooted in a desire for personal significance and control.

But what does control and significance mean in the context of Israel Keyes? Are we talking about control over his victims, over law enforcement agencies that pursued him, or perhaps even over the narrative of his life and crimes? And what kind of significance was he seeking? Was it the kind of infamy that comes from evading capture and confounding experts?

Or something more abstract, like achieving a god like power in his own mind. It's a deeply unsettling thought, because it implies that Keyes could be an embodiment of pure evil. A term that's often thrown around, but seldom fully understood. His actions and life choices seem to be driven by a need to assert his form of control and significance, untethered by the moral and ethical boundaries that guide most people.

This could be a watershed moment in behavioral psychology, forcing experts to grapple with the reality of a killer whose motives are not just hard to pin down, but may also defy our traditional understandings of human behavior and morality. Dr. Patel's concept of a motiveless motive is thus a reframing of how we think about criminal motivation, especially for outliers like Keyes.

It pushes us to think beyond traditional categories and consider the terrifying possibility that some individuals might commit heinous acts driven by motives that are self generated and self sufficient, eluding our conventional frameworks from understanding crime and punishment. It's crucial to note that while Keyes may be an outlier, the complexities of his psyche and actions offer an unsettling reminder of what humans are capable of.

As Dr. Thompson poignantly put it, Keyes didn't just defy profiling models, he shattered them. And that forces us to rethink and reevaluate how we approach the psychology of serial killers. We're

charged with the courier's murder and kidnapping and carjacking. We believe there's federal jurisdiction for that. Okay, so let's talk, let's keep it in the context of the curse and other, and other crimes that you, that you committed. Just so we're clear. Because we, we don't want to do anything to interfere with your rights.

And, and just so you know. I want to make sure your rights are protected, okay? My rights are fine, no worries. I understand my rights. I, I do know the constitution and I do know all the rights that are attached to it, even for people like me. So I don't, I, you know, I appreciate that you are very concerned about my rights, but I'm not an ignorant person.

I do know what they are, and I know and, and I'm telling you that's I have very specific reasons for wanting what I want, and as extreme as it may seem to some people, It really is not that extreme to me, because, just because of my outlook on things, and it's a personal opinion that I have of the way things are, and it's not gonna change.

And I know, as soon as I, you know, started talking to you, I knew I was never getting out. So, I mean, for me, that is the death penalty. Because I'm not Bubba from the Sticks who sat in one town for all my life, and I can't be satisfied sitting in prison for all my life. I've been lots of places, I've done lots of things, and sitting in prison for the rest of my life is a death penalty.

Same thing to me. I'd rather go out while I still have some sanity and good memories.

That's where I'm coming from. So I mean, I want to discuss the bottom line too, if we're talking about, we can talk about the couriers, hypothetically, that's not the way it's going to go, but I mean, we can talk about that. So hypothetically. Um, I give you all the details. Um, like I say, they're not really going to find a lot of evidence, but I'm sure I can give you enough.

You know, whether it be through my motivations, uh, and you know, like the way they died, you know, you're going to have some evidence to corroborate what I tell you. Um, the rest of it, you know, is just going to be my story because, I mean, if the house is gone, there's not, you know. So, I mean, yeah, based on that alone, from my understanding of the guidelines, I qualify for the death penalty.

On that case alone. I mean, I could be wrong, but I don't, I don't see why not. I don't know. I mean, if I don't, I don't know who does. Let me put it that way.

There is a lot of body of work on many, many serial killers that talk about things from abuses that they endured growing up to, um, typically Things that they're diagnosed, not early on, but later after they've been caught, which sometimes I feel like we like to take these psychological models and mold them to the person who committed these crimes.

And that simply, I think is, is an injustice to, um, the world of psychology and advancement because, you know, it's easy to say, Oh, well, you did some bad things. And so I'm going to take this. You know, this psychology thing that we've, you know, that we've got, and we're going to say that you're a sociopath.

This is where we start getting confused, where we say, Oh, well, the doctor who did this research, you know, scanned his brain and, you know, he too could, has these, some of these markers of a, of a serial killer, but he just has this one thing that didn't happen. I think that we have to be very careful when we're looking at those things.

But in a lot of this research, there are a lot of things that come up amongst. a bunch of different serial killers that seem to be, um, very similar amongst a lot of them, such as abuse when they're younger, such as behaviors like with animals, sadistic behaviors. And then with the crime scenes, you know, there are certain things that are not very common amongst serial killers, such as things like cannibalism or necrophilia.

And so, serial killers at least that we know of based on who have been caught make up approximately one percent of murders and so that's a very low number and then of those generally Those who partake in like necrophilia are a very small percentage as well And so some of the research with serial killers that they've shown in their methods say things about them and so this is where when they talk about he's kind of breaking the mold is because When a criminal profiler is looking at crime scenes, trying to figure out what direction to send detectives in, they're looking at things like the typology.

So is this a organized criminal versus a disorganized criminal, which they've figured out throughout the years, nobody is one or the other, they're generally mixed. You know, they might be a higher degree of an organized versus a disorganized, but they look at those different things. And then they look at all the serial killers that we've caught and have talked to in the past to say, well, based on all this information we have, you know, this person is probably has a higher IQ, has this, has that.

And that's how they kind of send detectives into a particular direction. And so with keys, the reason that it's come up, maybe he kind of broke the mold or it would have been hard to. go after somebody like him simply by looking at a crime scene would be one if you didn't find the body obviously there's no crime scene for you to look at but two if they're all completely random and there's no signature amongst his crimes then it makes it very hard to say one that this is the same person or to really take that crime scene and assess it in a manner that allows for you to build a type of profile so that's where He's become kind of a, you know, uh oh, we don't know what box to put him in, because everything he did was so completely different.

So, I'm pretty sure that there's a lot of serial killers that we haven't caught. I'm pretty sure that there's a higher number of serial killers than obviously we're currently aware of today. And so this might be something that can open a box for us making changes that allow for us to find some of these other serial killers.

That's a good point. So the FBI has some different motives that they have kind of agreed on for serial killers. Um, whether that's power and thrill, um, some type of ideology, financial gain, anger, sexually based, something of that nature. Do you think that he falls into any of those? Well, Dr. Patel does talk about motiveless motive, meaning that she believes he didn't really have a motive.

He was just driven by his own innate cruelty to hunt, but obviously nobody does anything for no reason, right? There's always a reason. And maybe that reason was his narcissism and his, his need to control things. And so I think at the root of it, I feel like his behavior was focused on just his need to be able to control and his joy in controlling others in his computer.

They found a bunch of missing people that he had nothing to do with that were missing. I believe he viewed someone's missing as The ultimate level of control to know where he put someone where no one else can find them is like an ultimate level of control. You're the only person in the whole world who knows where this person is and people want to know where that person is, but you're the only one that has a key to the solving that that problem is to me, maybe a potential motive for him or maybe a potential driving factor that causes him to do some of the things that he does.

I really feel like in the majority of cases, I feel like a higher level of a need for control than there is for a lot of other reasons or motivations. Even for a lot of, you know, sex crimes, it's generally about control, not even about sex. So I feel like that power and control element should be a, To me, that should be a direction that we're going in as far as a motivation.

It's almost an obsessive need to control, right? And I feel like the things that he can't control in his normal life, he tries to control in his non normal life. Something that tells me that control is very important to him is the suicide. It's so devastated him to be in an environment where he would lack control and the ultimate lack of control is to be confined Yeah, so and he knows that he wasn't gonna be in a general population environment because if they were Saying that he was a serial killer that wasn't gonna be the type of environment he was gonna be in so he wasn't even gonna be Incarcerated where he was gonna be able to exert a high level of control or even some level even some level.

Yeah, right. Absolutely And then they had had him, you know, due to his, how they had designated him. They had him in a cell all by himself. He wasn't with anybody. So his level of interaction was low too. And so for somebody who so deeply desires power and control, you don't have it. You hear it in this conversation with the FBI when he's saying, well, I want, I want.

I want a death sentence by this date. I want this. I want nothing left leaked to the media. I don't want nobody to know. He's got demands. He's still trying to control. The conversation he's still trying to control the narrative even after being captured and you know What's funny is that he kept making comments about getting online It was bugging him that he didn't have access to be in the know that really bothered him.

I didn't realize that Yeah, I feel like that really bothered him one of the last videos that they have publicly released was within days of when he killed himself and it was like the end of November and If you go back and listen to it, knowing that he kills himself a few days later, some of the things that he says to me are kind of like, he already had it in his mind, what he was going to do.

He wasn't planning on being there for another, for another interview. Right. He was meticulous in his planning. He already knew he was going to be back. He knew that was going to be his last interview. He might have already had the razor blade. Public perception of Israel Keyes is a study in paradox, much like the man himself.

To some, he is the boogeyman incarnate, a true mastermind whose calculated actions and elusive tactics make him a criminal outlier. This portion of the public is captivated, albeit in a horrified manner, by his intellect and the puzzle he presents. They see him as an enigma, a challenge to the norms of criminal profiling.

His name often crops up on online forums and social media discussions where true crime aficionados debate the various theories and unknowns surrounding his life and crimes. The lack of concrete details has fueled speculation and in some twisted way. Contributed to a grim sort of allure around his persona.

Then there's the other side, the group that views him with pure disdain, refusing to give him the credit that some believe his intellectual prowess might warrant. For them, discussing his intelligence or calculating nature is an affront to his victims and only serves to perpetuate his desire for significance and control.

They argue that the focus should be on the lives he destroyed and the families he shattered. Among this group, there's an effort to shift away from the narrative from Keyes as the mastermind to Keyes the monster. Another perception is that Keyes wasn't as prolific as he pretended to be, seeking significance through embellishment of his crimes, telling tall tales that could never be fact checked, providing no receipts.

Only one victim was ever properly identified and recovered, Samantha Koenig. The couriers were never found, with almost no physical evidence even connecting Keyes to the crime. Of the multitude of kill kits Keyes buried, only two have been recovered. His almost comical capture and the stupidity of his mistakes that led to his arrest are in direct conflict with the image of a mastermind or someone with high intellectual prowess.

And the pathetic ending to his life, a fizzling of energy in a cold anchored cell, Keyes extinguished an otherwise unexceptional life, in contrast with the image he wished to portray. Yet, the most complex sentiment might come from those who view him as a cautionary tale. For this group, Keyes represents the darkest recesses of human capability.

A stark reminder that evil doesn't always come cloaked in ignorance or impulsivity. Sometimes, it's calculated, it's planned, and chillingly competent. His story serves as a grim lesson on the limitations of criminal profiling and a call to action for new methods and approaches in both law enforcement and behavioral science.

What ties these divergent views together is a common feeling of unease, an unsettling reminder that people like Israel Keyes walks among us undetected through motives and capacities unfathomable even to experts, whether he's viewed as an enigma. A monster, a false mastermind, or a cautionary tale, the public perception of Israel Keys remains as fragmented and perplexing as a man himself.

It's a societal mirror reflecting our own fears, our own curiosities, and perhaps our collective need to make sense of the senseless. The Israel Keys case is more than just a chilling account of a man who committed heinous acts. It's a wake up call that stretches across multiple disciplines from criminal profiling to behavioral psychology.

One key lesson is the limitations of traditional profiling methods. If ever there were a case that underscored the need for a dynamic, evolving approach to understanding criminal behavior, this is it. The profiling models in place were not equipped to predict or explain a criminal like Keyes, which forces us to ask how many other potential criminals are we missing?

This case shows us that it's time to advance our methods, re evaluate our paradigms, and integrate more nuanced psychological profiles into our analysis. Another takeaway is the disturbing realization that our conventional understanding of motives might not be as comprehensive as we'd like to believe.

The introduction of the motiveless motive concept by experts like Dr. Emily Patel compels us to consider that some individuals may be propelled by internal, more enigmatic factors that don't fit neatly into a box that we currently understand. This opens up new avenues for research, particularly in the field of behavioral psychology, urging us to dig deeper into the complexities of human motivation and mental illness both.

The societal lesson here is twofold. First, we should be cautious in how we consume and discuss true crime, recognizing that the focus should always be on the victims and the impact on their families. This case serves as a grim reminder that behind the intrigue and theories are real lives shattered, and their stories deserve to be heard and respected.

Second, the Keys case illuminates the necessity for community vigilance and awareness. If someone as calculated and elusive as keys could operate for years without detection, it stresses the importance of fostering stronger community networks, encouraging people to look out for each other and reporting suspicious activities, however minor they might seem at the time.

In essence, the story of Israel Keys offers a sobering lesson in humility for law enforcement, behavioral scientists, and the public. It challenges our preconceived notions about what evil looks like and how it operates, urging us to evolve, adapt, and most importantly, to never underestimate the depths of human complexity.

I think it's very interesting that there are multiple ways the public is looking at this. The public doesn't just look at this from one perspective of, I think there's different opinions on Ezra Keyes. There is. What's your opinion? Truthfully, I'm a little bit split for a few reasons, because I noticed some instances in his interviewing.

And granted, there's only so much that's released. We've been through most of the FBI. Documents that have been released, there's a lot. There's like eight files with more than 400 pages of documents. And there's a lot that you can glean from all the paperwork and from his interviews. And, um, when he gets uncomfortable, how he makes space, you know, with one of the interviewers, particularly the female interviewer that was one of the primary people on this case with the FBI, he wasn't a fan of hers.

And I don't know if she didn't know that. I don't know if they didn't know that. But he was constantly making space in between him and her. It was really weird. And those are things that they should have, they should have had a psychologist in there, honestly. Or a behavioral analyst in there. I feel like he was dishonest.

about a lot of things, and I also feel like he was trying to maintain power and control in a lot of ways as well. Even if he was aspiring to be like a Ted Bundy. And what's funny is that for years a lot of people have said that Ted Bundy would be considered one of the more intelligent serial killers, and by a long stretch he wasn't one of the ones with the highest IQ.

Even Dahmer had a higher IQ than him, but people kind of looked at him as he was the more charismatic He was the one that kind of drew everybody's attention He's the one that had all the girls coming to the courthouse and you know So like he was kind of like your show Boatsy kind of pulled everybody in Kind of manipulated people in a big way in a big fashion And so I think some people are wanting to see him as being This, you know, how cool is this?

He's like the first ever who's just so like, he buried all these kids. I honestly think he was more of a bank robber than he was anything else. And I think he was more into, and there are a lot of serial killers whose primary motive was, um, to go in and, and steal things. You know, there's one in Texas that was killed recently, um, that not a lot of people had heard about, Billy Shamir Mir, and he was holding pillows over old ladies faces and killing them, and he would steal their stuff and pawn it, and he had a job, and he had been doing this for a while, and they're actually looking into more than 700 cases, and I wouldn't say that he was highly intelligent, or You know, anything of that nature, you know, some of these kids that they're saying that he buried everywhere.

They've only found two They had things in them that you could use for a bank robbery. There was nothing in there So special, you know, we're calling them kill kids There was nothing in there that was so special that you know says this was for a serial killer for a murder It could have been for crime such as a robbery And you know, something that stood out to me that could have been for arts and crafts, could have been for arts and crafts.

I mean, gosh, some of the stuff that they found in one of them, like the firearm that was in there, I wouldn't have trusted to use that to save my life. If I was like facing the grizzly bear. So, um, that thing was kind of rusted up and old. So, I don't know how fancy schmancy that was, but you know, realistically, you know, one of the things that they had found when they arrested him in his car, which that's another thing.

So there's things that don't align in my thought process of somebody who's super intelligent and so meticulous. So you're so meticulous, but you used a debit card of Samantha Koenig's boyfriend going from state to state from Alaska. Not smart at all. Not even. A little level of common sense, like almost like you're, unless you were meticulously planning to be caught.

And then he talked about going out in a blaze of glory. And something that I find funny in watching the footage of when he's arrested is he don't make no fast movements. Like he's gonna try to get away, like he's gonna try to grab a gun. The knife that would, that was in his pocket that he pulled out and sat on the back of the car, an officer walked away, another officer came to grab it.

And secure it so that he couldn't grab it and do anything with it the whole time he's standing there He doesn't try to grab it and do anything like he didn't do so all the things he said he was about I didn't see any of that displayed and none of his behaviors and it was so to me I felt like he was really hyping himself up.

What are your thoughts on him? I'm of the mindset of giving him the benefit of the doubt until disproved or until the evidence shows that he isn't who he says he was There's no reason for me not to believe that he committed the murders that he said he did. Until it's disproved. And I say that because I would rather continue to search for potential victims than to say, Oh, he's full of crap.

He was just kind of hyping himself up and let's stop looking for potential victims. Let's stop looking for potential alignment with his travel patterns and where they could be missing people and try to figure out whether he was involved in those crimes or not. I would err on the side of giving him the benefit of the doubt.

A lot of what he says does appear to be. Embellished and would make sense given his level of control. He would want to control the narrative And so that makes a lot of sense that he would do that at the same time, there's no harm in continuing to follow up on the evidence and the clues of his travel patterns and where he was and what people are missing in those areas and how they've been recovered.

And so my thought is I would believe him. Now, I have a difficult time claiming him to be super intelligent with the level of mistakes that he made in getting captured. So I have a hard time correlating. Those two things together with him being this highly elusive criminal, who is just so smart that he's uncatchable.

And then he just makes a dumb mistake, gets caught. That doesn't make sense to me that you could be both things, right? Yeah. I feel like those things don't line up. And even with Samantha and there's a possibility that Samantha could have been a one off. And I had said this from the beginning before we really had done much deep diving was that if he's this meticulous killer, right, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, then.

Kidnapping her and a ransom note. Come on. It was dumb. You know, that's like kidnapping your next door neighbor. Like you just want to be caught Yeah, so something had me thinking that that was more of a personal thing a one off that either He had become infatuated with her that he had she had said something to him that he did not like that was getting to him and And there's a couple of things that he had made on some threads.

One that was never publicly posted because of the bot that kept it from being posted, but he had posted some things concerning specifically concerning her case, um, saying things like pretending to be somebody that you're not. And basically like leading somebody on almost was kind of how he made it sound.

So it, it kind of makes me wonder if there was some type, some type of interaction that they had that he wasn't. Let's explore that. Let's explore that a little bit because I think that's very intriguing. I think from a perspective of a narcissist, And from a perspective of being a need to be in control, that seems very plausible.

And if that's the case, that was his undoing. Yeah. And the reason that I say that is because that's where I can see where those two parallels, those, those parallels of the lives that he's trying to keep separate that are, kind of unknown to each other where they began to mesh. And the reason that they began to mesh is because he's taken off his game.

And so if that is the case, then he went outside of his normal thing and it's going to start to eat away at him. And now the two lines have crossed the two lines that have never crossed. Now they're crossing. And so that could have been his undoing. And so now he's doing things he wasn't doing before, like having evidence in the car and taking a card and using it.

Only renting one car and not multiple cars so that you're seen in the same car at all the ATMs. Yeah. The other thing to me is also that that is not meticulous at all, right? That's the opposite of meticulous. It's sloppy. So it makes you think that it was spur of the moment. There's also something that's really been bugging me about the CCTV when she was abducted.

And that's that if, if you watch when he's out the window and she's empty in the register and it looks like maybe she's getting some stuff out of the safe while she's doing all of this and he's still outside the window, you will see a vehicle. That pulls around somewhere near the coffee stand and it's at that point where he jumps through the window and so it makes me wonder if his plan initially was to even abduct her, you know, if he was trying to get money because he was getting ready to go to Texas, if his initial plan was a theft, didn't even have anything to do with kidnapping Samantha, that would make a lot of sense because he was leaving the next morning at five o'clock to go on this vacation.

So the night that he's robbing her, He decides to kidnap her when at five o'clock in the morning, he's leaving, which doesn't make a lot of sense. Why you wouldn't. Yeah, it really, you can't dispose of her. Now you got to keep her body there while you're gone. And that had to be messing with his psyche, which could have thrown him off.

Yeah. So if what happened that night, wasn't how he intended it to go. Then I can see where his lines mesh. Those separate lives that he was living that were able to maintain their separation have now meshed together. As we conclude this spine chilling episode, it's impossible to shake the haunting shadow that Israel Keys casts over our understanding of human behavior, criminal profiling, and the ever persistent question of, What drives someone to evil.

We've dived deep into his complex psychology, scrutinized his meticulous planning, and pondered over the fragmented public perception of who this man really was. Yet, for all we've unearthed, the most terrifying revelation might be how much we still don't know. What we're left with is a confounding enigma, a man who defies easy categorization, who slipped through the cracks of our understanding and our systems.

He may be gone, but the ghost of Israel Keyes lingers on, a menacing specter that haunts the collective psyche. As we lay our heads down tonight, we're left to grapple with the unsettling reality that there could be others like him, lurking in the dark corners of society, or perhaps closer to home, still undiscovered, and plotting their next grim chapter.

In our quest for answers, we've unlocked more questions. In our search for closure, we found only restless intrigue. Israel Keys serves as a dark reminder of the insidious enigmas that still elude us, challenging our conventional wisdom and questioning our perceived safety. So, as you switch off the lights tonight, you might find yourself looking over your shoulder one last time, haunted by the awareness that the labyrinthine mind of Israel Keys could be a stark mirror reflecting elements in the world around us that we'd rather not confront.

We're reminded in the most chilling way possible, that sometimes the most frightening stories are those without a proper ending, and the most harrowing monsters are those that defy explanation. Sleep tight, listeners. Until next time, this is Body of Crime reminding you that the darkness is never as far away as you think.

And

that's a wrap on today's investigation, fellow detectives. If you found this episode, both enlightening and captivating, then please subscribe to our podcast show and our Patreon, leave a review and hit that like button, share our podcast with others and engage with us on our website and social media platforms, you can find us on all major podcast platforms, as well as our website.

At www. bodyofcrimepodcast. com Where you can access all of our episodes and bonus content Including valuable resources By expanding our community, we believe We can make a greater impact in our pursuit of truth And in shedding light on crucial cases If there's a case that you'd like for us to cover Or a personal story you'd like to share Please don't hesitate and contact us through our website We always welcome your feedback and suggestions Until next time, stay sharp And thank you for tuning in to the Body of Crime Podcast Bye