Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 90
substance. Criminal law proscribes conduct a careful line must be drawn between regulation
of behavior and the restriction of beliefs.
Certain well-publicized cases of violent crimes, such as those committed by Sean Sellers (who
attributed his actions to a belief in Satan) and the Matamoros murders (described by many as
satanic sacrifices but in fact were related to an Afro-Caribbean syncretic belief system), are
oft-cited examples of the dangers that specific belief systems represent to society. Such belief
systems, however, are those of the perpetrators of these heinous offenses, and are personal
to them. These are self-stylists who often suffer severe mental illness and who invariably rely
upon values that are unrepresentative of established belief systems. Thus, the individual, who
happens to claim some allegiance to one or another religion, is actually acting upon personal
desires and goals.
Regardless of the motive, available evidence suggests that these cases are aberrations.
Crimes of this nature are relatively rare and appear to be perpetrated by individuals or small
groups acting on their own initiative.
Media reports of these crimes often relate incomplete or inaccurate information and cause
some people to look for ritual crime where it doesn‟t exist. Even trained professionals may
categorize a crime as ritually related without sufficient evidence to support this interpretation.
The types of symbols and paraphernalia that are customarily relied upon as evidence of ritual
crime represent different things to different people and certainly are not always indicative of
unique belief systems.
Because of the hyperbole and hysteria, as well as an undue emphasis on belief systems as
agents of crime, investigation into ritual crime is often sidetracked, and objective and
effective analysis is defeated. Rather than attacking ritual crime based upon presumptions
about certain belief systems, effective crime prevention necessitates aggressive action against
practices (ritual or otherwise) that have conclusively proved to be criminal in nature or effect.
Because mental health professionals are so frequently confronted with claims of ritual crime
the potential for being affected by preconceived notions is especially acute. As with other
professionals, therapists may accept claims of ritual crime where unwarranted because other
elements of the claims are more easily validated. The fact that abuse has occurred does not
necessarily confirm allegations of ritual abuse. For treatment purposes this distinction may
not be relevant. Indeed it may be important to minimize the distinction in treatment sessions
between patient and therapist. But allegations of ritual crime (particularly when evidence fails
to support the allegations) can diminish a victim‟s credibility and may discourage a criminal
investigation or prosecution where one is appropriate.
The differing roles of law enforcement and therapy take on special significance in this regard.
Ultimately, continued research in the mental health field may permit a better understanding
of how ritual abuse affects victims psychologically and what treatment means are most
effective. The apparent link between drug abuse, mental illness, and ritual crime
demonstrates the importance of treatment issues. The debate within the mental health
community regarding the viability of ritual abuse claims, however, need not influence law
enforcement officials in the effective performance of their duties. Investigators should not
permit wild accusations to distract them from this objective. At the same time, counselors
claiming knowledge of ritual crime, whether they work in social services, schools, or the
private sector, as well as alleged victims of ritual abuse, should not be ignored. On the
contrary, ritual crime investigations heretofore evidence the need for cooperation among
these populations.
The role of the state should be to encourage a cooperative effort and to continue to educate
people on ritual crime. Successful eradication of ritual crime rests with effective enforcement
of existing criminal statutes. To the degree that organized crime exists, concentration on
spiritual belief systems as a motivation only diverts resources that could more properly be
substance. Criminal law proscribes conduct a careful line must be drawn between regulation
of behavior and the restriction of beliefs.
Certain well-publicized cases of violent crimes, such as those committed by Sean Sellers (who
attributed his actions to a belief in Satan) and the Matamoros murders (described by many as
satanic sacrifices but in fact were related to an Afro-Caribbean syncretic belief system), are
oft-cited examples of the dangers that specific belief systems represent to society. Such belief
systems, however, are those of the perpetrators of these heinous offenses, and are personal
to them. These are self-stylists who often suffer severe mental illness and who invariably rely
upon values that are unrepresentative of established belief systems. Thus, the individual, who
happens to claim some allegiance to one or another religion, is actually acting upon personal
desires and goals.
Regardless of the motive, available evidence suggests that these cases are aberrations.
Crimes of this nature are relatively rare and appear to be perpetrated by individuals or small
groups acting on their own initiative.
Media reports of these crimes often relate incomplete or inaccurate information and cause
some people to look for ritual crime where it doesn‟t exist. Even trained professionals may
categorize a crime as ritually related without sufficient evidence to support this interpretation.
The types of symbols and paraphernalia that are customarily relied upon as evidence of ritual
crime represent different things to different people and certainly are not always indicative of
unique belief systems.
Because of the hyperbole and hysteria, as well as an undue emphasis on belief systems as
agents of crime, investigation into ritual crime is often sidetracked, and objective and
effective analysis is defeated. Rather than attacking ritual crime based upon presumptions
about certain belief systems, effective crime prevention necessitates aggressive action against
practices (ritual or otherwise) that have conclusively proved to be criminal in nature or effect.
Because mental health professionals are so frequently confronted with claims of ritual crime
the potential for being affected by preconceived notions is especially acute. As with other
professionals, therapists may accept claims of ritual crime where unwarranted because other
elements of the claims are more easily validated. The fact that abuse has occurred does not
necessarily confirm allegations of ritual abuse. For treatment purposes this distinction may
not be relevant. Indeed it may be important to minimize the distinction in treatment sessions
between patient and therapist. But allegations of ritual crime (particularly when evidence fails
to support the allegations) can diminish a victim‟s credibility and may discourage a criminal
investigation or prosecution where one is appropriate.
The differing roles of law enforcement and therapy take on special significance in this regard.
Ultimately, continued research in the mental health field may permit a better understanding
of how ritual abuse affects victims psychologically and what treatment means are most
effective. The apparent link between drug abuse, mental illness, and ritual crime
demonstrates the importance of treatment issues. The debate within the mental health
community regarding the viability of ritual abuse claims, however, need not influence law
enforcement officials in the effective performance of their duties. Investigators should not
permit wild accusations to distract them from this objective. At the same time, counselors
claiming knowledge of ritual crime, whether they work in social services, schools, or the
private sector, as well as alleged victims of ritual abuse, should not be ignored. On the
contrary, ritual crime investigations heretofore evidence the need for cooperation among
these populations.
The role of the state should be to encourage a cooperative effort and to continue to educate
people on ritual crime. Successful eradication of ritual crime rests with effective enforcement
of existing criminal statutes. To the degree that organized crime exists, concentration on
spiritual belief systems as a motivation only diverts resources that could more properly be
