Introduction

Since Jack the Ripper stalked the streets of London’s Whitechapel in the 1880s, serial killers have become a staple topic for academics, the entertainment media and news media (Jewkes, 2004; Schmidt, 2005; Gibson, 2006; Jarvis, 2007; Haggerty, 2009). Furthermore, contemporary society has a fascination with serial homicide. However, despite capturing the attention of audiences and academics alike, defining exactly what we mean when we label someone as a serial killer is far from straightforward. In addition, distinguishing them from other types of killer, for example the mass murderer or the spree killer, has also proved difficult. Given the tendency of news media to misrepresent homicide (Maguire, 2002; Ferrell, 2005), it is not surprising that mediated representations of serial homicide are particularly distorted, fuelling an array of myths and stereotypes around this type of crime (Bonn, 2014). These factors combine to create challenges in grasping what serial homicide is, in both socio-anthropological and criminological terms. Even what would appear to be a relatively basic question – such as: Who are serial killers? – sometimes proves difficult to answer. To muddy the waters even further, we seem particularly troubled when it comes to describing, explaining and making sense of women who commit serial homicide, given the way in which such offenders challenge contemporary understandings of femininity and womanhood (Chan, 2001; Morrissey, 2003; Seal, 2010; Farrell et al, 2011). These issues will be explored within this chapter, drawing attention to the complexity that characterises understandings of serial homicide in general and female serial killers in particular. The chapter will also highlight the problems of current theorising when applied to the case that forms the subject of this book – that of 19th-century female serial killer Mary Ann Cotton.

Questions of definition

Defining serial killing is inherently problematic. There is no single agreed-upon definition used as standard within or across the various groups interested in serial homicide. Indicating the taken-for-granted way in which the term is used, while some writing on the topic clearly identify and justify the definition with which they are working, others fail to address questions of definition at all.