Ben Fawley's Criminal Past [Archive] - Crime Library Message Boards

Researcher

10-05-2005, 10:14 AM

Here are some interesting sites with some very interesting articles re psychopathy:

http://cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm ]http://cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm [/URL] http://www.syntheory.com/psychopathy/psycho.html ]http://www.syntheory.com/psychopathy/psycho.html [/URL]

Now, I am not saying these articles necessarily describe Fawley, just educational material to be aware of. Hmmmm..

(I mis-posted this originally in different thread; had meant to post here. Sorry for duplication.)

TN_Profiler

10-05-2005, 04:19 PM

Varacity - thanks for the acknowledgement. I am only using the information that is available to me to derive my theories.

Now that I have read the link regarding Ben's past I am beyond convinced of his ability to carry out something heinous against Taylor. Just read the last 3 paragraphs of the link Researcher posted and it is all there. His behavior is characteristic of bi-polar and that, in itself, is sufficient to believe he is capable. Awakening a girl at 4am with a hammer in his hand? Choking another girl? Can't you see the escalation of his acts? A storied past of violence against women is not necessary for a tragic event to occur (i.e. Scott Peterson) but it sure applies in many cases.

He has a history of violence against women, particularly when the relationship sours. I would like to offer a scenario and welcome your feedback.

Ben has a dark side that is triggered, among other reasons, by his relationships with women. When they "go south", Ben becomes dangerous to himself and, more importantly, to the women who are quickly exiting his life. If Taylor came to VCU with the intent of dating other guys I do not think Ben would be cool with this. She went to dinner with a new boyfriend and that may have been the trigger for Ben to slide down his slippery violent slope. Did she refuse his advances upon her arrival in Richmond? Did she just want to be friends? She shows up at his apartment the night she was last seen to borrow/buy a skateboard. Did the fact she only wanted a skateboard from him enrage him? If so, I think Ben could have used this rejection to inflict his anger in a violent way later that night. He knew where she was going and his timeline allows him the opportunity to intersect her in the very early hours. By reading her journals and his, I sense a cooling in the relationship after the spring. History shows how Ben handles the ending of a relationship. Is there any reason to think this one ended amicably?

PMcOuntry

10-05-2005, 07:39 PM

I had posted that same link earlier in another thread, but it appears to have gotten lost in the shuffle. Thanks for re-posting it under a new title for everyone. I found the article shocking to say the least.

PMcOuntry

10-05-2005, 07:43 PM

Sorry for the double post, have no idea how that happened... weird. Don't see a button to delete either. :confused:

BlkBeauty57

10-06-2005, 06:26 AM

CalifMermaid

10-06-2005, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by TN_Profiler
Varacity - thanks for the acknowledgement. I am only using the information that is available to me to derive my theories.

Now that I have read the link regarding Ben's past I am beyond convinced of his ability to carry out something heinous against Taylor. Just read the last 3 paragraphs of the link Researcher posted and it is all there. His behavior is characteristic of bi-polar and that, in itself, is sufficient to believe he is capable. Awakening a girl at 4am with a hammer in his hand? Choking another girl? Can't you see the escalation of his acts? A storied past of violence against women is not necessary for a tragic event to occur (i.e. Scott Peterson) but it sure applies in many cases.

He has a history of violence against women, particularly when the relationship sours. I would like to offer a scenario and welcome your feedback.

Ben has a dark side that is triggered, among other reasons, by his relationships with women. When they "go south", Ben becomes dangerous to himself and, more importantly, to the women who are quickly exiting his life. If Taylor came to VCU with the intent of dating other guys I do not think Ben would be cool with this. She went to dinner with a new boyfriend and that may have been the trigger for Ben to slide down his slippery violent slope. Did she refuse his advances upon her arrival in Richmond? Did she just want to be friends? She shows up at his apartment the night she was last seen to borrow/buy a skateboard. Did the fact she only wanted a skateboard from him enrage him? If so, I think Ben could have used this rejection to inflict his anger in a violent way later that night. He knew where she was going and his timeline allows him the opportunity to intersect her in the very early hours. By reading her journals and his, I sense a cooling in the relationship after the spring. History shows how Ben handles the ending of a relationship. Is there any reason to think this one ended amicably?

This guy should never be let out mental or not. He's a danger to all women.

emmeblu

10-06-2005, 10:01 PM

This guy is a real sick-O and I think LE should start looking at unsolved murders of other young girls in/around the area.

Thank goodness they now have this total pervert behind bars!
:flamemad:

MaxwellSmart

10-08-2005, 04:54 AM

I read these earlier, and forgot to leave a thank you! Interesting articles. Seems he just couldn't stay out of trouble. A true anarchist, just causing all sorts of mayhem, the one guy said it best.
Has anyone found any other info on his past? There seems to be a big gap 91-02. Was he just behaving? I doubt it.
Thanks for the links!

Adalena935

10-09-2005, 02:11 AM

Who people really are, is who they are in the dark.

This guy didn't just "..snap..". He's got a criminal history going back almost 20 yrs that we know about from news so far.

And those are just the times he was either caught in criminal activity or was reported.

16 counts of child pornography is not just snapping. What he is is a bad person who sometimes pretended to be ordinary. Not unlike the BTK killer & other evil people.

He reminds me of Joseph Duncan, the monster who murdered the Groene family in Idaho.

MaxwellSmart

10-09-2005, 06:15 AM

adalena -
Oh, but dontcha know it's not his child porn, that's not his stuff, some other guy's, couldn't be his fault. sounds just like the other creepazoids you mention, it's the demons, it's society, it's factor x, couldn't be their own freakin doing. nope, i don't see any "snap" either, more like a steamroller downhill with no brakes.
jmo

Researcher

10-09-2005, 11:03 AM

And let's not forget this wasn't "just" child pornography...there were infants as young as 1 year. Even if he didn't actually take those videos (my hunch is he did), simply wanting to watch something like that shows that he relates to humans as objects, things to use and manipulate for his sadistic pleasure. He is incapable of empathy. He is a reptile.

Bluprint

10-09-2005, 02:38 PM

I'm not buying the "it was left in his apt and he hasn't had a chance to toss it..." because this man spent many many hours playing around with his apt, taking photos and frolicking outside with his digicam, that monkey should've been throwing out those porn videos. He wanted them. He said so. I remember reading his entry about his apt being left a mess because the prior tenant had died and smoked and yellow scum was on the windows and walls and there was garbage and 100's of porn videos. Then he says (paraphrasing), "I'll throw them out... or not!"

Give me a break!

Ben also entries that he'd been playing handyman all day and fixing sinks and running electrical wiring thru the walls. I bet you anything if someone had left a library of religious books those would've ALL found their way to the dumpster. He's silly.

somechick

10-09-2005, 03:15 PM

I hear you, blueprint. When Hildebrandt told me it wasn't his and then someone else (a friend of his) explained the whole former neighbor thing, I immediately thought "how long would it take to destroy disgusting videos." It certainly wouldn't take me very long. He must've been going through them one by one...initially he probably thought the child porn was sick and turned it off, but then maybe he found himself curious and somewhat aroused. Ew...I want to vomit having just written the previous sentence. But that could explain how he happened to inherit something so vulgar and didn't immediately toss it or turn it into the police to make sure it didn't get into someone elses hands.

MaxwellSmart

10-09-2005, 07:22 PM

From my living room to the trash can and back = about 2 minutes.
From my finding child porn to turning it over to the police, about 5 minutes. He has no excuse imo.
As a parent this piece of the story makes my blood boil.
jmo

somechick

10-09-2005, 09:36 PM

I'm not sure but isn't there (or shouldn't there) be a procedure for dealing with finding child porn. Maybe I watch too much law & order but it seems like a no-brainer situation to turn it into the police immediately that way they can figure out if any of the kids are in missing persons etc. The fact that he didn't take immediate action to get rid of it and "took it upon himself to destroy it" doesn't sit right with me. Maybe that was just what he told people, wanted them to believe.

MaxwellSmart

10-09-2005, 10:20 PM

somechick -
There is always local police or state police to start with. In some smaller locales they may not have a lot of experience, but they darn sure would turn it over to those who do. when it makes us furious, just imagine how it affects them. The FBI I believe has a task force or whatevah ya call it to combat this. They also have a great website and tip submission form. There is a very large movement to combat pedophiles and child porn, though they tend to work totally off the radar. for example - i recently read about a website that someone had tipped the fbi to, instead of shutting it down or making it known, they silently monitored it and tracked down the offenders + pedophiles, and all their contacts, gathered irrefutable evidence and then, whammo!
you'll find some great information on this here at CTV. if you go to the main page of all forums, there is one dedicated to this.
jmo
FBI Crimes against children (http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/cac/states.htm)

MaxwellSmart

10-09-2005, 10:31 PM

oops - aaaaaand -
hundred videos, kids as young as possibly 1 engaged in sex acts, someone committed horrible crimes against these children, ben is a father of 2, the ONLY thing to do is turn it in. simple as dropping it with an anonymous note as to where it came from. destroying it guarantees those kids get no justice, the perp goes free, they will reoffend. imo he then condones sexual molestation of children and the distribution of child porn. there is just absolutely no excuse for this, what if it were his daughter, he would just destroy the tape himself? what about the perp? what about treatment, counseling, medical help for the child?
absolutely repulsive.
sorry but if it were really someone else's videos, any parent would have burned up the pavement getting to the police.
jmo

MaxwellSmart

10-10-2005, 01:28 AM

Angel -
He got rid of a ton of stuff online, he was a busy boy, I think he thought he'd have much more time. I sat here one night, taking a first look at some of his webpages as I was reading one blog write up. Literally 15 minutes later I went back to review photos of him and half of them were gone, poof! He was scrambling around, I betcha there were some investigators watching this happen too. I think he knew they would take his computers. when they made the first search and took 6 or 7 of them, he went right back online, guess he a had a spare or few. Like, hellooooo ben the fuzz has computers too. I know he had some erotica listed for sale on ebay, not child stuff obviously, but I don't have a clue why he had those videos in the apt., unless he had a buyer lined up... he ran out of time to cover his trail. Why do you think he didn't get rid of it?
jmo

BFD - v2.0

10-10-2005, 01:38 AM

Originally posted by MaxwellSmart
Angel -
He got rid of a ton of stuff online, he was a busy boy, I think he thought he'd have much more time. I sat here one night, taking a first look at some of his webpages as I was reading one blog write up. Literally 15 minutes later I went back to review photos of him and half of them were gone, poof! He was scrambling around, I betcha there were some investigators watching this happen too. I think he knew they would take his computers. when they made the first search and took 6 or 7 of them, he went right back online, guess he a had a spare or few. Like, hellooooo ben the fuzz has computers too. I know he had some erotica listed for sale on ebay, not child stuff obviously, but I don't have a clue why he had those videos in the apt., unless he had a buyer lined up... he ran out of time to cover his trail. Why do you think he didn't get rid of it?
jmo

He didn't get rid of the vast majority of things until after the media started focusing in on him.

Many other people associated with this case did the same thing. They started removing, editing, deleting, etc., different parts of their livejournals, websites, etc.

somechick

10-10-2005, 01:57 AM

hmmm... that's an interesting angle: that maybe he was planning to sell the child porn instead of taking it to the authorities. Either way it doesn't look good for him on those charges. Any responsible person would have immediately taken it to the authorities. The fact that he didn't shows that he took child pornography and molestation too lightly.

Hey Paula

10-10-2005, 02:03 AM

Originally posted by somechick
hmmm... that's an interesting angle: that maybe he was planning to sell the child porn instead of taking it to the authorities. Either way it doesn't look good for him on those charges. Any responsible person would have immediately taken it to the authorities. The fact that he didn't shows that he took child pornography and molestation too lightly.

Perhaps he took the child pornography/molestation lightly, was because he was focused on covering a murder.

Researcher

10-10-2005, 11:39 AM

The reason many intelligent criminals do dumb things is because underlying a sociopath is a highly narcissistic core. He sees himself in idealistic terms, he is better, smarter, craftier than anyone else, including LE. The flip side is that he sees others in a devaluing light: others are stupid, naive, don't get it, etc. This grandiose sense of himself means he will behave in ways that he thinks are really clever, thinks he'll never get caught. But then, of course, he gets caught because what he thought was clever turns out to be just dumb. His judgement on many occasions is quite simply bad. And of course, nothing is his fault, so when he gets caught, he spins "clever" lies, blames the system, stupid and evil people who mean him no good, blames his childhood, his parents (or lack thereof), blames the whole world which is against him. Claims everyone misunderstands him. Poor guy. (Barf.) He sees others as objects (rather than people) to be manipulated to satisfy his twisted needs. They are reptiles. They make the hairs on the back of your neck stand up. When you look in their eyes there is nothing there...nothing. They are evil.

MaxwellSmart

10-10-2005, 03:58 PM

Researcher - You nailed it head on, imo, excellent post!
Angel - yes! They also mentioned they found gun in his apt., which of course he's not allowed to have, being a felon, he even stated on his model page that he could not work with real firearms, and duh there's one in his pad.
Good grief dumb ain't even the word here. This is what made me keep wondering early on, if it were in any way possible he was being set up, seemed just way to easy. grrrrr
jmo

BFD - v2.0

10-10-2005, 04:18 PM

Originally posted by MaxwellSmart
Researcher - You nailed it head on, imo, excellent post!
Angel - yes! They also mentioned they found gun in his apt., which of course he's not allowed to have, being a felon, he even stated on his model page that he could not work with real firearms, and duh there's one in his pad.
Good grief dumb ain't even the word here. This is what made me keep wondering early on, if it were in any way possible he was being set up, seemed just way to easy. grrrrr
jmo

:confused:

"Who" said they found a gun in his apartment?

singlesix

10-10-2005, 05:45 PM

From the 10/8/05 Richmond Times-Dispatch:

"Law-enforcement sources said Fawley -- who has a previous criminal record in Richmond and in Doylestown, Pa., dating to 1986 -- was charged yesterday with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

One source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Fawley was observed to have been in possession of a gun by "two members of the community." The gun was subsequently turned in to police by an attorney sometime after Behl's disappearance, and before police searched Fawley's house a second time, on Sept.23.

While the prosecution of the gun and child-pornography charges will be handled in Richmond, officials said that at this stage of the investigation, it appears likely that any charges in connection with Behl's death would be prosecuted in Mathews County."

marabeth

10-15-2005, 10:36 AM

I thought in light of the reported but not yet official "confession"..I thought it would be good to bump this up for anyone who has not seen his previous behavior..

PMcOuntry

10-15-2005, 03:05 PM

Originally posted by AvengingAngel

Hi Max,

I don't know why he didn't get rid of it, but it does amaze me that he didn't. He's been described as "highly intelligent". He had to KNOW that he would be in the crosshairs. He had to KNOW that LE would put him under a microscope. Yet apparently he didn't stand in the middle of his apartment and look around and say to himself, "Ok, do I have anything ILLEGAL here?". Well sure, Ben, how 'bout the child porn stuff? You know, the stuff with the one year old baby (!!!!!!). You'll do time for that kind of stuff. And your fellow inmates, who have their own code, will hate you.

I think "highly intelligent" Ben is actually stupid. I have more and more confidence that LE will be able to build a slam dunk case against him, even if the cause of death can not be pinpointed.

He may have did it to taunt police, but he says it was an accident... even highly intelligent ppl make mistakes and there is no perfect crime. If he really did panic, which I think he did, whether it was intentional or accidental, he had so many darn sites maybe he forgot about some? Who knows...

PMcOuntry

10-15-2005, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by BFD - v2.0

:confused:

"Who" said they found a gun in his apartment?

It was on the list of stuff they took out of his apt.

marabeth

10-15-2005, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by PMcOuntry

It was on the list of stuff they took out of his apt.

This says they were not.

http://www.wwbt.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WWBT/MGArticle/WBT_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1128767525385

Virginia News Sponsored by:
Story Archives | World News | Richmond Times-Dispatch

New information on suspect in Taylor Behl case

By Ray Daudani
NBC12 News
Thursday, October 13, 2005

How did police get their hands on two of Ben Fawley’s guns? He’s the 38-year-old suspect in the Taylor Behl case. According to sources, the guns didn’t come from a police search or directly from Fawley. Instead, sources say, they were passed from Fawley to two different lawyers, before they reached police.

When Richmond Police searched the amateur photographer’s apartment last month they didn’t find any guns, just a 32-caliber cartridge. Sources say it was around the same time two of Fawley’s guns were dropped off at the police department by a lawyer, leading to a charge against Fawley of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

snip