Trait Theory and Routine Activity Theory: Russell Williams

Introduction: A Criminal Who Defies Simple Profiling

The case of former colonel Russell Williams offers unique insight into the psychology of criminal behavior. Williams's confession interview was released to the public and aired on The Fifth Estate, giving criminologists, sociologists, psychologists, and law enforcement officials rare access to the mind of a serial offender. Analysts interviewed for the documentary note that Williams presents a conundrum for psychologists and criminologists, as his reactions during the police interview did not fit any previously known profile — including that of a psychopath.

Williams exhibits traits that resemble psychopathic behavior, in accordance with individual trait theory. For instance, he meticulously recorded his crimes and kept photographic and video imagery as souvenir mementos. Yet Williams also waived his right to an attorney, permitted a foot imprint of his incriminating boots, and stated during the interview that he "was hoping" he would not have raped or killed again had he not been caught.

In addition to trait theory, routine activity theory can be applied to the curious case of Russell Williams. Unlike trait theory, which focuses almost exclusively on the criminal, routine activity theory takes into account the victim's attractiveness as a target. Williams's selection of victims was based on a type of opportunism consistent with what routine activity theory would predict. Moreover, there is an element of opportunism in Williams's methodology, even where his actions were premeditated. Russell Williams will continue to confound criminal psychologists because he combines the unique traits of the psychopath with the calculated opportunism of observing his targets go about their daily routines. This paper argues that both trait theory and routine activity theory are necessary for understanding Russell Williams, drawing on the facts of the case as well as relevant secondary sources.

Artifact Collection and the Psychology of Power

As Warren, Dietz, and Hazelwood (2013) point out, the collection of artifacts, memorabilia, evidence, and souvenirs from crimes is counterintuitive and paradoxical. The behavior represents a unique subset among serial offenders. After all, the evidence is kept close to the offender — in his home, for example — and provides an unequivocal link between the offender and the crimes committed. In some cases, such collections offer bulletproof evidence in the form of DNA and other irrefutable items. The amassing of artifacts is a peculiar psychological trait belonging to a subset of criminals, and one that supports individual trait theory. Trait theory explores the quirks of individual behavior, including the motivation to keep a database of crime artifacts in spite of the significant legal risk that entails. The collection of such items is a "trait" that belongs to Williams and others like him.

In addition to taking photographs and videos, Williams also collected his victims' undergarments — dozens of bras and panties. Psychologists note that collecting victims' undergarments represents much more than a perverted sexual fantasy; such items are "more than just fetishes" (LaSalle, 2013, p. 1). Trait theory offers two explanations for this artifact-collection behavior. The first is related to the sense of power the offender maintains over the victim. Just as rape and murder are crimes in which power is exerted and expressed, the preservation of artifacts indicates that the offender retains power over his victims even after they are dead. This sense of power also reinforces the offender's feelings of self-efficacy and success in evading detection across successive crimes. The second explanation is that artifact collection is an integral element of ritualized criminal behavior. Reverie and remembrance of the victims reinforces the offender's sense of power, reminding him why he commits the crimes and motivating future offenses.

The extent of Williams's collection — and the photographs he took of himself wearing his victims' undergarments — clearly indicates that the need for power was a key component of his psyche. Williams, a former Canadian Forces colonel, had been trained throughout his career in hierarchies and understood the importance of power and rank. For reasons that may include a sense of losing control or deep cognitive dissonance, Williams apparently reached a point where he felt compelled to acquire power by other means. Having exhausted legitimate sources of authority, he developed an alter ego of sorts. Notably, he did not begin his crimes until the age of 44 (LaSalle, 2013).

His police interrogation reveals a striking split in Williams's personality: he expresses remarkable sympathy for his wife and a strong desire to protect her, in spite of his crimes. It is as if Williams perceived two distinct selves — the married man moving into a new home with his wife, and the man compelled to rape and murder. Until his arrest, Williams was able to keep these two halves compartmentalized. He may even have waived his right to a lawyer precisely because the Williams who cooperated with police was not the same Williams who committed the crimes. One of Williams's rape victims has since claimed that his wife in fact knew of his double life, withheld evidence, and financially benefitted from the case (Friscolanti, 2014).

Psychological Triggers and the Limits of Trait Theory

Trait theory may not entirely account for all elements of Williams's criminal behavior. One psychiatrist assigned to the case withdrew from it, claiming it caused him to develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), as he stated to the CBC ("Dr. John Bradford won't work Magnotta case because of PTSD," 2014). Dr. John Bradford claimed that Williams had lived a normal life and was "not a psychopathic individual" before the age of 44, when he began acting on his criminal urges. According to Bradford (2014), something specific happened in Williams's personal life — an actual trigger event — "which has never been in the public domain" ("Dr. John Bradford won't work Magnotta case because of PTSD," 2014, p. 1). If this is the case, Williams may not be a typical psychopath, but rather someone who experienced a psychopathic "break" — analogous to how individuals with no prior psychological history can experience a psychotic break.

According to LaSalle (2013), the trigger event that has presumably never been released to the public could have been Williams's use of a controversial "cocktail of prescription drugs" taken for "an excruciating bout of chronic joint pain" that was threatening to end his career as a pilot (p. 1). If pharmaceuticals contributed to a psychopathic break, trait theory remains applicable: Williams had already demonstrated a preexisting tendency toward his crimes, evidenced by his admission of fantasizing about stealing women's underwear in his twenties and thirties (LaSalle, 2013). Trait theory also shows how pharmaceutical drugs can enhance or alter personality traits in ways that make criminal behavior possible — or, in Williams's case, perhaps inevitable. Trait theory encompasses not only psychological and personality characteristics, but also biological markers that influence whether individuals commit crimes. Pharmaceuticals are designed to alter brain chemistry, which is why they may be implicated in releasing or suppressing neurochemicals associated with emotion and impulse control.

Conclusion: A Dual-Framework Analysis

Individual trait theory and routine activity theory combine to account for the story of Russell Williams, the disgraced Canadian Forces colonel now serving consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole. What trait theory cannot explain in Williams's behavior, routine activity theory can. Routine activity theory accounts for the fact that Williams chose victims who were geographically close and accessible, and that he selected women in part because they offered a greater chance of successful overpowering. He began his crime spree with relatively low-level offenses — breaking and entering, stealing lingerie, and videotaping himself in the victims' clothing — that can be explained by routine activity theory, since the victims' predictable daily patterns allowed Williams to identify optimal moments to strike.

The personality and biopsychological traits that drove Williams toward heinous crimes round out the analysis. His long-standing lingerie fantasies, his years of apparent self-restraint, his possible pharmaceutical-induced inhibition loss, and his systematic artifact collection are all behaviors that trait theory can account for. Taken together, both trait and routine activity theories explain the case of Russell Williams more fully than any single framework could achieve.

References

"Dr. John Bradford won't work Magnotta case because of PTSD." (2014). CBC, March 13, 2014. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/dr-john-bradford-won-t-work-magnotta-case-because-of-ptsd-1.2571463

Fifth Estate. (2010). The Confession. [Video documentary].

Friscolanti, M. (2014). Russell Williams's wife knew he was a predator: victim. Maclean's. Retrieved from

LaSalle, L. (2013). Colonel Russell Williams where have you been? I've been to London to fly the queen and back to collect artifacts. All Things Crime, December 11, 2013. Retrieved from

Quan, D. (2013). U.S. study explores meaning behind Russell Williams's collection of 'artifacts' from crimes. Canada.com. Retrieved from

"Routine Activity Theory." (2011). Retrieved from

Warren, J. I., Dietz, P. E., & Hazelwood, R. R. (2013). The collectors: Serial sexual offenders who preserve evidence of their crimes. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18(2013), 666–672.