Implication of criminal versatility

Why does the PCL list "criminal versatility" as a feature of psychopathy? Does it mean that committing multiple different kinds of crimes for no reason is a sign that you are a psychopath? And does it imply that if you have a criminal specialty that you are frequently involved in and you are not as varied in which kinds of crimes you commit, this means you are not a psychopathic offender in the eyes of Robert Hare or whoever administers the PCL? Is it meant to separate career criminals from psychopathic criminals?

It's only one feature of psychopathy. I imagine someone could still be a psychopath and not be criminally versatile. It was probably just thrown in there in an attempt to identify those who are.

good question.

My understanding of this:

A "common criminal" who tends to commit crime out of need or because it's the only life they know tends to stick to a type. A burglar will always be a burglar for example. They don't tend to be the most intelligent of individuals.

However, a psychopath is committing crimes due to having no social conscience, so is more likely to break any law that stands in his way. It's not done out of need to feed a family, it's done because it's there.
Personally, my crimes as a youth were very varied, and none of them served any purpose other than I just wanted to do them. I felt that I was invulnerable to the law, which turned out to not be true, but nevertheless it was how I felt.

It just means they excell in all forms of being a criminal.

A lot of people are only good @ one thing. Killing people. Running drugs. Finding drugs. Dealing drugs. Pimping girls.. stealing things..

A psychopath tends to excell in all fields.

Plus, psychopaths tend to be more difficult to catch purely due to their versatility. Remove an M.O. Spread yourself over a huge amount of different "Law enforment" sects (I.e Drugs.. home invasions, smuggling, etc) less chance to be caught compared to doing a lot in one specific area.

ajr8 wrote:Why does the PCL list "criminal versatility" as a feature of psychopathy? Does it mean that committing multiple different kinds of crimes for no reason is a sign that you are a psychopath? And does it imply that if you have a criminal specialty that you are frequently involved in and you are not as varied in which kinds of crimes you commit, this means you are not a psychopathic offender in the eyes of Robert Hare or whoever administers the PCL? Is it meant to separate career criminals from psychopathic criminals?

It is because the criminal element has to be impulsive, and therefore, not a career or anything structured that way. If you are impulsive in your actions, it will inevitably lead to versatility. It is to distinguish from simple malicious people who may take advantage of others here and there.

So I would answer yes to your other questions, as far as I understand it. I think you could also include things that are considered immoral, but not necessarily against the law as well. So "criminal" has to be taken broadly as something not regularly accepted in the environment.

OneRinger wrote:It is because the criminal element has to be impulsive, and therefore, not a career or anything structured that way. If you are impulsive in your actions, it will inevitably lead to versatility. It is to distinguish from simple malicious people who may take advantage of others here and there.

So I would answer yes to your other questions, as far as I understand it. I think you could also include things that are considered immoral, but not necessarily against the law as well. So "criminal" has to be taken broadly as something not regularly accepted in the environment.

I think this is a good point, but I think criminal versatility could be chalked up to just youthfulness, play time when you're in your late teens and you've fully and permanently developed into a psychopath that's prime time for going wild and doing all kinds of immoral or illegal things. But I bet even as a psychopathic offender, with age and experience you'd likely settle into something specific that suits you best and yields the most benefits for you personally. I think psychopaths probably have longer criminal histories that were varied when they were younger, before specific patterns developed and made them into a specific type of offender.

^Could be due in some part to age. But young rebels will look psychopathic anyway, because they do not really have a fully formed personality and not specific goal in life. It is when this pattern continues later on that you can talk about psychopathy, imo.

There was a murder case here, that seemed to be from a psychopath.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nat ... le4184526/
If you Google him a little, you will see that he made all kinds of little scams in the past. Like being an opportunistic pimp, for example. He always had stories made up to make him appear normal. You can't say he was really a full-fledged criminal before that murder, but he did all kind of things that would be frowned upon. Most of his past was not on trial because they thought it would have affected the jury too much. It is the rapidity and unexpected change in the type of behavior that is outstanding. So whether he was a psychopath or not, he had what I would call criminal versatility.

He was caught in part because he had to use his phone and was too impulsive not to do it, even though he knew he should not. It was all on the moment. He kidnap a kid, rape her and kill her. There was no plan, no reason. When you do a lot of meaningless stuff like that, you are versatile.

OneRinger wrote:^Could be due in some part to age. But young rebels will look psychopathic anyway, because they do not really have a fully formed personality and not specific goal in life. It is when this pattern continues later on that you can talk about psychopathy, imo.

Agreed, but no doubt psychopaths get their start young and continue into adulthood in their criminal careers. I think settling into a specific and repetitive type of crime comes naturally, whether it's for actual monetary gain or if it just satisfies your psychological needs the best.

OneRinger wrote:^Could be due in some part to age. But young rebels will look psychopathic anyway, because they do not really have a fully formed personality and not specific goal in life. It is when this pattern continues later on that you can talk about psychopathy, imo.

There was a murder case here, that seemed to be from a psychopath.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nat ... le4184526/
If you Google him a little, you will see that he made all kinds of little scams in the past. Like being an opportunistic pimp, for example. He always had stories made up to make him appear normal. You can't say he was really a full-fledged criminal before that murder, but he did all kind of things that would be frowned upon.

I'm always fascinated when criminals graduate from petty or just non violent crime into violent crime like rape and murder. I don't quite understand it, I would think violence starts young and continues until a burn out stage or you get stopped by the law. I reached a burn out of violence at age 19. I've done the exact opposite of this guy. I've gone from violent to non violent and have not felt a strong psychological need to engage in violence. I've graduated into normal crime you could say. I don't act like a sick maniac anymore I'm proud to say. It wasn't psychologically satisfying anyway and I made no money doing it.

OneRinger wrote: Most of his past was not on trial because they thought it would have affected the jury too much.

When you're on trial for murder, it's easy to get your lesser crimes dropped from the record. It would be redundant to sentence him to life in prison for murder, plus two years for pimping, plus nine months for ATM fraud or something, his murder charge is enough for the jury.

ajr8 wrote:I'm always fascinated when criminals graduate from petty or just non violent crime into violent crime like rape and murder. I don't quite understand it, I would think violence starts young and continues until a burn out stage or you get stopped by the law.

Power over others is a highly addictive thing and people act differently, addictions or not. You seem to be looking for a linear path to understand human characteristics whether disordered or not.

I don't think you're going to find it. You have found yours though and that's really quite good considering how few people are truly self aware.