The murder was described as a thrill killing -now even ignoring their sexuality- and also I assume there was no sexual interference of Bobby Franks was this a sexual killing-did they get sexual excitement from the murder?
nismo power r34gtr
[deleted]
Though there was a sexual relationship between Leopold and Loeb, the killing itself wasn't sexual, nor did either get sexually excited by the killing. The murder was to prove they could pull off a perfect crime.
shareThey were never able to determine with certainty, but probably no. But Leopold, a homosexual, would engage in sex acts with his straight partner Loeb in return for participation in criminal activities.
shareReading more info on the case (mostly the psychiatrists' evaluations of Leopold and Loeb), Leopold was bi-leaning-gay, and Loeb was more asexual (not all that interested in sex).
shareIn real life, the prosecutor Crowe tried to make a case that Bobby Franks had been sexually molested — the Coroner's report, probably at Crowe's urging, included a finding that Franks' anus was dilated, suggesting it had been penetrated; but since he had been lying for several days without pants or underwear in a culvert with moving water washing over him, the lack of detectable traces of semen wasn't conclusive evidence either way.
When Crowe wsn't able to make a case for sexual abuse, he released a statement to the press revealing Leopold and Loeb were sexually "deviated". There seems to have been no real purpose to making the statement outside court other than Crowe feeling peeved and wanting to influence the public's opinion of the murderers.
Leopold and Loeb both denied having molested the body, but it's not clear otherwise why they would have removed all of Franks' clothing below the waist, and then abandoned it elsewhere in the field where he was found.
For those who want to read an historical account of the murder and subsequent trial, I can recommend "For The Thrill Of It" by Simon Baatz.
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.
It was an experiment in trying to commit the perfect crime. The kidnapping and the removing of the clothes was in my opinion a red herring to throw off Police
Oh GOOD!,my dog found the chainsaw
I don't understand your point, whitelion. Throw them off to what?
The murder couldn't have happened without the kidnapping. And the removal of Franks' pants led police to suspect exactly the kind of perpetrators Leopold and Loeb turned out to be. If it was an intentional red herring, it really wasn't a very artful one.
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.
What I've read about Leopold and Loeb, I wouldn't believe a word they said. Imo, they probably did molest the boy, but because they wanted to appear above it all, they would never admit what they actually did to him.
If they went through every detail, they most likely would have been put to death or at least, received a longer sentence.
I'm in the middle of the Baatz book now, which so far is excellent.
IIRC, Baatz says that L&L burned Franks's clothing in the Loeb house furnace, except for one sock, which had been lost somewhere along the way. Things that could not be burned (shoes, etc.) were dumped in a different location in the country.
Since they also tried to disfigure Franks with acid, it seems that they removed his clothes as part of their larger effort to make it impossible for police to identify the body if it was found (which they thought would not happen for a long time in any event).
....
This was never a sexual killing or molestation case--everyone with a conspiracy theory in their heads wanted it to be, though, so the malignant thoughts linger.
In reality, Bobby Franks was killed just moments after he got into the back seat with Richard Loeb (his cousin) by a sharp blow to the head with a taped-up chisel; Nathan Leopold was driving. The removal and subsequent burning of the clothes was a half-arsed attempt to mask the identity of the body; the same idea was behind the use of acid to try and burn off the face and genitals (due to Franks being circumcised). These were amateurs committing their first major crime, remember.
Sexuality never came into it, save for the fact that Leopold and Loeb had a give-and-take relationship. Loeb wanted Leopold to commit crimes with him; Leopold wanted Loeb's affection. As a side note, according to all interviews and paperwork, the sexual relationship between Leopold and Loeb never involved anal penetration.
[deleted]
Leopold was in love with Loeb, and up until the end of his life kept of picture of Richard Loeb in his room. Loeb was killed in the Joliet prison shower in 1936. One wag of a newspaper writer wrote after the murder, "Richard Loeb, despite his erudition, today ended his sentence with a proposition."
As for their physical relationship, it was said that Richard Loeb would allow Nathan Leopold to put his penis between Loeb's legs whenever Leopold did something to please him.