In the court case Mudgett v. Peterson, Fred Mudgett had appealed to be released from the mental institution he resided in. This may have gone well, but he was found to have murdered a worker at the hospital (Lexis Nexis). This case proves that, even if a psychopath seems as if they are of a sound mental state, a psychopath is capable of hiding their actual mental state. Mudgett v. Pearson also shows another instance of an individual with antisocial personality disorder getting caught for murder. The case is a perfect example of a person getting caught for a murder because they were a psychopath. Mudgett’s life was being further investigated in the hospital, and his awful mistake was found out. This case shows that a psychopath is not just more likely to be caught for homicide because of their mental disorder, but they are more likely to be found out because they have repeated an …show more content…
Not getting caught for a crime in the twenty-first century is difficult, and violent crime scenes are more likely to be messy and hold mistakes. Mistakes are problematic in a crime scene for the offender because evidence can be forgotten, so criminal investigators would be able to gather this evidence an use it to catch the murderer. Studies show that the majority of crimes done by psychopaths are motivated by a sexual goal (Karpman 192). The ulterior motive, regardless of what it is, gives the offender more to cover up. A non-psychopath is not as likely to search for this extra “benefit” of their murder, making them less likely to be suspected and charged for the