The assessment measures that the psychiatrist used seem to be various questions or an interview-style assessment. He asked various questions about Richard’s childhood, thoughts, feelings, beliefs, morals, reasons for his crimes, people, family, and children. Richard Kuklinski has various psychopathic traits that the psychiatrist was attempting to fish out. Through the interview questions that the psychiatrist was asking, information was divulged from Richard that may explain his crimes and how they intertwine with psychopathy. These traits were evident in his juvenile years, including killing animals, specifically cats, having significant anger issues, showing no remorse when describing his killings, having other uncontrollable urges, seeming to have the victim mentality, and blaming his victims for his actions. During the interview, the psychiatrist asks how he felt internally about his killings, “did it churn your stomach when you were dismembering bodies,” to which Richard replied that he did not think so and recalls him eating pizza during a dismembering and was unbothered (History Raider, 2017). During the same line of questioning, he stated that he did not like using chainsaws to dismember because “why ruin a perfectly good shirt?” which would indicate he does not see humans as humans and doesn’t feel empathy towards the people he was killing or their families (History Raider, 2017). He recalled the smell of death and decay that he found “annoying,” so he would wear cologne to mask the smell (History Raider, 2017). This again shows the psychopathic traits of lack of empathy, lack of remorse, being shallow, and his failure to take responsibility as an explanation for some of his crimes, while the more heinous and outrageous crimes he did take responsibility for, which could be attributed to his grandiose sense of self. Throughout the interview, Richard acknowledges how he comes across, again inflating his sense of self, but it also seems to be a manipulation tactic by saying he is coming across as a nice guy, but he is the furthest thing from.
Factor 1 facets for psychopathy are the way the individual holds interpersonal and affective traits, and factor 2 facets focus on the behaviors an individual may display, such as antisocial and the individual’s lifestyle (Hare, 2016). Four factors that are typically evaluated for psychopathy from the two facets and may be an indication of risk are the individual’s interpersonal conflicts, their affect, their lifestyle, and their behaviors (specifically antisocial behaviors) (Hare, 2016). Forensic psychologists can evaluate in depth some of these factors that can help determine how many checklist items from the PCL-R qualify them as a psychopath or not. The interpersonal factors that can pose a risk can include superficialness, a grandiose sense of self-worth, pathological lying, and manipulation (Hare, 2016). Affect can be an indicator of psychopathy when the factors include lack of remorse or guilt, shallowness, a lack of empathy or callousness, and failure to accept responsibility (Hare, 2016). The lifestyle factors that can be indicators include stimulation seeking, impulsiveness, irresponsibility, a parasitic orientation, and lack of realistic goals (Hare, 2016). Last are the antisocial aspects, which are the most common factors associated with psychopathy, which include poor behavioral control, early behavioral issues, juvenile delinquency, revocations of conditional release, and criminal versatility (Hare, 2016). The combination of all these factors can help with the PCL-R checklist and what to look for as indicators of psychopathy. When evaluating an individual for psychopathy, forensic psychologists should look for concerning behaviors, thoughts, and feelings, plus a history of concerning behaviors that may further indicate psychopathy.
The potential risk factors that should be addressed for future risk of individuals regarding psychopathy are based on the individual's life and personal traits. These risk factors can include their socioeconomic status, education, family dysfunction or dynamics, substance abuse, and mental illness. According to Pemment (2013), there are other ways to possibly look at psychopathy or the risk of someone being a psychopath through their brain matter. It has been theorized and proven that psychopaths often have a smaller amount of gray matter in the frontal lobe region and other neurological differences. This can help forensic psychologists who look at neurological scans to determine if someone may also fall into the psychopath category if they are displaying other signs of psychopathy. There are neurological indicators of psychopathy that affect someone’s beliefs, morals, attitudes, and behaviors, which can influence other areas for the individual as well (Pemment, 2013).
Hare, R. D. (2016). Psychopathy, the PCL-R, and criminal justice: Some new findings and current issues. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 57(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000041Links to an external site.
History Raider. (2017, May 16). The Iceman and the Psychiatrist – Richard Kuklinski – Part 3Links to an external site.Links to an external site.