Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 69
Task Force Study of Ritual Crime
Michael P. Maddox
Virginia State Crime Commission
Abstract
The very general and amorphous overtones that discussions of cults frequently
assume present a particularly perplexing problem for the criminal justice field.
Because these discussions are typically pervaded by extreme emotion, a
rational response to allegations of cult, or ritual, crime becomes difficult. This
predicament is exacerbated by the ignorance surrounding the occult. While
attempting to be sensitive to the diverse viewpoints on ritual crime, this report
offers an empirical basis for evaluating the level of such activity, as well as an
objective attempt to clarify some of the conflicting issues inherent in claims of
this nature.
During the 1990 session of the Virginia legislature, Delegate Robert Tata sponsored House
Joint Resolution No. 147 (HJR 147) directing the Virginia State Crime Commission to “study
certain cult practices” and to
(1) focus its study on those cults in Virginia that emphasize or promote their
members‟ participation in dangerous, antisocial, or criminal activities as a part
of their practices (2) determine, to the extent possible, the prevalence of
such cults and their recruitment and ritualistic practices (3) identify risk
factors associated with youth involvement in such groups (4) confer with law
enforcement agencies throughout the Commonwealth regarding the reports
and documentation of occult activity, ritualistic crimes, and whether such acts
involved youth (5) inventory school divisions to determine the nature and
magnitude of the problem and the perspectives of school administrators
concerning how such problems should be managed (6) assess the final
impact of vandalism and destruction of public property due to such acts (7)
review the efforts of other states to prevent and control such cults and
resulting criminal activity (8) recommend appropriate ways in which the
Commonwealth might respond to such activity to protect public property and
safety while protecting the Constitutional rights of its citizenry and (9) limit
its study to such related matters as the Commission may deem appropriate.
The resolution called for creation of a task force consisting of 13 members, reporting directly
to the Crime Commission, in order to fulfill the requirements of HJR 147. In addition to
members drawn from the ranks of the Commission, the task force was to be comprised of one
member each from the House of Delegates and from the Senate, and four citizen members.
Established by Section 9-125 of the Code of Virginia, the Crime Commission‟s legislative
mandate is “to study, report, and make recommendations on all areas of public safety and
protection.” Section 9-127 of the Code of Virginia provides that “the Commission shall have
the duty and power to make such studies and gather information in order to accomplish its
purpose, as set forth in section 9-125, and to formulate its recommendations to the Governor
and the General Assembly.” Section 9-134 of the Code of Virginia authorizes the Commission
to “conduct private and public hearings, and to designate a member of the Commission to
preside over such hearings.”
Pursuant to HJR 147, the Crime Commission established a task force and proceeded with this
study per the authorization and direction of such resolution.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 70
Executive Summary
House Joint Resolution 147 (HJR 147) directed the Crime Commission to establish a task force
in order to study certain cult practices that represent a danger to citizens of the
Commonwealth and to determine the prevalence of such practices, the risk factors that induce
youth‟s participation in this activity, the fiscal cost resulting from property damage, and the
means of addressing these concerns.
Following expert testimony regarding the scope of issues relating to the occult and cult
practices, the task force determined that parameters to this study must be carefully drawn
and objectives narrowly focused. Particularly prominent was concern about potential conflicts
with constitutional rights to free association and exercise of religion.
To eradicate confusion and properly identify the subject matter of this study, the task force
defined the focus to be that criminal behavior which is derived from or motivated by a specific
spiritual belief system and the practices or ceremonies with which it is associated. Such
behavior is regarded as “ritual crime” or “ritualistic crime” for the purposes of this study.
Controversy about ritual crime, both in terms of its prevalence and its nature, is rampant.
Much of the debate can be traced to the careless or inaccurate use of terminology.
Inappropriate identification of and reference to groups and belief systems, as well as inexact
descriptions of what constitutes ritual crime, inevitably cloud this debate and make more
difficult an objective investigation into the actual incidence of occult-related crime.
A statewide survey of all law enforcement agencies and school divisions, and geographically
representative samples of social service departments and licensed mental health practitioners
in Virginia produced comprehensive data about the incidence of ritual crime in the
Commonwealth. Follow-up interviews confirmed that most incidents which could be linked to
belief systems involved minor property crimes. The results make clear the difficulty in
establishing causal connections between the reported cases and spiritual belief systems.
Claims regarding incidents of ritual crime suffer in many cases from a lack of adequate
evidence. While this is attributed by some to the effective disposal of evidence by cult
members, it is clear also that indicia of unconventional belief systems are often speciously
linked to ritual crime.
The research evidenced a distinct schism between the types of reports from mental health
therapists and other interviewees. While schools, law enforcement agencies, and social
service workers pointed to specific cases of crime, therapists tended to provide more general
accounts of ritual crime which they derived from their clients and which were frequently years
or decades old.
This contrast between law enforcement and mental health extends also to the goals of the
respective groups. Therapists‟ focus is on treatment issues rather than the prevention and
enforcement of crime. Response to ritual crime therefore by necessity differs for these two
segments of the population and recognition of this fact is important both in interpreting data
and in making recommendations for action.
Based upon survey results, testimony, and intensive research, the task force made the
following findings:
 Misconceptions about ritual crime are pervasive.
 Evidence is insufficient to establish the existence of any major conspiracy or organized
criminal network based upon an occult or spiritual belief system.
 Unpopular belief systems are erroneously associated with criminal behavior.
 Criminal activity that might reasonably by associated with belief systems consists