I’m not a psychologist, just the son of one.
We’ve been talking about what might have motivated Chris Benoit to do what he did. It occurred to me that his behavior is consistent with that of a wild animal — whatever it is that gives us the ability to reason over our animal instincts got turned off in his head somehow.
Benoit’s child with Nancy was seriously handicapped, though two children from a previous relationship were not.
In the wild, animals kill sickly children they don’t think will be able to survive alone. I’ve seen a Siamese cat eat her young.
If a wild animal deems that a female can only bear sickly young, it might kill the female too.
Ironic that Benoit’s nickname was “The Rabid Wolverine.”
Suicide is not an animal instinct. But it is a very human reaction to the realization that your life, and that of your loved ones, is irrevocably ruined.
That’s my theory of what was happening inside of him, anyway.
I think you’re about 180 degrees wrong about most of it actually. The time between the events and the text messaging don’t vibe with someone working on animal instincts.
What it speaks to is a mind state of panicked rationalization. Something happened to set him off, maybe she planned to leave him and take the kid. He reacted poorly, and then painted himself in a corner where killing his wife seemed like the only option.
After that he probably had a few ideas, like fleeing the country, hiding the body and etc., but he realized that none of those options vibed with the well being of his son. Again, the only logical solution in his mind was the end the kid’s life.
The last part was also a rationalization.
This kind of thing happens a lot. It is part of a survival instinct but almost every action is poured over by a panicked but lucid mind. It was still him, but at his worst. Can you be absolutely sure of what you would or wouldn’t do at your worst?
I think ReJeKt hits on some of both my and Luke’s points about all of this.
He reacted poorly
This to me is a weird thing to say. His poor reaction was to “kill is family”. Ours would have been to “cry and run away”
Why?
Again, the only logical solution in his mind was the end the kid’s life.
Logic = killing someone?
It was still him, but at his worst.
This, I actually agree with. There is no “not him” vs. “him” discussion for me. The only people I know of with two “minds” are split-brain patients (multiple personality disorder does fit in this description)
Can you be absolutely sure of what you would or wouldn’t do at your worst?
I have to think about this and how it correlates with what I was saying in previous posts. On a previous post I ask (parphrased) “If put in the right scenario, am I mentally able to do these and other horrific things?”
If yes, than that means every single one of us has the mental capacity to murder his/her family or torture hundreds of people, and we are just “deciding” NOT to do those things.
If no, than the people that can do these things have “different” brains or “different” biology than me.
When I say he “he reacted poorly” I mean whatever got it to the situation where he tied his wife up before he killed her. It’s not too hard to imagine, He hit her, she threatened to go to the cops and ruin his career, he hit her again even harder, etc.. After that there’s really only two choices, give yourself up or get rid of the evidence.
And I’m saying the logic of killing his son was in his mind alone. But yeah, sometimes it is logical to kill someone. That doesn’t make it right though. He undoubtedly thought about what his kid’s life would be like in the foster system or in a special care home and came to the conclusion that it would be worse than a quick death in his own bed.
It’s not too hard to imagine, He hit her, she threatened to go to the cops and ruin his career, he hit her again even harder, etc..
I understand this, but it still doesn’t answer why he was “mentally capable” to keep hitting her. There are tons of domestic cases where the guy “decides” to stop hitting the woman… He didn’t. What took over?
The answer still seems more like Luke’s “animal instinct” deal. He was unable to control it, to tell himself to stop.
And I’m saying the logic of killing his son was in his mind alone.
I agree that it was in his “abnormal-animal” mind alone. I think my “normal” mind would NOT keep killing and I would just collect my losses. BUT like you said earlier: “Can you be absolutely sure of what you would or wouldn’t do at your worst?” That truly is a scary question. You can know a person through and through but still have no idea how they would react in a certain situation. Does that mean I have the mental ability to murder countless people and eat ‘em just for good measure? if I was at my worst?
He undoubtedly thought about what his kid’s life would be…
To me, if he was “thinking normally” at all, he wouldn’t have done any of it.
I think anyone is capable of killing, for sure. It’s not an impulse we’ve evolved past. I have evil thoughts cross my mind all the time, but also a holding program of sorts that says no, don’t do that.
But killing your own kid goes against the most hardwired of instincts, genetically, morally, rationally, etc. An animal’s primary reason for being (and that includes the human animal) is to propagate the species. Most parents would die to protect their young.
That is, except in cases where the animal instinct is to say that the offspring is not viable. Reason and morality still say no, but subtract those…
I can recall a lot of cases where people killed their children or families to “protect” them from something, usually some truth about the killer themselves.
I think in his mind he was protecting his son from the hell of being in “the system” where he would be over-medicated and mistreated. It was mercy killing, an act of love in a way.
The time delay between the events and the text messages he sent in between them don’t give credence to some sort of “temporary insanity.” He didn’t just kill his wife, he tied her up, and then made the decision to kill her. that is not an instinct.
It’s not hard for me to imagine the panic of a “world is closing in on you” kind of mind state that a person could get themselves into for actions like these to seem like the the only option at the time. I’m surprised it doesn’t happen more often.
I have evil thoughts cross my mind all the time, but also a holding program of sorts that says no, don’t do that.
Exactly my point. Your “holding program” works. His doesn’t/didn’t.
But killing your own kid goes against the most hardwired of instincts
Absolutely. But there is post-pardum disorder as well. And side note: If killing your own kid goes against what “nature” gave him…then doesn’t that state that his “brain” abnormal?
I can recall a lot of cases where people killed their children or families to “protect” them from something, usually some truth about the killer themselves.
And this is not “temporary insanity”? Seems pretty insane to me.
I’m surprised it doesn’t happen more often.
Exactly…Some are born with biological differences that can cause them to go haywire and other not. That would explain why it doesn’t happen to everyone.
And I also think that this is exactly the kind of discussions that need to be happening whenever horrific events like this occur. I personally don’t find the “he was evil and in a fit of rage” really scientific and it never holds up. I appreciate the banter about my ramblings.
To me this is the “sympathy” I referred to in a previous post.
And this is not “temporary insanity”? Seems pretty insane to me.
Temporary insanity is when you have no control over your own actions. These people act for what they perceive at the time to be the “greater good.” Benoit was clearly in control of his actions, he had the forethought to contact his friends and tell them that something was wrong and where to find the bodies.
I doubt there was anything “abnormal” with his brain. A culmination of the right kind of stresses can affect a lot of people in this way. It would be like trying to find a pre-existing brain biology for determining which soldiers get post traumatic stress syndrome. It could really just happened to anybody.
Man, this whole thing is some kind of Shakespearean twist…
Benoit was clearly in control of his actions
I can’t believe that a normal mind, thinking normally, acting normally would agree that killing someone is the right thing to do (under these and most circumstances). Someone in control of their actions would not have killed. They would have sat down and cried and left the room. Something abnormal was going on. Something triggered the mind to act “abnormally”, and if his brain is the same as mine/ours, then that same “trigger” can make me/us kill. (Unless of course his brain isn’t the same as mine.)
And I do not think is was temp. insanity, I don’t even know what that is, to be honest. I actually don’t like the insanity defense in courts.. To me if you did the deed, you are guilty regardless of your mind. There is no excuse. HOWEVER, abnormal minds and minds that the court deem as “insane” should be dealt with differently (studied and examined forever!) But that’s a whole different subject.
It would be like trying to find a pre-existing brain biology for determining which soldiers get post traumatic stress syndrome
They can. Some are more susceptible than others based on a number of factors. But I do conceed, that it still can happen to the ones that aren’t susceptible.
The “trigger” was stress. Even normal people are capable of doing awful things under constant or extraordinary levels of stress. Think “Saw” i guess. It warps the perceptions and makes your options seem very limited. Between the road and his kid and whatever other pressures he had in his life, you can’t really put yourself in his shoes and say what would or wouldn’t make sense at the time.
Apparently Benoit was getting massive amounts of steroids. So that pretty much explains how he got “set off.” But the murders are still acts of premeditation.