The UK Lucia

Today saw the publication of a paper entitled “In Search of the ‘Angels of Death’: Conceptualising the Contemporary Nurse Healthcare Serial Killer” by Elisabeth Yardley and David Wilson (Birmingham City University, Centre for Applied Criminology). It appears (2014) in Wiley’s “Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling” (J. Investig. Psych. Offender Profil.)

I have many concerns about this paper but my first is the following: it is based on 16 past cases, at least 2 of which seem almost certain to have been rather serious miscarriages of justice. In fact an earlier version of the methodology proposed by the authors was used against Lucia de Berk – the prosecution brought in an FBI expert who has contributed to one of the first publications on HCSK’s (Health Care Serial Killers) … and in which he made use of his inside knowledge of the Lucia case.

So looking at this sample, N = 16 with at least 2 false positives (Colin Norris, Ben Geen), what can be concluded? (Probably at least 3 false positives: the Finnish case of Aino Nykopp-Koski  is highly controversial). The checklist of “red flags” certainly identifies those who are going to be successfully prosecuted as an HCSK. In fact the reason they are being prosecuted is precisely because of some of the red flags. Others are subjective evaluations by fellow nurses and doctors and are contributed to the prosecution case *after* it has started. The most pernicious point is that an investigation into a suspected HCSK starts internally in a hospital and is carried out by doctors who themselves, formally, should be seen as suspects (their own patients are involved…). How objective will they be? What we know from the cases of Lucia, Colin Norris and Ben Geen, is that in this situation, doctors trawl for recent “suspicious” cases, re-writing or at least re-explaining medical events, which till then had not been considered suspicious at all. This results in a compelling dossier which goes to the police … media, police and courts do the rest.

The appearance of this landmark paper was reported in the Guardian newspaper. Ben Geen got some free publicity, the newspaper even included his photograph, taken during trial or appeal. Don’t expect a photograph of a young man in the middle of an appalling nightmare to present a “picture of innocence”.

Here’s the checklist. Lucia had an enormous high score according to the evidence presented to the court. But not if the evidence is “corrected” with a view to correspondence to truth.

1. Moves from one hospital to another

2. Secretive/difficult personal relationships

3. History of mental instability/depression

4. Predicts when someone will die

5. Makes odd comments/claims to be ‘jinxed’

6. Likes to talk about death/odd behaviours when someone dies

7. Higher incidences of death on his/her shift

8. Seems inordinately enthused about his/her skills

9. Makes inconsistent statements when challenged about deaths

10. Prefers nightshifts—fewer colleagues about

11. Associated with incidents at other hospitals

12. Been involved with other criminal activities

13. Makes colleagues anxious/suspicious

14. Craves attention

15. Tries to prevent others checking on his/her patients

16. Hangs around during investigations of deaths

17. In possession of drugs at home/in locker

18. Lied about personal information

19. In possession of books about poison/serial murder

20. Has had disciplinary problems

21. Appears to have a personality disorder

22. Has a substance abuse problem

I emailed Prof. David Wilson in order to start an academic discussion with him about his research methodology. He said that I couldn’t criticise the paper because it has been published in a peer reviewed journal. And now he has blocked my emails. I have had the same experience when attempting to start a conversation with earlier researchers in this field. It seems that criminology is a field of science with impeccable research methodology and therefore above any criticism from other scientists.

Inside the Mind of HCSK Professionals

De Ene Zijn Dood is de Ander Zijn Brood, or One Man’s Death is Another Man’s Living. The public has a great fascination with murder, carried out by people whom we trust in situations in which we are helpless. Here are two books which capitalize on this: Inside the Minds of Health-Care Serial Killers by Katherine Ramsland; and Engelen des doods (Angels of Death), by Paula Lampe.
Continue reading