Book Review: 'I'- The Making of a Serial Killer

BOOK REVIEW

TITLE: ‘I’: The Making of a Serial Killer
REVIEWER: Richard Chirombo
AUTHOR: Jack Olsen
PUBLISHER: St. Martin’s Press
DATE OF PUBLISHING: 2002
GENRE: Non-Fiction

‘I’: The Making of a Serial Killer’ is a real-life story about a child, Keith Hunter Jesperson, who claims to have been physically and emotionally abused by his father, Leslie, and, because of the alleged abuse, turns out to be a serial killer. He targets women, mostly commercial sex workers, and murders nine within a five-year period spanning from January 1990 to 1995. A self-confessed follower of a TV programme by Perry Mason, which offers advice on how to build an alibi (behaviour that aid in distorting evidence and building up convincing evidence to the contrary), Keith manages to get away with hic crimes, until after the ninth murder because he decides to abandon all cautionary rules about building an alibi.

Keith is telling his own story throughout the book, though author Jack Olsen also comes in, as he tries to unmask and offer some insight into the making of serial killers- from childhood to the time a seemingly innocent individual begins to kill and savour the experience. He evaluates Keith’s background, present behaviour and expert advice on serial killers and psychopaths as a way of introducing each preceding sub-theme. One of the most compelling aspects of the book is how Keith manages to keep his voice cold and humorous as he narrates, in gruesome fashion, how he murdered the nine women by strangulation. The only instance he changes tone is when he refers to his father, on whom he levels accusations of ill-treatment and cruelty. Keith accuses Leslie of favouring his brothers and other family members to the extent that, when the author interviews Keith’s father and is shown a love poem Leslie wrote for his way-ward son during his baby-sitting days, and refers to the times the father hugged the son before going to bed, Keith is infuriated, to the point of holding back tears. He says:

I hugged my dog everyday, but I never hugged by father and mother. And they didn’t hug me or my brothers or my sisters. I never thought about this one way or the other. It’s just the way we were. In our family, nobody hugged, except me and my dog.”

Otherwise, he talks about death as one talks about an enjoyable experience and makes fun of his victims’ ordeals. It could be said, for good reason, that the plain, detached manner in which Keith recounts how he raped the women several times on end before choking them, and how he could resuscitate them and play ‘death games’ with them, arouses that common natural reaction in us: anger. He even suggests that he could kill more, given the opportunity. Naturally, one is inclined to sympathize with the victims and their families. Throughout, we see Keith becoming the key figure, playing the leading role in his own dramatic production.

Keith’s murders take place in two United States of America states. These are Oregon and California. More than the later, Oregon is very crucial a place in the story because it is where he committed his first murder, the murder of Taunja Bennett in January 1990. Finally, he is convicted and sentenced to life Imprisonment with Hard Labour and goes back to Oregon State Penitentiary to serve his stacked-up sentences. As inmate number 11620304, he will become eligible for parole on March 1, 2063, a month before his 108th birthday. Oregon is also a place of his educational failures, failing to make it to university because of poor class performance. He holds both US and Canadian citizenship, visiting the later occasionally in the course of his life.

The book starts on a symbolic note when the author notes in the prologue that the weather on the day of Taunja Bennett’s murder was chilly, which, coincidentally, happens to bore Keith to the bone and influences him to go outdoors where he meets Taunja at B&I Tavern. But before that, we learn that the victim kissed her mum, Loretta, ‘good-bye’ a sure symbol of farewell in the last mile of her life. She, actually, never saw mum again. Lately, the twenty-three-year-old high school dropout had been listening repeatedly to ‘Back to Life’ by Soul 11 Soul, and carried a black purse.

Almost all of the action in Jack Olsen’s book takes place in three places: (a) On the road between Oregon and California as Keith, a truck driver, goes about his work of loading and delivering goods (b) At home, in Oregon, during his childhood days, and where he faces various forms of maltreatment, and (c) At Oregon State Penitentiary, where the convict is to spend the rest of his life. These changes in venue have a bearing on mood, but help us understand the behaviour of serial killers. Quotes from psychologists also build well for the story, equating Keith’s sentiments and behaviour with empirical evidence.

The book is premised on conflict between father and son, indecisiveness over matters that could cost one a life time in prison, and a litany of problems for the chief character, Keith, who is forced to move from alleged parental abuse (though his father emphatically denies it, while at the same time implying that it was the way most parents raised up their children then) to broken marriages. His divorce to wife Rose Pernick goes ahead despite stiff opposition from his father. Keith says he divorced because he wanted to defy his father and show him that he could now effect his own decisions, an apparent sign of that ongoing conflict. Keith’s dislike of his father started at a tender age, which culminates into maltreatment of both him and sister Shalon. This is apparent when the son recounts how, one day, he asked the father how he (Keith) could tell if their electrified fence was on.

He told him to “piss on it” and “I felt the shock in my balls. But he just stood there, laughing”. Keith goes on to say that his father then went on to ask Sharon to touch the electric fence when she was very young. He laughed at her, too. At one time, Jesperson senior demanded that all kids be paying monthly rentals for staying in their father’s house, but it was only Keith he was collecting from. When the unsuspecting son discovered the plot, his father merely told him to get over it because it was a learning experience. This alleged maltreatment then forces Keith to turn to his dog, Duke, for friendship. However, even the dog is shot dead by the father without the son’s knowledge.

The book also thrives on dilemma, the many times Keith could not make a decision, or follow up on one made earlier. For instance, when he decides to kill Jean, a woman with a six-month old baby, he changes his mind because the baby cried. Yet, this was after he had tried thrice to break Jean’s neck. In the end, he lets her go scot-free, dropping her at a truck stop he had earlier found her. The woman later reports to police and Keith is arrested. Five times in the book, Keith regrets ever leaving Jean arrive, and calls it his first life mistake. Keith was also in dilemma after killing Taunja Bennett. In January 1991, while in Portland, Oregon, between truck hauls, he watched on TV a couple arrested for her murder. These were 57 year-old Laverne Pavlinac and 39 year-old John Sosnovske, with Laverne leading police officers to the place she had dumped the body of Taunja (exactly the same place Keith dumped the body). Keith did not believe it. Neither was he sure about letting the cat out of the bag and risk arrest, nor continuing to enjoy his freedom. There are also times he contemplates committing suicide but abandons the idea for fear that he may put his father‘s name to shame. At one time, he contemplated taking 20 sleeping pills but abandoned the idea in favour of getting arrested. The main dilemma, though, happens when he kills his ninth victim, former girl friend Julie Winningham at Troutdale, Oregon. He could not make up his mind on where to dump the body, along the road or downhill, where nobody could see it. In the end, he defies his gut feeling to take it downhill, and leaves it along the road. This reads to his arrest, and subsequent conviction. Over and over, he mules over that decision, wishing he acted on his gut feeling. At the same time, he says he was tired of killing and wanted to be arrested.

The main problem, though, is that Keith cannot stop killing. The second is that he wants to get Pavlinac and Sosnovske out of prison; they have already served four of their 13 year jail terms. He feels angry that the couple is getting all the publicity when it was supposed to be him basking in the limelight for Taunja’s murder. The other problem/dilemma is that of Oregon police and court officials who do not want to admit that they made a big mistake and arrested innocent people instead of Keith, the self-confessed killer of Taunja. Though Keith provides all evidence and takes the officials to the place where he dumped the body, the officials quickly dismiss his claims. It raises questions about law enforcement and judicial officers, while the officers concerned want to maintain a public image that they carried out their work diligently. Yet a resolute Keith is set to shame them, which creates tension and suspense, keeping the reader on the edge.

However, one cannot help but question the extent of personal hatred between Pavlinac and Sosnovske, to the point of incriminating herself into the murder of Taunja simply to get Sosnovske behind bars. Though she later tries to get out of the trap, the officials cannot believe her. She and Sosnovske’s lawyers thus quickly agree to a guilty plea for the two to get away with a light sentence. They get 13 years IHL in return. Olsen’s writing technique to include expert advice and arrange his sub-themes in chronological order helps in keeping the reader interested from beginning to end. Throughout the book, we see the names of Keith, Leslie Jesperson, Brad (Keith’s brother), Taunja Bennett, Julie Winningham feature prominently. They are the millionaire’s cabbage around which the story is woven.

Finally, Keith makes a difficult decision and decides to confess to Detective Rick Buckner that he killed Taunja. Keith makes another decision to write to his elder brother Brad and confess that he was a serial killer. When he sends the letter, Brad takes it to his father who tells him to submit to police as evidence. When Keith is arrested and decides to advice Brad to destroy the letter, it is tool late.

In the end, we see Keith triumphing because, though he is jailed for life, he manages to get away with a life sentence instead of a death sentence. After all he did, a life sentence is too minimal a sentence. This is evident in sentiments raised by one of Julie Winningham’s sisters. Joane Faria told reporters she would try to withhold tears for her sister until the killer was put to death.

No matter what my sister did in life, there was no reason for what he did. This monster makes a joke out of murdering somebody. He shows no remorse.

Worse still, Keith goes on rampage showing contempt for authority by granting media interviews from Oregon State Penitentiary purporting that he killed more than nine women. Sometimes he exaggerates and puts the figure at 40 or 60, just to pump himself up. He starts an internet forum where he touts his exploits, angering the association for online publishers in the US. He also sets about creating a League of Serial Killers. To supplement his contacts, he also stays in touch with criminologists, journalists, producers, detectives, high school students, lawyers, teachers, researchers, distant relatives, doctoral candidates, celebrities and other aficionados of bloody murder. Keith also continues to sign autographs with a ‘Happy Face’ as his trademark, in the process mocking family members of his victims like Joane Faria. Another sign that Keith has triumphed is the eventual release of Pavlinac and Sosnovske, to the chagrin of police and court officials. In the end, Keith declares that he is happier in prison than he would be anywhere outside prison. He says he could not ask for more in life than the freedom he has at Oregon State Penitentiary; he even seems to enjoy the tight security he is accorded.

Keith Hunter Jesperson, Leslie Samuel Jesperson, Julie Winningham, Taunja Bennett and Peggy Jones are the main characters in while story. Support characters include John Sosnovske, Laverne Pavlinac, Sue Anna, Angela Subrize, Rose Pernick, Billy Smith, Detective Rick Buckner, Bruce Jesperson, Duke, Art Jesperson, Sharon, Jill, Gladys Bellamy Jesperson, Claudia

The book is also rich in symbols, some of which include the following features, objects and words:
1. Stolid figures of the north, in reference to the Jesperson’s domineering ancestry, represent strength
2. The term ‘permanent resident of a walled domain’ on page 36, used in reference to Keith’s incarceration, represent prison
3. The term ‘On a chill winter’ in the prologue by author Jack Olsen represents bad news
4. Zero temperatures, gale-force winds and blizzards on page 36 -in reference to the time the Jespersons moved from British Columbia to the prairies- represent tough circumstances/situations
5. Parched Prairies of Saskatchewan, also being described as the ‘Dirty Thirties’ on page 36, represent a period of less fortunes. As it turns out, the Jespersons are forced to go back to British Columbia after finding a Dustbowl famine in their new land.
6. Happy Face, used throughout half of the book, represents carefree (freedom).
7. Belt, used throughout the book in reference to his father, represents cruelty.
8. Lizards represent commercial sex workers, who are seen looking through truck windows in search of customers, mostly drivers, throughout the book.

These symbols are constant and do not change. The other notable aspect is that most of the symbols are unique to the characters’ situations, while such symbols as hugs and chilly weather, Zero temperatures, gale-force winds and blizzards, permanent resident of a walled domain and lizards are universal. They apply everywhere.

Ironic situations also abound. Cases include the time Keith learns that two people have been arrested for the murder of Taunja Bennett. He says he feels sorry for them yet he goes on to celebrate his freedom. The other case is when he lets Jean go scot-free after trying to break her neck three times; it is so ironical of a serial killer wishing to leave no trace for his crimes. We also find Keith blaming ghosts for the arrest of Laverne and Sosnovske. Though he claimed to have been no criminal, Keith acknowledges being a key follower of Perry Mason’s TV programme on how to build an alibi and conceal criminal evidence. He also gets angry at a woman, Susan Smith, who drowns her two children in a lake. Though he is a serial killer, attaching no importance to human life, he vows never to beat or harm children, including his own. Keith also says in one of his letters that he loves his father, in the same letter declaring he hates him. The killing of his own girlfriend Julie is another situational irony, as well as Julie’s decision to report Keith to the cops for rape. It is unlike courting individuals. He also accuses his father, who is not a serial killer, of turning him into a serial killer.

Keith also knows many things that other characters do not. At a tuck-shop in New Mexico, he gives a waitress a U$D65 necklace as tip. When the waiter wonders, Keith says: “Where I am going I won’t need this.” The waitress did not know what he was talking about. Again, when Julie threatens that she will allege rape, Keith tells her she does not know what she is talking about and what she is dragging herself into (death by strangulation), Julie insists she knows what she is talking about. She does not know that Keith was murdering women and she died. Keith also blows his truck horn when he passes prisons, shouting ‘I will join you guys one day’ Prison guards did not understand.
These actions influence the reader to conclude that Keith new his fate, which prompts one to read from cover to cover in a bid to follow every bit of the action. It helps in building a climax for the book.

‘I’: The Making of a Serial Killer is a well-written and comprehensively researched book that unravels one of the most incredible aspects of human behaviour: the urge to harm others without remorse, repeatedly even for a lifetime. It is written in simple language, using an easy to follow technique, and the inclusion of expert quotations turns the book into an instant resource guide into psychopath behaviour.

However, the author should have done more to get the side of Keith’s wife for another dimension to the story. The book also glorifies violence in that the main character shows no remorse for his actions. It could lead children into violence, much the same way as Perry Mason’s TV programme influenced Keith on building an alibi. In short, it teaches children and fanatics that they can harm others and get away with it; the pinnacle of anti-social behaviour. It would be better if the book was rated 18 and above as one way of safeguarding children from its violent contents.