I am not saying this is incorrect, however I was under the assumption that the Harpe's were the first american seriel killers. They dates back to the late 1700's and early 1800. Why does Holmes get this title. Also what about Billy Potts and his tavern? This is older than Holmes.
I am confused.
H.H. Holmes was the first criminal to be termed a multimurderer and was also the first DOCUMENTED American serial killer. The book, Holmes-Pitezel Case, is an excellent resource which documents the history of the Holmes case as well as the trial proceedings. The victims bodies were found and identified. The case went to trail and much physical evidence was also documented in numerous newspapers such as the Chicago Tribune and the Philadelphia Inquirer.
From Wikipedia:
"The Harpe Brothers were murderous outlaws who operated in Tennessee, Kentucky and Illinois in the late 1700's. Unlike most outlaws, their crimes were motivated more by blood lust than financial gain. There are so many versions of their story that it was difficult to separate fact from the legends of 150 years ago."
From Southern Illinois History - http://www.illinoishistory.com/pottsinn.html
"Historians have not been able to prove the existence of Billy (the very nature of the story prevents that). However, the tavern really did exist and documentary evidence does link the tavern keeper, a man by the name of Isaiah Potts, to the outlawry occurring in the first third of the 19th Century."
There were most likely other American serial killers before Holmes, many probably in the U.S. army slaughtering Indians as well.
Some cite Jesse Pomeroy as an early serial killer.
The term serial killer is widely believed to have been coined either by FBI agent Robert Ressler or by Dr. Robert D. Keppel in the 1970s. Here is the FBI's definition of serial killer: A serial killer is someone who commits three or more murders over an extended period of time with cooling-off periods in between.
Jesse Pomeroy only killed two children and thus cannot be classified as a serial killer.
I wondered about this too. Just off hand I can think of a few. The Harpes were very real and very murderous. Also, on the Natchez trace here, murders were a daily occurrence from the first time it was used.
The Terrible Benders, or The Bloody Benders, spring to mind. I'm pretty sure they came first. 99% sure but not 100% positive they preceded Mudgett. No one knows how many they killed. They found over a dozen bodies iirc and parts of even more. And they got away to continue. They were never caught.
There was 'Liver Eating' Johnson. The guy that the film Jeremiah Johnson was based upon. He had a blood feud with the Crows. As far as I know the Crows were universal allies of the whites with that one glaring exception. How many he killed is unknown but it was enough to spook a warrior tribe. Whether he eat the livers or not, I do not know. But he always cut the liver out.
Then there is the relatively unknown DeWitt Smith. His story was fairly well known here in middle Tennessee years back. I first heard of him from our history teacher. DeWitt Smith was a confederate soldier in the 45th Tennessee that deserted when he found out his cousin had been tortured to death by Union soldiers. Tongue and genitalia cut off, beaten, burned, sliced and dragged behind horses with a noose around his neck etc. DeWitt Smith went off the charts when he heard the news. He deserted and started his one man terror campaign to kill yankees. His method was to slip into camps at night and cut the throats of sleeping soldiers.
No one really knows the total. For the Union army did all they could to keep it under wraps. It caused a lot of fear and unrest. But most accounts say he slit the throats of at least 50 sleeping soldiers and traitors.
I would bet the US Civil War produced dozens of serial killers, if not more. After every war you have mass murders or serial killers pop up. But back then if you was moderately intelligent you could evade detection for years.
On a side note, I've not watched this film but if my memory serves me right, the guy that actually caused Mudgett to get caught was a guy serving time for train or bank robbery. A tough guy by all accounts. Some time after he gave the info that got Mudgett caught he built a Guillotine-like device with a brick, a piece of wood and two nails. He then used it to poke his own eyes out.
"What does it do?" Do? "It doesn't DO anything. That's the beauty of it." Jacques Heim/Louis Reard
[deleted]
These murders were never solved and thus cannot be titled as America's First Serial Killer if the perp has not been caught.
share"These murders were never solved and thus cannot be titled as America's First Serial Killer if the perp has not been caught."
Hogwash. By your definition Jack the Ripper is not to be considered a serial killer then.
To add another to the list of American serial killers who predate H.H. Holmes:
The Servant Girl Annihilator terrorized Austin in 1884 and 1885, resulting in 16 corpses and hundreds of false arrests. Holmes would have been just 21 years old at this time, having just graduated from Medical school. And while he was certainly doing strange things to cadavers and advancing his confidence game, he wasn't as yet murdering for sport. (As far as we know.)
I've never understood why Holmes is awarded the title of "first documented serial killer" when The Austin murder spree was so thoroughly reported upon and documented, a full 5 years before Holmes' "Murder Castle" was even constructed.
A lot of strange things happen in this world. Things you don't know about in Grand Rapids.
Read "The Devil in the White City" about this story. Brilliant!
share