Summarize the post . For each discussion activity, you are responsible for posti

Summarize the post .
For each discussion activity, you are responsible for posting a reply to at least one postings made by your classmates.
After you have made your original post, read some of the posts from your classmates and construct two reply post of 100-150 words that responds to two of your group-mate’s original posts. Your reply post should be written such that it does one or more of: identifies something that you find especially interesting or insightful about your classmate’s original post; poses an engaging and relevant question and/or builds on the ideas from your classmate’s original post; raises a real-life experience or observation that you feel would be relevant to illustrate or help further develop an idea or point in your classmate’s original post.
Please note that you will need to make an original post before you can read and respond to your peers’ posts.
Some points to keep in mind:
Be clear and to the point in your postings.
Edit your work. Your posts should be coherent and use proper grammar and spelling.
Keep postings to 100-150 words. Quality is better than quantity.
Contribute your own thoughts about the material you have read.
Support your thoughts by referencing the readings used, and references used in post below or other outside literature.
Raise additional questions or points of discussion to stimulate further discussion.
If you have questions, show that you have already tried to find a solution.
Respect the viewpoints of your peers. Ask for clarification if you don’t understand a point. Assume good intentions.
Use the proper terminology introduced in the course readings.
When using literature in your postings, make sure to provide references in proper APA 7 Style.
Show respect and sensitivity to peers’ gender, cultural and linguistic background, political, and religious beliefs.
You are strongly encouraged to take the time to review the following documents on writing quality discussion posting and on taking roles in discussions.Taking a role in online discussion.Taking a Role in Online Discussions Below are some roles that anyone in an online discussion can fulfill in order to help move an online discussion forward in productive ways. See if you can determine what role is required in your online discussion and then write a message that takes on that role. Devil’s Advocate • Takes opposing points of view to those currently under discussion Pollinator • Travels to other groups, reads their postings and summarizes points made in other groups not made in home group. Facilitator • Comments on the groups process (e.g. “Perhaps we should all remember to put a subject line in our messages.”) • Encourages others to participate, • Starts a thread or an idea on the topic, if the discussion lags. Summarizer / Discussion Weaver • Summarizes the discussion for the group at specific intervals in 1 or 2 short paragraphs. Usually summarizes twice per week or if the discussion lags • Reminds others about what has already been discussed. • Asks the group what issues have been concluded and what ones are still to be discussed. • Relates ideas in posted messages to one another. Researcher • Assumes responsibility for looking at what is available on the net, journals etc. and brings ideas back to the group. Responder Replies to others and builds on the ideas of others. This is a role that everyone in the group must perform for every discussion.
POST-1 (Alyssa Speyer)
From Levin and Fox (2017), one of the most compelling motivations for serial homicide is the desire for power and control. This explanation resonates because many serial killers exhibit a need to dominate their victims, often choosing individuals they perceive as vulnerable. The killings are often driven not by immediate gratification but by the sustained feeling of total control over another life. This aligns with serial killers’ tendency to meticulously plan their crimes and prolong the experience to maintain control. Many serial killers demonstrate this through sadistic acts, where the torture and domination of their victims become central.
In Pettigrew’s (2020) work, the concept of neutralisation theory is also compelling. Serial killers often rationalise their actions to minimise guilt. Pettigrew discusses how killers may use strategies such as denial of victim or denial of responsibility to distance themselves emotionally from their crimes. This psychological mechanism is powerful because it explains how otherwise ordinary individuals can engage in such horrific actions without breaking down psychologically. The power/control motivation offers a comprehensive explanation for many serial killers actions, particularly those whose crimes escalate over time. Pettigrew’s neutralisation theory provides insight into how serial killers cope with their crimes psychologically, explaining the lack of remorse often observed in them.
The name I selected is Paul Bernardo because he was someone who my mom has brought up to me multiple times, due to being raised in Scarborough. Bernardo, also known as the Scarborough Rapist, is a notorious Canadian serial killer and rapist, active during the late 1980s and early 1990s. Together with his wife, Karla Homolka, he committed a series of rapes and murders, targeting young women, including his wife’s own sister.
Bernardo’s actions were driven by sadistic sexual desires. His enjoyment of domination and torture fits the hedonistic category of serial killers, as defined by Levin and Fox. His violent sexual fantasies escalated into acts of rape and murder, driven by a need for physical and psychological gratification. Bernardo sought to dominate his victims, both physically and emotionally. His acts of torture were prolonged and intentional, demonstrating a deep need to assert his power. His videotaping of the crimes is an example of this control, as he likely replayed the recordings to relive the sense of domination. Bernardo rationalised his actions by portraying himself as a victim of circumstance and even claimed that his wife Karla Homolka was the mastermind behind some of the murders. He denied responsibility for the full extent of his crimes during his trial, using denial of responsibility as a psychological defence. Paul Bernardo fits many of the typical demographic characteristics of serial killers as described in criminological literature. He is a white male, and serial killers tend to be overwhelmingly male and often white. He committed his crimes in his mid-20s, aligning with research that suggests many serial killers start in their early adulthood. His background as an educated individual with a respectable outward appearance is also typical of serial killers who often blend in with society, making them more difficult to catch. Bernardo predominantly targeted young women, often strangers. Serial killers typically choose victims who are either strangers or vulnerable members of society. This fits the broader pattern of victimisation seen in many serial murder cases. His ability to manipulate his wife, Karla Homolka, into participating in the crimes also speaks to his controlling nature, fitting the pattern of a power-driven serial killer.
Paul Bernardo’s motivations fit strongly with Levin and Fox’s hedonistic and power/control categories. His psychological rationalisations, as explored through Pettigrew’s neutralisation theory, show how he distanced himself from the emotional burden of his crimes. Demographically, he fits many of the standard profiles for serial killers, and his choice of victims young, vulnerable women aligns with what is known about the typical targets of serial killers.
References
Levin, Jack, and James Alan Fox. 2017. “Multiple Homicide: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder.” Chapter 15 in The Handbook of Homicide, edited by Fiona Brookman, Edward R. Maguire, and Mike Maguire. Wiley.
Pettigrew, Mark. 2020. “Confessions of a Serial Killer: A Neutralization Analysis.” Homicide Studies, 24(1): 69-84.
Historica Canada. (2021, June 22). Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka case. The Canadian Encyclopedia. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/paul-bernardo-and-karla-homolka-case
POST-2 (Vihanya Jayatilake)
The readings I would focus on are the compelling explanations or motivations for serial homicide presented in Levin and Fox’s (2017) Multiple Homicide: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder and Pettigrew’s (2020) Confessions of a Serial Killer: A Neutralization Analysis.
Compelling Explanation or Motivation for Serial Homicide:
Levin and Fox (2017) highlight several motivations for serial homicide, such as power and control, financial gain, and sexual desire. Of these, I find the need for power and control most compelling. This explanation suggests that many serial killers are driven by a desire to exert dominance over their victims, and the act of killing fulfills this need. Serial killers often feel powerless in other areas of their lives, so they seek to compensate by controlling others in the most extreme way possible – by taking their lives. This theory aligns with the personality traits of many serial killers, such as narcissism and psychopathy, which are characterized by a lack of empathy and a need to manipulate others (Levin & Fox, 2017).
Paul Bernardo Case Study:
Paul Bernardo, known as one of Canada’s most infamous serial killers, fits several of the typical demographic characteristics associated with serial murderers. He was a white male, middle-class, and in his twenties when he committed most of his crimes, which is consistent with many profiles of serial killers (Levin & Fox, 2017). He was highly methodical and driven by sexual sadism, a common motivation for serial killers in the United States (Pettigrew, 2020). Bernardo, alongside his wife Karla Homolka, committed a string of brutal rapes and murders in Ontario, notably involving schoolgirls.
What makes the case even more chilling is the fact that his wife Karla Homolka, who actively participated in the crimes, lived in St. Catharines, where I live with my parents. They even spent part of their honeymoon there and carried out some of their horrific acts in this very community (Butts, 2016). It’s unnerving to think that such heinous events took place so close to home.
Bernardo’s motivations align strongly with the sexual sadism and need for control that Levin and Fox describe. He preyed on vulnerable young women, exploiting his relationships and carefully planning his attacks, showing the manipulative and power-driven traits often observed in serial offenders.
Demographic Profile:
Paul Bernardo fits several demographic characteristics common to serial killers, as identified in the literature. Serial killers are often white males, between the ages of 25 and 40, and have a history of escalating violent behaviour (Levin & Fox, 2017). Bernardo was 27 when he committed his first murder, and his criminal activities followed a pattern of escalation from voyeurism to rape and eventually to murder. Additionally, serial killers frequently target individuals with whom they have little personal connection, as was the case with Bernardo’s victims, who were mostly strangers or acquaintances.
Bernardo’s relationship with Karla Homolka also stands out because it’s uncommon for serial killers to operate in pairs. However, their dynamic further illustrates the power and control motive, as Bernardo manipulated Homolka into participating in the crimes (Pettigrew, 2020).
References
Levin, J., & Fox, J. A. (2017). Multiple homicide: Understanding serial and mass murder. Wiley Online Library. https://doi-org.subzero.lib.uoguelph.ca/10.1002/9781118924501.ch15
Pettigrew, M. (2020). Confessions of a Serial Killer: A Neutralisation Analysis. Homicide Studies, 24(1), 69-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088767918793674
Butts, E. (2016). Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka Case. The Canadian Encyclopedia. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/paul-bernardo-and-karla-homolka-case
Label post -1 as((Alyssa Speyer)
Post -1 summary reply WRITE in 8-12 lines also add personal opinion it should be personal opinion about other post and also add creative attrcative question.Donot use AI AND CHATGPT AS MAM HAS SOFTWARE TO DETECT EACH AND EVERY LINE . She has software to detect each and every single word.
Label post -1 as (Alyssa Speyer)Post -1 summary reply WRITE in 8-12 lines also add personal opnion it should be personal opnion about other post and also add creative atttrcative question.Donot use AI AND CHATGPT AS MAM HAS SOFTWARE TO DETECT EACH AND EVERY LINE . She has software to detect each and every single word.
POST-2
LABEL POST -2 AS (Vihanya Jayatilake)
Grading criteria is
Criteria A+ Discussion Post
Reply
Post
(4-5 points)
All response posts engaged classmates in further dialogue on the topic.
Length guidelines met; writing clear and compelling; poses an engaging and relevant question and/or builds on the ideas from a classmate’s original post OR raises a real-life experience or observation relevant to illustrating or further developing an idea or point in a classmate’s original post.please start reading instructions mam
and guidelines and you have to answer to this i am proving the grading rubrics everything write in own words donot use AI AND CHATGPT AS MAM HAS THE SOFTAWARE TO DETECT.EACH AND EVERY LINE and each and every single word.
I Have also attached the grading rubric photo which is in form of image grading rubric is very much important you have to follow each and every instruction very carefully.
only these sources which i have provided you have been provided in post for post1 and reference for post which are provided only those no out source has to be used.
I have attached the grading rubric for student reply post.