Get this or a similar paper done in as fast as 4 hours, 24/7.
NB: We do not sell prewritten papers. All essays are written from scratch according to are specific needs and instructions
Instructions:
After going through each and every reading in detail these are rea
Instructions:
After going through each and every reading in detail these are readings which are below I have provided pdf
write an original initial discussion post of 250-300 words that conveys your thoughts about the following question:
The Unit 06 Research Discussion is based on the following required readings:
Levin, Jack and James Alan Fox. 2017. Multiple Homicide: Understanding Serial and Mass
Murder, Chapter 15 in The Handbook of Homicide, edited by F. Brookman, E.R. Maguire, and M. Maguire
Pettigrew, Mark. 2020. Confessions of a serial killer: A neutralization analysis. Homicide Studies 24(1): 69-84.
DISCUSSION QUESTION: Much of the research on serial killers has been conducted in the United States, including your required readings above which outline the various explanations or motivations for serial homicide.
Which of these do you find most compelling and why?
Next, select a name from the list of Canadian serial killers below and search the internet for what is known about this individual.( Gilbert Paul Jordan-https://medium.com/@mrodriguez0/gilbert-paul-jordan-the-serial-killer-that-used-alcohol-to-kill-his-victims-94db52e9060b
Which of the explanations or motivations are the most relevant to the serial killer selected? How well does his profile fit what we know about the demographics of serial killers and their relationships with victims?
Discuss your findings with your group.
In this course, our discussions are what we describe as ‘asynchronous’; that is, students discuss an assigned question, exchanging ideas related to this question at varying points each week. A key benefit of asynchronous online discussions is that students can participate whenever it is most convenient (although see grading rubric about timing of posts below) and can think about the weekly discussion questions before participating. In this way, students often feel better prepared as they have read and engaged with the course materials before participating (which is also one of the important aspects discussed in the grading rubric below).
The purpose of the discussion forums is to have students engage with course material and then demonstrate their understanding of course materials by expressing/explaining an idea, responding to other group members’ ideas, and/or developing a thread of ideas together as a group. In this way, students learn from the instructor, the course materials, and each other. It further provides students with ongoing opportunities to review, reflect upon, and apply new knowledge such as concepts, theories, or research findings. This will help when students are working on their two major writing assignments for this course which also requires knowledge of and engagement with course materials.
There will be diverse perspectives and that is o.k. However, all students must strive to be constructive and considerate if they disagree with any of their group members. It is okay to challenge and disagree with each other but only if it is done in a respectful manner.
Note: There is no single ‘right answer’ and the approach you describe need not reflect all of the tactics! The goal here is to generate discussion and share ideas about how best to engage in challenging conversations about climate change.
After you have made your original post, read some of the posts from your classmates and construct one reply post of 100-150 words that responds to one of your group-mate’s original posts. Your reply post should be written such that it does one or more of: identifies something that you find especially interesting or insightful about your classmate’s original post; poses an engaging and relevant question and/or builds on the ideas from your classmate’s original post; raises a real-life experience or observation that you feel would be relevant to illustrate or help further develop an idea or point in your classmate’s original post.
Please note that you will need to make an original post before you can read and respond to your peers’ posts
¨write in 260 words. follow proper guidelines as given in beginning. Use AP7 STYLE OWL PURDE. Provide reference.
Write in on own words.
¨Some points to keep in mind:
Be clear and to the point in your postings.
Edit your work. Your posts should be coherent and use proper grammar and spelling.
Keep postings to 250-300 words. Quality is better than quantity.
Contribute your own thoughts about the material you have read.
Support your thoughts by referencing the video and docx provided and other outside literature.
Raise additional questions or points of discussion to stimulate further discussion
If you have questions, show that you have already tried to find a solution.
Respect the viewpoints of your peers. Ask for clarification if you don’t understand a point. Assume good intentions.
Use the proper terminology introduced in the course readings.
When using literature in your postings, make sure to provide references in proper APA Style.
Show respect and sensitivity to peers’ gender, cultural and linguistic background, political, and religious beliefs.
You are strongly encouraged to take the time to review the following documents on writing quality discussion posting and on taking roles in discussions.
PREPARING TO WRITE1. Read assigned material—critically—and take notes as you read: Who wrote this material (a respected expert? an activist with a specific aim or belief?) Do they have any possible biases? Are studies reliable and valid? (What kind of research was performed?) When was this material written? Are the definitions/conditions/opinions described still accur vant? ate/rele Is an opinion expressed? How might someone disagree? How does this material relate to other concepts and theories you are studying? (Remember, instructors choose readings with a plan in mind—try to imagine why they have assigned this reading) Does the article complement other things you have learned? Is it in opposition? 2. Read and understand the discussion question or topic provided by your instructor • What are you asked to do? (Formulate an opinion? Respond to a question? Explain a concept or theory?) • How are you asked to do this? What kind of information are you expected to include (e.g., supporting quotations or references, examples, etc.) Do you need to bring in outside research? 3. Sort out the finer details • Is there a word maximum? Minimum? (Most posts will be 1‐2 paragraphs maximum). • How many times are you expected to post? (Find out if you are required to post a certain number of times per question, per week, etc.) • How much of your grade is this component worth? Each post? Budget your time accordinglyAre you expected to respond to other students’ posts? What proportion of original posts versus responses are you asked to provide?INITIAL POSTS – An initial post is a response to the original question presented by the course instructor, or the opening post on a particular topic (i.e., not responding to other students’ posts). Consider each post a “mini‐thesis,” in which you state a position and provide support for it. If you are responding to a question, be sure to 1. Take a position: Provide a clear answer to the question (incorporate some of the wording of the question in your answer if possible). 2. Offer a reasoned argument: Provide an explanation for your point of view, and use evidence from your text, notes, or outside research (where appropriate) to support your point. 3. Stay focused: End with a summary comment to explain the connection between your evidence and the question (how your evidence proves your point). Your post might also introduce a question or idea that others can follow up on. But make sure you have answered the question first!
Discussion Grading Rubric:
Discusssion Marking rubric.
A+ Discussion Post A+
Criteria
Excellent16 – 20 points
Posted early and continued toTimeliness make contributions throughout each week.
Posts
Quantity of Posted more than three times each week.
Posts
Overall Score
Level 5
All original posts were directly related to the question, were thoughtful, and includedQuality of references to the course readings.All response posts engaged classmates in further dialogue on the topic.
48 and above
Original Initial Post(8-10 points) Length guidelines met.
writing is clear and engaging; approach clearly described, including tactics it would reflect. Approach connected to/rationalized in terms of QUESTION In the Unit 05 Discussion area , after reading DISCUSSION QUESTION: Much of the research on serial killers has been conducted in the United States, including your required readings above which outline the various explanations or motivations for serial homicide.
Which of these do you find most compelling and why?
Next, select a name from the list of Canadian serial killers below and search the internet for what is known about this individual. ( Gilbert Paul Jordan)
Which of the explanations or motivations are the most relevant to the serial killer selected? How well does his profile fit what we know about the demographics of serial killers and their relationships with victims?
Discuss your findings with your group.
No any other outside source has to be used. I have also attached the grading rubric photo.
very very important instructions.
please start reading instructions mam
and guidelines and you have to answer to this i am proving the grading rubrics everythong write in own words no AI AND CHATGPT AS MAM HAS THE SOFTAWARE TO DETECT.EACH AND EVERY LINE and each and every word.
I Have also attached the grading rubric photo which is in form of image grading rubric is very much important you have to follow each and every instruction very carefully.
only these sources which i have provided you have to use.I have also attached the grading rubric photo.Original Initial Post(8-10 points) Length guidelines met.
writing is clear and engaging; approach clearly described, including tactics it would reflect.approach connected to/rationalized in terms of QUESTION: In the Unit 04 Discussion area , after reading For this activity, ask two of your friends or family members how they would explain what leads an individual to kill another individual. What theories or explanations appear to underscore their views? How might their view relate to their age, gender, and where they live?
It should contain no spelling errors and typos
READINGS which have to be used
Resources and link which has to be used are five pdf which have to be analsyed and use proeprly.
NO OTHER SOURCE HAS TO BE USED ONLY these readings has to be used .
No outsource has to be used.
First you have go through these readings and
First you have go through these readings and
Readings are as follows:
I have attached the pdf in order
READING:1 Handbook of Homicide. Ch.15: Multiple Homicide: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder [Read pages 249-265]
Levin, J., Fox, J.A.(https://ares.lib.uoguelph.ca/ares/ares.dll?action=…)
READING:2 Investigating cold cases and killers in the “murder city”
W5: Death’s Playground
READING:3
Homicide Studies. Confessions of a Serial Killer: A Neutralisation Analysis
Pettigrew, M. refrence link which should be put( in https://ares.lib.uoguelph.ca/ares/ares.dll?action=…)
Reading :4 Gilbert Paul Jordan: The Serial Killer That Used Alcohol To Kill His Victims https://medium.com/@mrodriguez0/gilbert-paul-jorda…(very vrery important)
READING:5( refrence for this one should be https://courselink.uoguelph.ca/d2l/le/content/8932…) Unit 06 Introduction and Learning Outcomes
Introduction
Have you ever been asked, “What relationship in your life do you think will pose the most danger to you?” It is unlikely and equally unlikely that you have ever thought about who might pose the most danger to you. Think about it for a moment now. It is likely that each of you will come up with a different answer because it will depend on a variety of factors and circumstances in your own life that may be different from others in this course.
It is an important question, however, when seeking to understand homicide because the relationship between a victim and their killer is a key element focused on by researchers and, as we will learn later in the course, it is also a key element in the investigation of homicides by police as well as in how the courts respond to homicide.
Remember, as Barkan (2015) noted, social relationships and social interactions are key to understanding criminality, and violence can arise from straightforward or complex circumstances or contexts. For example, we have already learned in previous units that males in Canada are most often killed by acquaintances, whereas females in Canada are more often killed by family members, and most often male partners. Therefore, your answer to the question posed above – what relationship poses the most danger to your life – may often depend on whether you are female or male as well as other characteristics (e.g. your age, your race/ethnicity, where you live, what your occupation is, etc.). Regardless, understanding the various types of homicides often begins with an examination of social relationships, if any, between the victims and their killers.
Units 06 through 09 examine what will be referred to as ‘social types’ of homicide. Social type refers to homicide that can be categorized based on the social relationship between the victim and the perpetrator or the social processes (or circumstances) that led up to or surrounded the homicide. For our purposes, the victim-perpetrator relationship will be the most important factor for our discussions because, as homicide research pioneer Marvin E. Wolfgang (1958, p. 203) once stated:
“…homicide is a dynamic relationship between two or more persons caught up in a life drama where they operate in a direct, interactional relationship. More so than in any other violation of conduct norms, the relationship the victim bears to the offender plays a role in explaining the reasons for such flagrant violations.”
This does not mean that the social structures we learned about in previous units are no longer important. Regardless of the social relationship between victims and their killers or the circumstances involved, social structures may often determine or shape the way in which specific types of homicide occur between those sharing these different social relationships and we’ll see some examples of this in the coming weeks.
The various social types of homicide that we will learn about are often not mutually exclusive, however, as you will see throughout your readings. For example, Unit 06 and 07, focus on ‘multiple homicide’ and you likely automatically think of serial homicide or mass public killings that take place largely between strangers and, sometimes, acquaintances. But what about the husband/father who kills his wife and three children? This is an example of a mass homicide, sometimes referred to as familicide, but it has taken place between a man and his female partner/spouse (referred to as intimate partner homicide) and between a father and his children (referred to as filicide). It is often the case that there is a primary victim – usually the female partner, in this example – but there remains at least four possible homicide subtypes – or social types – that can be used to describe this event: mass homicide, intimate partner homicide, filicide, and familicide. If the offender kills himself following the homicide, this homicide event can also be referred to as a homicide-suicide. Mass homicide or familicide are the most appropriate terms in this example, but it shows that understanding the different social types of homicide requires our thinking to be flexible, recognizing each homicide may belong in multiple categories.
So, keeping this in mind, we begin in Unit 06 with the phenomenon of multiple homicide – discussing what we mean and then focusing first on serial homicide. Unit 07 will examine mass homicide which you will learn captures various types of killings that involve multiple victims. We will then move to more intimate types of homicide in Unit 08 by looking at children as both victims and perpetrators. Here, you will learn that children are most often killed by, and kill, those with whom they share the closest relationships. In Unit 09, we will examine homicides between those who arguably share the closest social relationship that adults can share: intimate partners. Throughout your readings, pay close attention to the role played by the victim-perpetrator relationship in these social types of homicide.
Now let’s turn to multiple homicide…
One of the most popular media or television images of the homicide perpetrator is that of the serial killer and, less often but equally fascinating to many, the mass killer. These types of perpetrators are often portrayed as unpredictable and random in their choice of victims, and a potential danger to all of us. The reality in the Canadian context and elsewhere is that these types of killers are generally rare and, as we will see in subsequent units, we have less to fear from such killers than we do from those whom we know more intimately. Although, certainly, the recent mass killings in Toronto in April 2018 and, more recently, in Nova Scotia in April 2020 may not leaving us feeling that this is the case and we’ll come back to these two cases in more detail in Unit 07.
However, multiple homicide can often feel to be quite distinct from other types of homicides and so the objective of the next two units is to become familiar with various types of multiple homicide perpetrators and victims, including their differences and similarities, and how we can categorize these different types of killings according to this information. You will also be asked to rethink the concept of multiple homicide by considering less-commonly discussed multiple homicide perpetrators and victims.
Defining Multiple Murder
Introduction
The first required reading for this unit by Levin and Fox provides a succinct overview of what is meant by multiple homicide – what they argue is primarily serial and mass homicide – focusing on individual perpetrators. They discuss varying definitions of multiple homicide (or murder) and highlight how the classification of these homicide events has often varied significantly with much disagreement among scholars and researchers leading to confusion among the general public as well as professionals. This is largely because many cases cross over definitional boundaries as shown below in my discussion of one of Canada’s serial killers – Allan Legere – or was he a mass killer or a spree killer? You read on and decide for yourself. It provides a great example of the complexities involved in the classification of multiple homicide perpetrators that are discussed by Levin and Fox.
Professor Dawson’s Story: Allan Legere
You might be surprised to learn that we have had numerous multiple homicide perpetrators (most often serial, but also mass and spree killers) documented in Canadian history and into the current day. Some of these are hard to categorize, however, as a specific type of multiple homicide.
For example, recall that in the mid-1980s I was a newspaper reporter in New Brunswick in a town that had been experiencing a series of homicides. One of these killings was committed by Earl Lewis, whom I’ve already discussed. Another involved three perpetrators— Todd Matchett, Scott Curtis and Allan Legere— who were convicted of killing Miramichi-area shopkeeper John Glendenning on June 21, 1986 and brutally beating and sexually assaulting Glendenning’s wife, Mary, who survived.
While serving a life sentence for the Glendenning murder, the third perpetrator — Allan Legere— became known as ‘The Monster of the Miramichi’ after he escaped custody on May 3, 1989 during his transfer to a local hospital for the treatment of an ear infection. Legere remained at large for seven months, during which time he committed four more homicides, arson, and sexual assault, before being recaptured. His subsequent trial for these homicides became one of the first Canadian cases to use DNA fingerprinting. Convicted for these crimes in 1991, he was reportedly held in Canada’s only super-max security penitentiary in Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines, Quebec. In 2015, he was reportedly transferred to the Edmonton Institution, a maximum-security federal institution in Alberta which caused some fear to resurface for those who experienced his reign of terror in New Brunswick (see link below).
Allan Legere’s transfer to lower security raises fears in Miramichi
If you search the Internet for information on Legere, you will see him referred to as a serial killer, a mass killer and a spree killer. Which is correct? My editor at the time, Rick MacLean, co-authored a book with CBC journalist, André Veniot, called Terror: Murder and Panic in New Brunswick (1990) that describes these events in detail. I draw from this book to show the difficulties of categorizing Legere.
As you will learn from the readings in this unit, the most common definition of a mass killer is the killing of four or more victims as part of a single, ongoing event in one location. Legere was convicted of killing four victims during his escape from custody, but these homicides were not part of a single, ongoing event nor did they occur in one location. Rather, his victims were killed at different locations and at different times. So, should he be classified as a serial killer, a spree killer, or both? Both would likely be appropriate, according to the criteria described by Fox and Levin (see Table 2.1), but let’s say you have to choose one or the other, which would you chose?
Recall that one key characteristic that distinguishes spree and serial killers is whether there is a cooling-off period. Clearly, the length of time that passed between Legere’s first victim in 1986 (John Glendenning) and the first of his four homicide victims in May of 1989 (Annie Flam) represents a long cooling-down period. However, this was due to his conviction and incarceration for Glendenning’s murder and not the result of his return to normal routines, which typically characterizes such cooling-down periods. If we focus, however, only on the four victims killed during his escape from custody, one might argue that serial killing best describes these events. For example, following the sexual assault and killing of Annie Flam and the sexual assault and beating of her sister-in-law, Nina, who survived this attack, Legere did not strike again until more than four months later, this time sexually assaulting and killing two sisters: Donna and Linda Daughney of Newcastle. Finally, approximately one month later, Legere killed his fourth victim: Father James Smith of Chatham. Therefore, there was a cooling-down period, which is not typically present in spree killing and arguably more than one event which is more characteristic of serial killing.
However, Legere was unable to return to his normal routines between each homicide as is typical of the serial killer because he was on the run and, further, this may also have had a role to play in the timing of the homicides. It is also often argued that spree killers usually do not have a typical victim and their victims are often those who were unfortunate to have crossed their path at that point in time. In contrast, serial killers often have a typical victim. It is believed that Legere sought out his four victims for specific reasons. However, beyond this connection, they share few characteristics (i.e., in terms of gender, age and so on), so can they be classified as a ‘type of victim’?
If you search the Internet for information on Legere, you will find that he is most often referred to as one of Canada’s ‘serial killers’, but you can see how he might be categorized otherwise. Not all cases are this difficult, though, so once you have completed the readings for this unit, give it a try with the cases provided and discuss your conclusions with your group.
Update: In 2021, Allan Legere cam up for parole and was denied (see story).
As you see, Levin and Fox argue that it is more beneficial to minimize the distinctions among serial, mass and spree homicide and, in fact, they argue that it’s time to eliminate the ‘spree killer’ designation altogether. In this course, we do just that focusing on serial homicide and mass homicide only which also have similarities, but enough differences to keep them as separate types of homicide. Before moving on to a more detailed discussion of serial homicide, make sure you spend some time on the Levin and Fox chapter, including Table 15.1, because it will help you better understand the remainder of this unit and the next.
Serial Murder
The term ‘serial killer’ conjures up images of Jack the Ripper, Jeffery Dahlmer and Ted Bundy and we more often think of the United States and, specifically, bigger cities in the United States as the hunting ground for such killers. But what about these names: Clifford Olson, Robert Pickton, Paul Bernardo, and Karla Homolka? These serial killers used Canada, and specifically British Columbia and Ontario, as their hunting ground, and not always in the bigger cities. And then there was Gerald Thomas Archer, Russell Johnson, and Christian Magee? It might surprise you to know that these serial killers perpetrated their crimes primarily in the London area although Russell Johnson, referred to as The Bedroom Strangler, killed one of his victims in Guelph.
In fact, it has been suggested that London may have had up to six serial killers operating all at the same time from 1960 to 1985. Further, if we base the number of suspected victims of serial killers on the size of the population of each of the two cities (i.e. rates per capita that we learned about in an earlier unit), London has more serial killers than New York. So perhaps large cities are not always the hunting ground for serial killers?
You can read more about what has been referred to as the ‘Serial Killer Capital of the World’ in the article by same name, Serial-Killer Capital of the World? A look at London, Ont.’s Dark History (Suen, F-Y., 2014) and you can add the book mentioned – Murder City: The Untold Story of Canada’s Serial Killer Capital, 1959-1984 – to your summer reading list if interested. But, for now, turn your attention to the required W5 documentary, Death’s Playground, which investigates cold cases and killers in London during this period.
W5: Death’s Playground
So far, we now know that serial killers, although rare, do not confine their acts to the United States or big cities. But what motivates serial killers? What do they look like in terms of their gender, age, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, education and so on? Some answers to the first question are contained in the Levin and Fox chapter in Table 15.1 and in the section ‘Explaining Multiple Murder.’ However, there is nothing like hearing it straight from the source so turn your attention to the required reading by Pettigrew (2020) who analyzes a confession from a serial killer which offers a somewhat different take from the explanations offered in Levin and Fox’s chapter.
Which explanation do you find more compelling? Why?
You now have some idea of potential motivations or explanations for serial killers’ behaviours, but what about the second question? What characteristics do serial killer share, if any? To learn more, read the recommended reading by Pakhomou (2004) who examines the demographics of serial killers as well as the relationships with their victims.
No any other outside source has to be used.I have also attached the grading rubric photo.
very very important instructions.
please start reading instructions mam
and guidelines and you have to answer to this i am proving the grading rubrics everything write in own words DONOT no USE AI AND CHATGPT AS MAM HAS THE SOFTAWARE TO DETECT.EACH AND EVERY LINE and each and every word.
I Have also attached the grading rubric photo which is in form of image grading rubric is very much important you have to follow each and every instruction very carefully.
only these sources which i have provided you have to use.I have also attached the grading rubric photo.
Get this or a similar paper done in as fast as 4 hours, 24/7.
NB: We do not sell prewritten papers. All essays are written from scratch according to are specific needs and instructions
Leave a Reply