KEEPING KILLERS FROM PROFITING THEIR CRIMES

It seemed simple enough, people were clamoring for the story. The first to get all of the gory details and get it published. The ".44 magnum killer" was all the rage in the papers, who also became known as the "Son of Sam". He shot to almost stardom after his 13 month killing spree in the 70's. New York was on its knees in fear and the "Son of Sam" was at the top of the world.

The "Son of Sam", David Berkowitz was a postal worker born in New York city, who at the age of 24 started to stalk his victims on quiet streets or calm neighborhood communities. He started in the Bronx, then Queens and finally Brooklyn. His method of killing was point blank shooting or shooting through car windows with a .44 caliber handgun. He would many times find people parked in some remote place and kill them there.

With one set of victims, a young couple parked in a car in the wee hours of the morning on a cool spring day, he left a note. The note was personally addressed to Joseph Borrelli, the police detective assigned to investigate the recent crime spree. Part of the letter read as follows in all capital letters...

P.S. JB PLEASE INFORM ALL THE DETECTIVES WORKING THE CASE THAT I WISH THEM THE BEST OF LUCK. KEEP EM DIGGING, DRIVE ON, THINK POSITIVE, GET OFF YOUR BUTTS, KNOCK ON COFFINS, ETC. UPON MY CAPTURE I PROMISE TO BUY ALL THE GUYS WORKING ON THE CASE A NEW PAIR OF SHOES IF I CAN GET UP THE MONEY. Signed SON OF SAM (along with some scribbled symbols)

These letters continued being sent personally to Joseph Borelli until Berkowitz was arrested on August 10th, 1977. His reference to getting up the money to buy all of the people working on the case shoes may be an indication of the plans he had upon his imminent capture. Which happened coincidentally by a parking ticket he received and was seen tearing up near one of the crime scenes.

Upon his capture and the trial to follow, Berkowitz rocketed to celebrity status. His case was highly publicized in the press and it achieved worldwide recognition. It was because of this publicity that everyone wanted a piece of Berkowitz and his story and were willing to pay big money to get it. Berkowitz was given 26 consecutive 25 to life sentences for killing 6 people and wounding 7 others.

With his fate sealed, Berkowitz was offered excessive amounts of money for the story of these killings. But before he was able to act on the offers, the state of New York enacted a new law slated as, "The Son of Sam" law. The law was put into place to keep criminals from profiting from the publicity of their crimes, i.e. selling their stories to publishers. After the placement of the law in New York, other states also adopted similar laws. Some of them often authorize money earned from deals such as book/ movie and paid interviews to be used to compensate the victims of the crime or their families.

The law after numerous revisions in New York in 2001, remains in effect and is still called the "Son of Sam" law, requires that victims of crimes be notified when a person convicted received 10,000 dollars or more from virtually any source. It also states that a person may not benefit from the sale of a story or any other mementos pertaining to the crime, if the criminal was convicted after the date lawmakers passed the law in the state where the crime was committed. It also gives victims an extended period of time to sue the perpetrator of the crime in civil court.

Currently about 40 states and the federal government have "Son of Sam" laws on the books and occasionally comes under scrutiny with the argument being stated that it violates a first amendment right of free speech. This was more recently brought into question when the kidnapper of Frank Sinatra Jr., David Keenan sold his story and was sued by Sinatra. Keenan contended that the state law violated his first amendment rights and should not be applied to the case since the crime was committed more than two decades before the state law took effect. First amendment advocates and others support Keenan's efforts and argue that "Son of Sam" laws would keep many books from publication. Others say that without financial incentive many criminals would not tell their stories, which can be critical to historians and criminologists.

I remain torn between the lines when it comes to the laws, while I agree that criminals should not profit from their crimes, I also don't want my rights infringed upon in the area of the First Amendment and free speech. The "Son of Sam" laws were put into place for a reason but perhaps it is time for a revamp of them and maybe a middle ground where all parts of the process can be satisfied.