Milwaukee, Wisconsin. January 30th, 1992.

On the fifth-floor of the County Safety Building, defence attorney, Gerald Boyle, has just finished opening the trial of Jeffrey Dahmer with an hour-long outline of his clients life and crimes. “This was not an evil man” responsible for the murder of 15 young men in Wisconsin and routine acts of dismemberment, necrophilia and cannibalism, Boyle claims. “This was a sick man.”

It is not a sentiment echoed by the opposition.

The affable laidback showmanship of Boyle contrasts to the stiff relentless intensity of prosecuting lawyer, E. Michael McCann. The 55-year old district attorney – with a Master of Law degree from Harvard and a passion for public service – is to spearhead the argument that Jeffrey Dahmer had committed his murders as a sane man.

Though it was Gerald Boyle who proclaimed the start of Dahmer’s trial to be the beginning of an “odyssey,” McCann’s 90 minute opening statement was a crusade in itself. As one ‘Milwaukee Sentinel’ reporter later quipped: “If court watchers had decided to hang onto his every word, they would have ended up with very sore arms.”

While providing his own narrative of the defendant, McCann highlighted numerous instances of control which had prevented Dahmer from killing more than the seventeen times he’d openly confessed to. Control which contradicted the defence teams argument that Dahmer was not responsible for his behaviour by way of some mutinous mental illness and a paraphilia which drove him to desire sex with the dead. McCann was more of the belief that Dahmer wasn’t so-much sick as he was selfish and that, in the eyes of the law, his crimes couldn’t be explained away by pathological sexual deviancy.

Below follows the entire transcript of that statement as recorded by Court TV in 1992. Some minor alterations and additions have been made for the sake of clarity and grammar but, other than that, everything that follows is in the words of Michael McCann unless otherwise stated. 

Under His Terms

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. This is also opening statement time for the State of Wisconsin. As a district attorney, I have the option of either waiting until the first part proceeds or proceeding now – and I wish to tell you what the State will be showing in this case and what the basic theme of this case is. 

We all have sexual desires. That comes with humanity. Everyone in this room has sexual desire. Some of them vary. Some of them vary in strength. A man may desire a woman; a woman may desire a man; a man may desire another man or a woman may desire another woman. We understand that. We all have those experiences. Most of us know what we’re talking about. 

Some people have different desires. Desires that vary from that. For some, it may be a desire to have sex with a child – referred to as a ‘paedophile.’ For another person, they’re taken up with a fetish. Maybe they get particular excitement out of seeing a woman’s stockings or a woman’s undergarments. And we understand that and that involves [consent] – not for the child, but for adults – it’s consensual. People understand that and people can either reject it or accept what another one’s sexual desires are, as an adult. But the key issue is: you don’t impose that on somebody else. And that’s what this case is about. 

This is about a man that had sexual desires for men (not a crime. Certainly in most states it isn’t. Certainly it isn’t in Wisconsin). Sexual desire for men. But it was a man that didn’t want it after having relations with such men – he didn’t want to stop there, he didn’t want it to end. He wanted to continue under his terms. And that’s what this is about: the decision, of the defendant, to go ahead [and] take men unwillingly. In bathhouses – and I’ll talk about that. Even [with] other adults that wouldn’t do as he wished, he began to drug them. And that’s really what this is about. About an appetite – a sexual appetite – of this defendant that simply would not be stopped. 

You’re aware of that in other types of cases. Whether it’s child molesting cases or rape cases, we’re aware of that. This is another type of case. This man’s first preference was not dead bodies. He repeats that throughout his statements. He repeats that to the psychiatrist. His first preference is not dead bodies – that’s a later preference. That’s subsequent when he can’t get people to do exactly as he wishes. Then he considers use of a dead body.

Not a Hardship Story

You may be thinking: “Let’s talk about his youth.” You may be thinking a person that killed 17 people must come from a violent household. I think we tend to think there must be battery here. Child abuse. That there may be sexual abuse. Was there incest in the home? Something sexually wrong between the mother and the son or between the father and the boy? Something like that going on? No evidence of it in this family. Was there some violence going on? Was he beaten and kicked and knocked around by an abusive parent? The record is devoid of that and I don’t think you’ll see anything of that in this trial. 

His father is a degreed man. Has a doctoral degree, is a successful chemist. This is not a hardship story. The years that we’re talking about in Bath, Ohio, you’re talking about a young man raised in a beautiful home on about a quarter-and-a-acre of land – one-and-a-quarter acres – with a pond, trees. We’re talking about, really, a person raised in many ways in a very advantaged situation. Not a desperately-beaten abused person. Keep that in mind. A person that wanted something and wasn’t going to take ‘no’ [for an answer].

With respect to the first issue of the jogger: [Mr. Dahmer is] 15 or 16 years old – [as] Mr. Boyle has told you and the evidence will show. He focuses on a young man that’s a jogger in the neighbourhood. He decides he’s going to attack him. We’re told that this obsession is going to attack him so he lies in wait. He saws a baseball bat in half and lies in wait where he’s seen that jogger running.

Well, that day the jogger doesn’t run by. Is [the defendant then] seized out of control? Does he run around the park looking for somebody else to beat? Does he grab another jogger and go after him? Grab somebody else? Go to another park? Start prowling the streets that day? No way. The jogger doesn’t come along and he goes back home. He decides no, he won’t act on it. The opportunity isn’t right. The jogger isn’t there. So he goes back to his home. 

The next incident we hear about is a man named Steven Hicks. You see here (to my right) I’ve written it up there – homicide – to assist you because of the number here: Steven Hicks age 19, during the Summer of 1978.

Mr. Dahmer has graduated from Revere High School in Bath, Ohio. He’s finished his high school education. He’s driving along. He starts thinking about – he reports that he’s had thoughts about having sex with a hitchhiker. On this particular day he sees a hitchhiker. He passes by and thinks about it. He’s got a car that day. He’s got a home available to him that day. His parents are not there and he picks up that hitchhiker and takes that hitchhiker back to the home. After a period of time, the hitchhiker apparently – and he gives some mixed statements on this. His initial statements to police are not the final statements on it – but, eventually, he indicates that he decides that he wants to have sex with this hitchhiker and comes up behind him and invites him to the home. They’re talking and he comes up behind him and hits him with a barbell. Renders him unconscious and then proceeds to strangle him – to strangle him with a portion of the barbell. For sex. To have sex with him. This is not a fight. This is not an angry fight, it’s a decision. And if you believe Mr. Dahmer at the end, he didn’t even ask for it. [There] isn’t even a turn-down involved. It’s a decision that he is going to have sex with that young man – and he does.

He conceals the body a day or two later. He takes it apart, cuts it up, decides to transport it to a dump. Packs it into some garbage bags, puts it in the back of the car and drives down the road. He’s stopped by a police officer [while] driving to the left-of-centre and that officer stops the car and thinks there’s some drunkenness involved and there’s a discussion between the officer and himself and he persuades the officer that he is not intoxicated and the officer writes a ticket [for] driving left-of-centre and leaves him alone and Mr. Dahmer then returns to the house. To the family house. The body’s still in the back [of the car] and [he] stuffs it into a part of the house.

At first he told police that, two weeks later, he got rid of the body under a crawl space. But in a later statement he said no, in fact it was two years later, after the military. Some three years later, he came back and disposed of the body of Steven Hicks. That was the first slaying. That occurred in Ohio. That is outside the jurisdiction of the State of Wisconsin and that occurred in 1978.

Mr. Dahmer states he experienced remorse about this. You will see [that] one of the tests we’ll talk about is whether he knew it was right or wrong. Mr. Boyle did not address that issue because I don’t think there’s really much dispute about that issue at all. I think you will find from the evidence that Mr. Dahmer knew, at all times, what he was doing was wrong.

This is not the case of a psychotic man that didn’t know the difference between right and wrong. This is a man that had just graduated from high school in a family where there were many opportunities.

Different Tastes

He decided he would then go to Ohio State University – and in the Fall of 1978, he matriculated at Ohio State University and lived in a suite of rooms there with a number of other men. There were no assaults during that time. Whatever he says bothered him, or stimulated him, he had under control.

There were no further attacks in the Summer of 1978. He went to the Ohio State University [and] lived in a suite of rooms with other men. There are no reports of attacks on those men. He flunked out because of excessive drinking, in part.

He decided that he would enter the army and in late of 1978 – late in that year – he entered the United States Army. Served in the army [for] the better part of three years. Trained down in camps in the southern part of the United States and then moved over to Germany, where he lived for the better part of those three years. Lived in a barracks right near men in the southern camps. Lived in the barracks in Germany. There are no sexual assaults during that time. There are no impulses that he doesn’t control.

He undertakes to masturbate, which has become a habit with him [and] a way that some people deal with sexual stress – particularly younger men. You may say it’s wrong, you may say it’s right. You may say it’s healthy, you may say it’s unhealthy – there’s a division of perception on that. But he gets pornography and he deals with those desires in that fashion. Doesn’t attack anybody and those years pass without any evidence of an attack. Sexual desire, yes, we all have sexual desire and he’s dealing with those sexual desires – controlling those sexual desires. 

He returns in March to the United States. He’s mustered out because of excessive drinking. Mustered out of the army and goes down to Miami, Florida, where he lives for a number of months – roughly from March to September of 1981. There are no sexual assaults down there. He’s controlling himself. No evidence that he attacked anyone [in] either statements by him or by anybody else. He kept his sexual urges under control.

Returns in September or so to Bath, Ohio where his parents are. There’s been a divorce and the father has remarried. Is there for a couple of months and the decision is made that he will go to live with his grandmother in West Allis, Wisconsin and he moves here to Milwaukee County. This is in 1981.

[He] takes up residence with his grandmother in West Allis, Wisconsin and he resides there for several years. In 1982, he has a job at the Milwaukee blood plasma centre. Works there for a year, has some problems. He does have a curiosity about blood – this was brought out by one of our psychiatrists. Does have a curiosity about blood. Tastes it once, doesn’t like it, that’s the end of it. Curious, yes, I grant you that. Different tastes. Curiosity. Tries it once, doesn’t like it, that’s the end of it. Tastes it, doesn’t like it.

In 1982, 1983 and 1984 – under the influence of his grandmother – he turns towards religion and gets somewhat serious about religion, about taking his drinking under control, about dealing with his sexuality. And during that time he states that, with that aid, he came with a pretty good control of himself.

I’ll read briefly, indicating what one of those reports were…

He said his grandmother was a religious woman and, at this time, he began attending church with her and was apparently looking into religious ideals in an attempt to change his life. He stated [that] he recalls reading the Bible and attempting to look for a job and to live the so-called “straight and narrow life.” He stated that he looked into the religious aspects of life.

However – Mr. Boyle has indicated as well – he was at the West Allis Library, apparently one day, [and] a man passed him by, dropped a note in his lap suggesting a homosexual liaison in the basement of that library. He did not respond to that. Did not go down to the light, down to the basement. Did not meet that man. However he indicates then, after that occurred, [that] these ideas started to bother him again – what he described as the darker side of himself – and he quit attending church and looking into a religion and, for a while, he delved into the occult. He stated that he did this because he felt that, since religion wasn’t working, maybe he should delve into the occult and into Satanism. However, after reading several books and dabbling into it – at least at that time – he decided that it was not for him and he began to give into his homosexual tendencies.

There may be different perceptions of that in this room and on this jury – about whether [homosexuality is] right or wrong – [but] in our state it’s not a crime between adults to have homosexual practices. That’s the state of law in our state and that’s what guides in terms of what a person lawfully or unlawfully does. At any rate, he became involved. Then he started to read gay and homosexual pornography. Eventually became acquainted with the bars in the homosexual areas of our city – and those are on the South 2nd Street area, south of the Milwaukee river. He became familiar with gay bathhouses and undertook to attend and participate in activities.

Meanwhile in 1985, he had gotten a job at the Ambrosia Chocolate Company as a mixer. It was a third shift job. It started in 1985 [and] it was to continue virtually to the time of his arrest. He was to perform as an employee.

Liquor is Quicker

At the bathhouses, he describes how there was casual sex. Persons that would meet in relatively short time and engage in sexual activities. Some persons wished to have anal sex, others wished to lie with Mr. Dahmer. And [in] these bathhouses, he [described] how there’ll be a central lounge area and then there’ll be a number of rooms around that lounge area – small rooms with beds where, if individuals wish to engage in homosexual activities, they meet in that lounge area, re-pair to the bedroom area and engage in those activities.

Some of those men whom he met wanted to have anal sex with him. In other words: wanted to penetrate his anal orifice with their penis. He did not like that and he decided that he wanted to continue to attend the bathhouses, he wanted to express himself sexually that way, but he did not want the other person – the other male – to express himself by anal sex on Mr. Dahmer. He felt that sometimes the men insisted on that. He didn’t want that but he wanted the sex, so he came up with an idea of drugging the persons he would meet at the bathhouses – particularly the Milwaukee bathhouse. And we’re not talking at all about someone sharing marijuana or sharing cocaine, we’re talking about Mr. Dahmer deceiving these men and giving them drugs that would put them to sleep. 

He decided then that, in order to do that, he would go to a physician and lie and say to the physician that – because he was working the third shift – he needed sleeping pills so that he could sleep during the day. And from day one, with that ruse, he went to a physician and secured a particular drug.

I don’t wish to mention that drug – and I hope you will understand that – because I think there are people that might want to drug other people. I think that that’s a true tragedy in life: there are people that will take sexual advantage of each other sometimes. You’ve heard the expression: ‘Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker’ – you don’t have to be a homosexual person to want to take advantage of another person sexually. There are persons who deliberately will ply a woman with alcohol with the intent of taking advantage of her sexually. And there are persons who are available for drugs [and] if they knew how to do it, a concern would be that they would use that drug to put someone to sleep. They are not insane people that would do that any more than [a man] who used alcohol to get a woman drunk to take advantage of her sexually was an insane person. It’s been going on for a long time. And [Dahmer] determined to take that drug that he got from the physician – with the ruse that he needed it to sleep – and he began to experiment with drugging people.

Maybe you’re unhappy with what goes on in bathhouses, maybe you aren’t, but this much is true: you’ve got no right to drug somebody else against their will. No matter what they’re undertaking to do with you, you’ve got no right to do that. And [just] because it may be sex that some on this jury may feel that they don’t approve of, it doesn’t mean you have a right to drug somebody else. And that’s what he did. Began to drug people. At the bathhouses.

And the word got around and finally a gentleman who ran the bathhouse at that time – Bradley Babush, he’ll be a witness – became angry about it and confronted Dahmer and said: “Get out! You can’t do that anymore, we don’t want you around here. Get out.” And kicked him out of the bathhouse  – the Milwaukee bathhouse.

Dahmer knew it was wrong. Dahmer never contended that what he was doing was right. Whether it’s this or whether it’s killing people, [he] never contented, at any time, that he was hearing a voice or anything else. And there was Brad Bush telling him: “Look it, buddy. You can’t drug people. Get out of here!” And he kicked him out. That was the gentleman that operated the bathhouse at that time and he will be a witness. 

Did Dahmer stop? No. We know the purchasing of drugs continued.

A History of Deceiving

I’m going to pick up with a little bit of greater detail now, in citing particular dates of activities.

On 7/31 ‘86 – July 31st, 1986 – Dahmer visited Dr. Carlos Olson on South 90th Street and received a prescription for the particular drug he was using to drug these people.

On September 8th of 1986, Dahmer was arrested for lewd and lascivious behaviour that was later amended to disorderly conduct. He was convicted on March 10th, 1987 for disorderly conduct and received one year’s probation. What was involved was indecent exposure – and it’s interesting I ask you to follow this because you’ll see the want of candour. You’ll see, in future incidences – when he’s talking with a psychologist or a probation worker – Mr. Dahmer will undertake to deceive that worker about what really happened here at this exposure case.

He was exposing himself in a park to several young boys – minors – and they reported to the police. The police arrested him. At first he denied it and then he confessed that he had done it a number of times. That officer will be called to testify – [the one] to whom he confessed – that he had done it a number of times. At least four or five times and he was found guilty. What is interesting about it, as well as other things, is that you will see when he later speaks to other persons in the criminal justice system through the years – the psychologists [and] probation officers – he will undertake to try to deceive them about the true nature of what happened in that incident. He pled guilty on March 10th, 1987. But even while that case was pending, on February 13th of 1987, he received another order of this drug that had been prescribed by Dr. Olson from Richard’s Pharmacy. 

Also – on the 27th of February – he purchased 30 tablets of this particular drug from this particular pharmacy, which had been prescribed by Dr. Olson. We’ll have Dr Olson testify because I want you to see that Mr. Dahmer has a history of deceiving doctors and here he’s deceiving a doctor [by] going to him, saying what his problems are, fabricating a problem and getting a drug. I think that’s important to keep that in mind.

Again – on the 10th of April, 1987 – he again purchased that same particular drug from Richard’s Pharmacy, prescribed by Dr. Olson. Again – on the 15th of May of 1987 – he purchases 30 tablets of that particular drug from Richard’s Pharmacy, prescribed by Dr. Olson. Again – on July 1st, 1987 – he purchases 30 tablets of that particular drug from Richard’s Pharmacy, prescribed by Dr. Olson. He’s using this drug basically for the purpose of drugging people. He’s now out of the bathhouses [and] he’s going to hotels. He said he used the Ambassador Hotel and the Wisconsin Hotel. He would meet these men, persuade them. He said his typical process was to suggest he would pay them to come go to the hotel with [him] and drug them. And while they were drugged he would use them sexually. 

Now mind – no matter what he says his fantasies were – the incidences at the bathhouses did not result in anyone being killed. And the incidences in the hotels do not involve anyone getting killed until the latter part of November of 1987.

However, before getting into November of 1987, I’d like to speak to a condition of probation. When Mr. Dahmer was convicted of the indecent exposure – the disorderly conduct case – he was placed on probation and a condition of that probation was that he was to get help – psychological help. The judge in that case said “look it. Something’s wrong here. Get some psychological help” – and he undertook, by the order of the court, he undertook to start visiting with Dr. Evelyn Rosen. She is a clinical psychologist. Those treatments continued until March of 1988.

But what is critically important here [is] he’s beginning to see a psychologist. Meets with her. Meets with her on October 5th of 1987. Meets with her again on November 2nd of 1987. Meets again with her on November 16th of 1987. Doesn’t cooperate. 

Here’s an opportunity to get some help, sent there by a court. An opportunity. The issue here is going to be responsibility – responsibility for what he did. And here is an opportunity to get help if he’s troubled. Troubled by this, by what he says are the fantasies that go on in his mind. But he doesn’t do that. Indeed, the records reflect that he rejects assistance from Dr. Rosen [and] is obviously uncooperative over the year that he sees her. On several occasions flatly turns his back to her. And this is not psychosis. No evidence of psychosis from that. Flatly turns his back. Rejects the hand. Rejects the purpose – the court ordered assistance. He rejects and does not cooperate with Dr. Rosen throughout that period. He sees her on November 16th, 1987 again. Dr. Evelyn Rosen.

Failure to Resist

On about the 20th of November – that’s towards the end of November of 1987 – he meets a young man by the name of Steven Tuomi and they go to the Ambassador Hotel.

Mr. Dahmer will indicate that he has already reserved that room. He has already ground the pills that he’s going to use to drug [Tuomi]. He has secured the room, prepared the pills and then he goes out to look for whom he will victimise.

I hope I do not fail to mention it, because it’s important: You will see that every person he victimises either doesn’t have a car or doesn’t have use of the car at that time. What is supposed to be an ungovernable, uncontrollable urge is highly selective to make sure that the person he selects [does not have a car]. And he explains later that he doesn’t want a car around because police interest might be aroused.

At any rate, he selects Mr. Steven Tuomi, goes out – literally – gets him, brings him back, offers him some money to come back. They come back to the hotel and he drugs him, which is his practice. Mr. Dahmer himself is drinking. 

Mr. Dahmer says he woke up the next morning and Steven Tuomi was dead in the bed. Now, Mr. Dahmer says he doesn’t know what happened. He saw an injury – looked like a rib injury – on Mr. Tuomi, Mr. Dahmer could not recall. He said himself [that] his arms were bruised but he did not know what happened. Drinking, whatever it was, he did not know what happened.

He went down to the hotel lobby, signed in for another day – keeping the room for another day – [and] during that day [he] went down to the Grand Avenue Mall, bought a large suitcase and brought it back to the Ambassador Hotel. He stuffed Mr. Tuomi into that suitcase, waited until about one or so in the morning, summoned the cab and took the suitcase with Mr. Tuomi into it down to the cab. Got into the cab and went out to his grandmother’s home. When he got out to the grandmother’s home – at the opportune time – he disposed of the body of Mr. Steven Tuomi. Masturbated on it and disposed of the body of Mr. Steven Tuomi. Cut it up. Cut up the flesh into small garbage bags – triple-lined garbage bags – took ‘em out to the garbage. Took the bones, wrapped them in a sheet and smashed them with a sledgehammer and then put them also in the garbage. And you’ll see he did this – and did this with several of the others that he killed at the grandmother’s home – waited until the garbage men took away the evidence the next day or so.

It’s interesting because, at this time, when the psychiatrist talked about this particular time with Mr. Dahmer, they asked him – and particularly Dr. Dietz – what about this? After this event? And he said “well…” 

Dahmer says the following:

“Since I had completely failed in trying to resist the urges, I just went with it. Embraced it.”

*McCann now provides both the question and answer side to Dahmer’s discussion with a psychiatrist*

QUESTION: Decided not to try [to resist]?

ANSWER: Right, right

QUESTION: But the only time you tried to resist was when you were going with religion with your grandma?

ANSWER: Right 

QUESTION: And then the failure with the fellow at the Ambassador. Do you even remember what happened there?

ANSWER: After that, there was no resistance after that. None. It was a gradual escalation. Drinking, bathclubs, book stores, bathclubs – right up until the ultimate 

(the bathclubs that he was going to later [were] in Chicago)

QUESTION: Did you understand how self-indulgent this was?

ANSWER: I did, but by that time my moral compass was so shot. So totally corrupted that that was my main focus of life. These were my fantasies. That’s what fuelled my fantasies. That’s what happens when you think you don’t have to be accountable to anyone: You think you can hide your activities and never have to account for them. It can lead to anything then. Which it did.

QUESTION: You think more people would have done these sort of things if [they] weren’t inhibited by [their] conscious?

ANSWER: It would depend on the person I suppose. I don’t know. I can’t speak for others. I really don’t know. I only know what happened in my case

QUESTION: You felt this as a struggle for a couple of years?

ANSWER: Right. Up until the Ambassador and then there was no struggle after that. No struggle at all 

QUESTION: You did just what you pleased

ANSWER: Right. Exactly

*McCann resumes talking as himself*

That hits it at the heart.

A Man That Quit Struggling and Yielded

I’m a human being. I’ve struggled with sexual impulses. I think every human being struggles with sexual impulses. You can’t stop with that struggle. It’s life long with a normal person, it declines as you grow older. And the issue is here and that’s what this case is about: a man that quit struggling and yielded.

We go on.

In a pattern that is somewhat frequent, that was a weekend – that particular November date [when Steven Tuomi died].

On November 23rd 1987 – which was a Monday (apparently the Monday after the Ambassador Hotel incident) Jeffrey Dahmer took a sick day from the Ambrosia Chocolate Company. On November 24th 1987, Jeffrey Dahmer took a sick day from the Ambrosia Chocolate Company. That’s where he’d gotten the job in 1985.

Again, on December 17th 1987 – Jeffrey Dahmer saw Dr. Rosen. No cooperation there.

Again, on December 21st 1987 – Dahmer sees Dr. Rosen. No sharing of problems.

On December 30th, 1987, Dahmer purchases more of this particular drug at Richard’s Pharmacy – prescribed by Dr. Carl Olson. Gotta get more drugs. 

On the first or on the fourth of January 1988, Dahmer again sees Dr. Rosen. No cooperation.

On Sunday the 17th of January in 1988 –  *McCann points to the list of victims he has periodically been referring to*

We are now down here:

James Doxtator… A 15 year old boy. Jeffrey Dahmer says he met him at the 219 Club – this is a club in the area where there are a number of gay type clubs. Dahmer met him there, offered money, took him out to the grandmother’s house in West Allis, took him in – the grandmother was asleep – drugged him, had sex with him and killed him. Fifteen year old boy. Then disposed of the body. 

On Monday the 25th, 1988 – Jeffrey Dahmer took a sick day at the Ambrosia Chocolate Company. This is the Monday after this weekend.

On that very same Monday  – the weekend following that – Jeffrey Dahmer again saw Dr. Rosen. Every time – I can assure you – that he sees Dr. Rosen, there’s no cooperation. He will not cooperate. Doesn’t share, does nothing, doesn’t reach out for help.

On Saturday, March 5th, 1988, Dahmer purchases 30 tablets of this drug at the Richard’s Pharmacy, prescribed by Dr. Carl Olson.

On March the 7th, 1988, Dahmer sees Dr. Rosen again. 

On Sunday, March 27th, 1988: The fourth victim. Richard Guerrero, age 22. Basic facts of these: Mr. Dahmer meets him at the Phoenix Bar – that’s in the gay bar area. He went to Dahmer’s grandmother’s house out in West Allis and they had oral sex. Mr. Dahmer drugged Guerrero, killed him and disposed of the body.

Why is he doing this? Why does he say that he did this? The reason is to extend his time of pleasure. He wants the man compliant. His first choice is a totally compliant living human being. His first choice is not a dead body, he wants a totally compliant living human being. He likes to lay on him – lay on that person, the man – likes to feel and hear the body movements, hear the heart. He likes the response of a living human being. The sexual response of a living human being. But he wants to continue it and these chaps want to leave – “hey, it’s time to go!” When he knows that’s coming, you get out the drug. He’s going to continue the pleasure and drugs the person so they don’t leave and he continues the pleasure. And when they come out of the drug they’re gonna want to leave, so you kill ‘em. And you keep the body. And you get a couple more days of pleasure out of that body. 

For your couple of days of pleasure – second-rate pleasure. It’s not his first choice, it’s his third or fourth choice. I’ll detail it later what his choices are, but to continue that pleasure for several days. In particular, Dr. Fosdal – and his remarks when he testifies – he’ll talk about talking with Dahmer [and] the total lack of respect for life that Dahmer had. His pleasure over the other person’s life. Those were the choices. And Fosdal asked him: “look it, you made these choices.” And he said “yes, I made these choices.”

That slaying was on March 27th, 1988. A Sunday. On Monday, March 28th, 1988, Dahmer took an unexcused absence from the Ambrosia Chocolate Company in the process of enjoying and getting rid of the body.

Enough to Knock Him Out

On the 3rd of April, 1988, Mr. Dahmer met Mr. Ronald Flowers.

Mr. Flowers has a car, but Mr. Flowers was leaving in this gay bar area [and] his car was parked there and he was going to leave. He had been visiting in one of the taverns with friends of his and was leaving but his car wouldn’t start – and he will testify to this. His car would not start. He tried to get a start. Finally walked over to a telephone booth to call a friend to see if he’d get a friend to come and jump start his car. Well, he’s at that booth, he’s frustrated, there are other people waiting at the booth and Dahmer comes up to him and starts to push him: “Now look it, come on out. Let’s have some fun. Come out to my grandmother’s house, I got a car there. I’ll take her car and we’ll go jump-start your car.”

As a matter-of-fact that’s a lie, Dahmer didn’t have a driver’s license. Throughout these incidents, Dahmer does not drive a car. Although he was driving as a younger man.

The individual, Mr. Flowers, is reluctant – as he’ll tell you, he will testify. He decides to go out to the house, out to the Dahmer household. The grandmother’s house. They take a cab out there but Mr. Dahmer doesn’t park the cab in front of the house. Doesn’t take the cab to the house. Stops the cab a couple of blocks away, says “no, we’ll get out here.” He gets out there – and Flowers will testify to this.

They start walking for a couple of blocks and Flowers said “what’s going on here?” Flowers says “look, all I wanted with this guy was to get a jump start for my car.” They have to walk a couple of blocks and he’s saying “hey, where’s this house? Where’s your car?” Finally they come up to the grandmother’s house in West Allis. They go inside and when they go inside – Mr. Flowers will testify – he hears the grandmother call out: “Jeffrey, is that you?” The grandmother hears the voices, apparently, of the two men. Mr. Flowers is a tall handsome man, as you will see. [She] hears the voices of the two men and it’s apparent that the grandmother must know that there are two men there in the house. They sit down to have a cup of coffee. Mr. Dahmer – as was his custom and the way he drugged these men – offers a cup of coffee to Mr. Flowers. Mr. Flowers wants to get back and get his car started. He’s not happy [but] he says “okay, I’lll have a cup of coffee.” The coffee is served. He says he notes that, as [Dahmer is] preparing it ([and he] doesn’t think about anything at the time [but] he remembered it well afterwards) that Dahmer’s got his back to him as he’s preparing the cups of coffee. Then he passes the coffee to him, Flowers starts to take it. Says “right away, even before I passed out, I knew I had been drugged.” In very very short order, down he went. That’s all he can remember. He wakes up in the County hospital, Ronald Flowers does – as he will testify. Dahmer told the police that after Flowers passed out, he took advantage of him sexually. Took advantage of Mr. Flowers. Flowers had told Mr. Dahmer what his work was. 

This is what Dahmer told the police about this incident involving Mr. Flowers – and that is the encounter on April 3rd, 1988:

“Flowers told him that he had a car problem, at which time Jeffrey stated that they could take a cab back to his grandmother’s house where he could get his grandmother’s car and come back to give him a jump. Dahmer stated that they went into the house and after he, Dahmer, turned off the alarm, he gave Flowers a cup of coffee in the basement and the coffee had Halcion in it. Mr. Dahmer stated that he had gave Flowers as much as 12 of these pills because Flowers is a big man. He wanted to make sure he got enough to knock him out and that he passed out within half an hour after they arrived at the residence. He stated that Mr. Flowers passed out, at which time he, Dahmer, pulled his pants down. He does not recall if he had oral sex with him or not. But in the morning, Dahmer says his grandmother saw him at that time. At which time, Mr. Dahmer decides that Flowers was too big and Dahmer didn’t want to cause a commotion and his grandmother had seen him so he decides not to kill Flowers.”

He decides not to kill Flowers.

Dahmer went on to state that – when finally Flowers became at least somewhat groggy but conscious – he walked him to a bus stop on 57th and Lincoln [and] gave him a dollar to get on the bus. Dahmer admitted that he did take 80 dollars from Mr. Flowers but stated that he left other monies in his wallet. Mr. Flowers doesn’t recollect [the theft because] he was so drugged. The first thing he recollects is waking up in the county hospital, where apparently someone saw him in the drugged condition and took him out to the county hospital.

The point here is: even when he has him drugged, he decides grandmother found out about it [so] he decides he’s not going to go ahead with the killing. Doesn’t hide the body. He could hide the body – kill him, hide the body – [but] he doesn’t do that because there’s some risk involved. This is not a man out of control. He decides at that time, as he said, not to kill Mr. Flowers.

Again, he’s running low on his drugs and on August the 4th, 1988, he purchases 30 more tablets of that particular dope from Richard’s Pharmacy, prescribed by Dr. Carl Olson. Then on September 27th, 1988, Mr. Dahmer is arrested at 808 North 24th street. He has left the grandmother’s home and got an apartment down on North 24th Street near Well Street.

Never Out of Touch

We are now at the sexual assault which occurs on September 26th, 1988.

Because there is a minor involved, he will testify he is 13 years of age and I am not going to release his name at this time. The offence occurred on the 26th of September, 1988. The arrest [was] early in the morning at the Ambrosia Chocolate Company on September 27th.

Here’s what happened – and that young man will testify to it:

He’s walking home from school in that area. Says Mr. Dahmer came up to him, told him that he had gotten a new camera – we’re talking about a 13 year old boy. He had gotten a new camera and Mr. Dahmer wanted him to pose for that camera and would he do him a favour and [offered] some money. Would he come over and pose? He’s got this new camera.

This boy is a Laotian boy. He was not fully Americanised in the sense that Americans, I think, teach their kids very much that you don’t meet a stranger and go to someone’s house. They went to the house – he’s a 13 year old boy – got in the house and Mr. Dahmer prepares the cup of coffee with the drug in it and passes the cup of coffee to the boy. He has the boy start posing and – while the boy will say he was scared, obviously at this situation – he told him to take his shirt off then zip his pants open. Then Dahmer went over and reached down and touched his penis. Pulled his penis out over his underwear. The boy became alarmed and afraid. He had taken some of the coffee and he got up and said he’s got to go, he’s got to go. He has some recollection of Dahmer saying “here’s the money”, then having some money and the boy left the house. He had not gotten far – as he’ll testify – before he began to feel the effect of the drugs. He made it home and, [at] his next consciousness, he wakes up in a hospital where his parents have taken him…

Why didn’t Mr. Dahmer kill this young man? Mr. Dahmer states that he had to work that evening and for that reason he didn’t kill him. He had to go to work.

Does this sound like something he couldn’t control?

Here’s the young man leaving – relatively slight boy of age 13. He doesn’t attempt to overpower him, that’s not the plan. I suppose if that was his intent and he tried that, there could be a ruckus. The point of the matter is he doesn’t undertake to slay this boy although he’s got him there, he’s given him the drugs and the young man is there. He doesn’t undertake to kill him.

He was arrested the next morning. The boy, of course, went to the hospital. The police went to the hospital. An inquiry was made. Dahmer was identified and early the next day, the police went to the Ambrosia Chocolate Company and arrested him at work. Dahmer was taken. The investigating officer, Scott Shaefer, will testify. He will testify how he was brought to the Detective Bureau and Shaefer interviewed him at that time. And I want you to hear Shaefer because, if a man is under arrest, that’s a time of stress. You’re going to see that [Dahmer is] not acting psychotically and one of Mr. Boyle’s doctors claims he’s psychotic. I’m going to bring in all kinds of witnesses, not [ones] that just spent 10 hours with Mr. Dahmer, but [ones] which spend a lot more time. That are going to tell you they never observed anything psychotic about Mr. Dahmer. The psychiatrist saw him for 10 hours? We’re going to put people on the stand that worked with him and saw Dahmer for thousands of hours and said they never saw him out of touch with reality. They didn’t see him with a lack of free-flowing ideas or bizarre behaviour or [being] out of touch with reality or incoherent speech. These people, that spent thousands of hours with him, didn’t see him like that. People that worked with him never saw him like that, although Mr. Boyle’s psychiatrist is going to claim that he’s psychotic. In any event, I’ll put on the stand Detective Scott Shaefer – who interviewed Mr. Dahmer at the time of his arrest. Again, this is less than a month later. He was arrested on September 27th, 1988. 

On October 7th, 1988, he’s back getting the drug from the pharmacy – again prescribed by Dr. Carl Olson. That’s less than a month after the arrest. On the 10th of February, 1989, Dahmer purchases more tablets from that particular drug from Richard’s Pharmacy – prescribed by Dr. Carl Olson.

On March the 10th, 1989, Dahmer pleads guilty to the second degree sexual assault. That’s their two counts: Enticing and touching (enticing [means] bringing him off the street into the house and then sexually touching him in the house). It’s two counts and he faced substantial years in prison. However, he is given probation and then, even before that sentencing takes place, he pleads guilty on March the 10th. He will not be sentenced until May 23rd – that’s two months later. However on Saturday, March 25th, 1989 – that’s 15 days after he pleads guilty – victim number five: Anthony Sears. Mr. Dahmer met him at Le Cage, which is in the gay bar area near Second and National. They went to Dahmer’s grandmother’s house out in West Allis where they had sex. Dahmer then drugged the victim and killed him. This is the fifth victim that occurred. As you can see, he was 24 years of age on March 25th, 1989.

Imagine. While the case is pending… On May 23rd, 1989, he is sentenced for second degree sexual assault. He received one year in the House of Correction and five years of probation. Four days later, on May 27th 1989, he purchased some more drugs from the pharmacy. 

That’s Control

All right, what happens from then on – in the next period – you see a gap there from that sexual assault on May 23rd, 1989.

The next homicide that takes place is on May 20th of 1990. During a part of that time he is on, what we call, ‘work release.’ During this time he is in the House [of Corrections]. As I recall, it’s the facility right across the street from here: the Saint Anthony’s Hospital Centre. Used to be Saint Anthony’s Hospital, it’s now a community correctional centre. And he can walk to Ambrosia Chocolate from there, it’s not far from the centre. And during that time – during that year – he is out regularly to work. He comes back and spends an evening at the house, at this facility. During that time – for that year – although he’s out, he does not initiate any assaults. For one year – this period of time – there are no sexual assaults. That’s controlled. That’s control. If this were a man out of control, when he was released to go to work – any of those hundreds of days that he was on the street – if he was out of control, he’d be doing sexual assault. But he decides no, he’s at the House of Correction. He’s to be there, it’s in his interest to be there – to be there every night – and that’s where he is.

On March 30th of 1990, he again gets some more pills. By this time, of course  – well. He doesn’t serve the full year. He sends a letter and he’s released a little early. So although he actually was sentenced to the year, he gets out early. And on the 30th of March, 1990, he gets the pills again. The same drug prescribed by Dr. Olson. And on the 31st of March, 1990, he purchases membership in the Unicorn Club Limited – which is a gay club on Halsted Street in Chicago. In other words, he gets the drug here [and] goes down to Chicago. The next day, he goes down to Chicago.

On these registers of the club – the bathhouse there – on March 31st, 1990, and on Sunday, April 1st 1990, he visits the Unicorn Club. This is also a bathhouse. The operator of that bathhouse will testify. And Mr. Dahmer visits a number of times – and I’ll mention that as we go through. Visits the bathhouse in Chicago again on April 8th of 1990. Mr. Dahmer visits the Unicorn Club limited in Chicago.

On the 12th of April, 1990, he buys more drugs. He’s using his drugs in the bathhouse down in Chicago. He purchases 30 tablets again – and this was again prescribed by Dr. Olson.

On the 13th of April, 1990, he goes down to the Unicorn Club again in Chicago. On the 21st of April, 1990, goes to the Unicorn Club in Chicago.

On the 27th of April, he had an appointment at De Paul [Rehabilitation Hospital].

As a part of that condition of probation, he was given a year in the local facility here and – in addition – he’s given five years probation. The condition of the probation is that he spends a better part of a year at the local facility but the probation is to continue for five years from the sexual assault charge… [And] the first year is to be at the Saint Anthony’s facility across the street. He served about 10 months across the street but that five years probation continues. And the condition of that probation is that he gets some help.

He’s got a probation officer… Her name is Donna Chester [and she is attempting] to persuade him to get help and he has been referred to the De Paul Centre a number of times… He doesn’t make the effort.

Part of this problem is drinking. You will see – when we talk about the homicides – [that] he takes the drinks. He doesn’t want to kill them, he says. He takes the drinks to put down the inhibitions.

At any rate, he makes his first appointment at De Paul.

He mixed up the dates, he says, and he cancelled that.

924 North 25th Street

He moved to an apartment now.

He had surrendered his apartment when he was serving time here at the local lockup and he moved back out to his grandmother’s house. Now he gets his own apartment again at 924 North 25th Street. This is the facility in which he is to kill a number of men – and he moves in there on May 14th, 1990.

Five days later, on Sunday, May 20th of 1990, he met Raymond Smith. Also known as Cash D. He met him at the 219 Club – one of the gay clubs – and they went to the address at 924 North 25th Street where Dahmer drugged him, killed him and had oral sex with him.

This is the first person that he killed there.

Now, this is after a year. Well over a year has passed now. He has not killed anyone [in that time]. He has controlled himself. He has gone down to the bath houses in Chicago [and] he’s controlled himself while he was serving that time. And you see that the passage of time, in the interval, was passed from Mr. Sears (which was March 25th, 1989) to the next homicide which is about 14 months later, under about May 20th of 1990. Again control. Obvious control. This is not a man running out of control.

On Monday, May 21st, 1990, he used some of his drugs on Mr. Smith. He gets new drugs. He gets 60 tablets – again prescribed by Dr. Olson. He also purchased a camera on that date. A colour camera that he will be using to take pictures. On June the 1st of 1990, he attends a seminar at De Paul Hospital.

On the 4th of June the same year, 1990, [he] attends a seminar at De Paul hospital. On June 11th 1990, he has a face-to-face meeting with Donna Chester – his probation agent. He says that he prefers male partners but denies being involved in sexual activity. He states that he masturbates to release his sexual urges. And the agent tries to help him, give him advice. Refers him to a facility that helps homosexual men that are having problems. She tells him how to call, how to get in touch. He does not seem to ever exercise that option. He does go to the group therapy at the De Paul hospital on the 15th of June, the 19th of June [or] the 20th of June of 1990. Again, on the 22nd of June, he attends group therapy.

On Sunday, June 24th 1990, he meets Edward W. Smith – also known as The Sheik – who was last seen at a gay pride parade. Dahmer met him at the Phoenix Bar and took him to his apartment by cab. That’s at 924 North 25th Street. They had oral sex. Dahmer gave Smith a drink and strangled him. 

I may be reading these in one sequence or another, but basically what’s happening is: with some there’s sex before, with some there’s sex after. Not all the individuals that he takes out there, for one reason or another – as you’ll see, he meets some on the street – some may be homosexual, some may not be homosexual. Some he has sex with after he drugs them. But, again, he drugs them and then about the time that they would be coming around and recovering, he then proceeds to strangle them to death. Each of these so far, he has strangled to death. Except we do not know how Mr. Tuomi died, but the rest had been strangled to death.

He missed work Monday. [Edward Smith’s killing] was on the 24th. Sunday the 24th of 1990. On Monday the 25th of 1990, Dahmer misses work at the Ambrosia Chocolate Company and [on] the 25th he also goes out to group therapy at the De Paul Hospital.

On the 25th, he also has a face-to-face meeting with Donna Chester, his probation agent. At that time – and this is a day after his involvement with Edward Smith – Dahmer stated that he was gay but had no sexual involvement with male or females. He states that he satisfies his sexual urges with masturbation

Again, on June 20th of 1990, he goes to group therapy at De Paul. On the 30th of June he goes down to the Unicorn Club bathhouse in Chicago. On the 3rd of July, he has another session – a one-on-one session – at the De Paul Hospital with Patty Anthony, who was a counsellor. They’re trying to address his drinking problem first.

On Sunday July 8th, 1990, Mr. Dahmer is at the Phoenix Bar and makes contact with a juvenile. He has an encounter with a male – a 15 year old boy – on July 8th, 1990. And at that time, Mr. Dahmer advises the police of what happened out there. He attempted to drug the young man. He had him lay out on the bed to start posing. At one point he asked the young man to turn over and the young man turned over. Mr. Dahmer had secured a mallet (didn’t have drugs available at that time) but he had secured a mallet and he struck this young man in the back, near the neck area, with the mallet. The young man was not knocked unconscious, a struggle ensued. He was conscious. They argued back-and-forth and this occurred over a period of time. Mr. Dahmer apparently sobered up some during that time. Dahmer states the young man left, saying he was going to call the police. [Then] came back [saying he] didn’t have any money. They talked some more for a number of hours and then eventually Dahmer decided to walk the young man to a bus stand. And when the psychiatrist asked him about that, he says: “well, you know, he became human. He ceased to be an object to me and I didn’t want to kill him then.” And he doesn’t kill him. He exercises control and does not kill that man. That young boy. He’s a 15 year old boy.

On July the 9th, 1990 – this is the day after that contact with the 15 year old – Mr. Dahmer sees Donna Chester, his probation agent. He says he’s feeling depressed and thinking about suicide.

On that ninth, again – which is Monday after the incident with the 15 year old – Dahmer takes a sick day from the Ambrosia Chocolate Company. On Monday, August 27th, 1990, again Dahmer has a face-to-face contact meeting with Donna Chester, his probation agent. [He] complains about various problems that he has. He discussed his sexual behaviour and stated not what he was really doing [but] stated that he buys himself pornography books and masturbates. He denies picking up any male partners to Donna Chester. 

A Disposal Problem

Again, on 30th of August, 1990, he has a one-on-one session at De Paul. On Monday 9/3/90 – that is September 3rd of 1990 – another homicide occurs. And this involves Ernest Miller – a 23 year old man.

Jeffrey Dahmer states that he met him in front of a bookstore in the 800 block of North 27th Street (there’s a bookstore in that area that’s roughly 27th and Wells in our city). That he met Mr. Miller there in the street. That they went back to the apartment. That [Mr. Dahmer] drugged him and then killed him by cutting his jugular vein. Dahmer said that he was short on pills [and] didn’t have a full dose to give Miller. This is the only person that Dahmer killed with a knife. And that he felt, as this man might be coming out of the drug state, he had enjoyed him sexually. As he’s coming out of the drug state, Dahmer decides to stab him in the neck and, in that fashion, kills him. Again, he goes through the process.

We’re going to talk about about getting rid of the bodies and Mr. Boyle’s remarks have emphasised what he’s doing to the bodies and so on. That’s true… He enjoys the bodies for a day or two and then he’s tired of them. He no longer finds them sexually attractive and then it becomes a disposal problem and how to get rid of those bodies.

You may recall with the first incident ([Steven] Hicks) he’s trucking it away in a car when he’s stopped by the police. That’s back in Ohio in 1978. He does not have a car himself, as I’ve indicated to you. [With] every one of these victims, he always picks a guy with no car. And why does he do that? Because he doesn’t want a car. When the man is killed there’s going to be a car sitting in front of the house. And if there’s a missing [bulletin] out on this person – ”hey! Here’s his car!” – and suspicion is going to mount if abandoned cars are plentiful suddenly around his apartment. So, for a man who claims he couldn’t control himself, he is always very careful to see that he gets a man who doesn’t have a car.

At any rate, after several days he’s got to dispose of those bodies. And that’s a messy job and a dirty job. And he tells you later – he tells [Dr.] Fosdal – that he didn’t like that. Didn’t like that part of the job. That’s why it backed up sometimes. He had a couple of bodies there because it was an unpleasant aspect of getting rid of the bodies, but it was a clever way. 

When all is said and done, he killed 17 men and there was no one looking for him. He wasn’t wanted. It’s a very clever way to get rid of the flesh of these people and to soak the bones in acid. He got acid and would soak the bones, get through to the bones. He kept mementos of them. He kept skulls of many of – not all of them, but many of them. And he kept some portions of a couple of the men – and I will talk about that in a few minutes.

At any rate, he killed Miller on September 3rd of 1990.

He Always Knew it Was Wrong

On September 4th of 1990, he called his probation agent, Donna Chester, and talked with her and said he would get an assessment according to her wishes. And on the 15th of September of 1990, he again went to another doctor and got 60 tablets of that particular drug. At a particular point, the doctor from whom he had been getting this drug became concerned. Thought he was going to get dependent on the drug. Confronted Dahmer and said “look, I’m concerned you’re going to get dependent on this drug” – obviously not knowing Dahmer was lying to him about what he’s using the drugs for – and Dahmer switched to another doctor to get those drugs.

On September 22nd of 1990, Dahmer visits the bathhouse club down in Chicago – two visits on the same day. On Saturday, September 22nd, 1990, he went into the bathhouse twice on that day. On the 23rd Sunday, he visited the Unicorn Club in Chicago again.

He returned to Milwaukee on September 23rd, 1990 – or Monday, September 24th, 1990 [when] he met David Thomas.

Dahmer states that he met him at Second in Wisconsin – this is on the street Second in Wisconsin – and that they went to Dahmer’s apartment on North 25th Street. Dahmer drugged him and killed the victim.

In his first two statements to the police, Dahmer stated that he did not have sex with him and that he killed Thomas because he didn’t want him to recover and get angry at him. That he didn’t want Thomas to come out of it and get angry at Dahmer. And I didn’t tell you, but after Flowers recovered (that was the man that recovered out at the grandmother’s house) Flowers will tell you, when he testifies, [that] at some later date he confronted Dahmer at one of the gay taverns and had words with him. And Flowers is a very strong-looking man. At any rate, that was his first statements. He was to change that later – his statements about what he did with Mr. Thomas – but in his first statements to the police he said he did not have sex with him and killed him because he was concerned [that] if he came out of it he’d be angry and he would do something to Dahmer.

Again, he dismembers the body.

On Monday the 24th – the slaying of David Thomas occurred either on the 23rd or the 24th of September, 1990. In any event, on September 24th, Dahmer makes a strong armed robbery complaint. Claimed that twenty dollars was taken from him on the street and he made that complaint… This is within 24 hours, give or take some, of the slaying of Mr. Thomas.

And – interesting – also on September 24th 1990, Dahmer has a face-to-face meeting with Donna Chester. And at that time there was some discussion about a urine test that he had not passed and Dahmer stated that he had taken a particular drug to sleep. Occasionally Dahmer – and you know at least in one incident we know for sure – Dahmer tells us, as he was mixing the drugs, he got the cups confused and he wound up taking the drug, rather than the person to whom he was designing it.

On the 25th of September, 1990 – this is two days after the slaying – Dahmer misses an appointment at the De Paul Hospital. He called his probation agent and told her, Donna Chester, that he’d been robbed and that they had taken ten dollars. Notice ‘twenty five’ dollar complaint to the officer, ‘ten dollar’ complaint to Donna Chester. On October 13th, 1990, Jeffrey Dahmer met with a psychiatrist – a Dr. Krembs. That was on the recommendation of the De Paul people. On the 25th of October, he saw another counsellor at De Paul. For a second time, on November 3rd of 1990, Dahmer met with Dr. Krembs. 

On the 5th of November, 1990, he had his carpet cleaned. We’re going to bring in the carpet cleaners. There was blood on the carpet. Apparently, blood on the carpet. And the carpet cleaner will advise you what he observed, and so on, while he was with Mr. Dahmer. 

On November the 9th of 1990, Dahmer saw Dr. Krembs. Dr. Krembs – and this is in Dr. Krembs’ report, in terms of his psychiatric notes – concludes that Dahmer is not psychotic. As did the psychiatrists for the State of Wisconsin and the court appointed psychiatrists – who concluded that Mr. Dahmer was not psychotic. At any rate, Dr. Krembs concluded that in his notes.

On the 18th of January, 1991, Dahmer purchased a dummy surveillance camera from an electronic store. He was concerned – very concerned – about someone entering the apartment and finding some body parts that he had there. He always knew it was wrong. He kept the place locked, he had it posted. You will see pictures of that – where he had posted. Alarmed. He brought in this dummy camera to try to convince people, if a burglar broke in, to say “hey! Get out of this place!” And don’t go into the bedroom where he kept some of the parts – some of the skulls – that he was collecting.

And on the 11th of January, 1991, he received a prescription from Dr. Crowley. Dr. Crowley is a psychiatrist that, again, his probation officer had recommended that he see.

On the 4th of February, 1991, Dahmer goes down to the bathhouse in Chicago. On the 5th of February, 1991, Dahmer obtains 15 more of the particular drug from a Dr. Bruce Hong. We will call him to testify as well. 

On the 9th –  this is four days later – he gets more drugs and he goes down to the bathhouse in Chicago at the Unicorn Club. Again he indicates to the psychiatrists that, a number of times, he met men down there and drugged them and had relations with them. 

On the 17th of February, 1991, on the street at a bus stop, the defendant met Curtis Straughter. Mr. Straughter was a 17 year old man at that time.

Now we’ve gone through David Thomas, we’re now at Curtis Straughter, aged 17. On February 17th, 1991, Dahmer met him on a street corner near a bus stop. Met with him, they went to Dahmer’s apartment, Dahmer drugged him, had oral sex and strangled the victim with a strap. Took some photos at the time then dismembered him.

On the 18th of February, 1991, Dahmer was a no-show at the probation office – and you’ll see the pattern is the same. When Dr. Rosen tried to help him after the exposure case, he refused help. When Donna Chester (the probation officer) tried to assist him, he refused help. When De Paul tried to address the drinking problem, he continued to drink on the weekends. Ignoring their efforts. Responsibility is the issue here. Just rejecting any efforts to help.

On the 25th of February, 1991, Dahmer called his probation officer, Donna Chester, stating that he was sick with the flu and he would miss that appointment on that particular day. On Friday the 22nd of March, he secures 60 more of this particular drug from Dr. Hong. Several weeks later, on April 7th, 1991, another victim falls. 

That is victim number 11, Mr. Lindsey. He is 19 years of age. Mr. Dahmer meets him on 27th in Kilburn, which is near his apartment. It’s a street corner meeting and Dahmer takes him to the apartment where Dahmer drugged and strangled the victim and then had oral sex with him and then dismembered him. Again, he keeps these bodies for several days, generally, to enjoy them. And again he took a sick day. That was on a Sunday that he slew Mr. Lindsey and the next day – Monday and Tuesday – he took two days off from Ambrosia Chocolate Company.

On Friday the 12th of April, 1991, he had a face-to-face meeting with Donna Chester, his probation officer. He claimed that things were going well for him at the time.

Young Sinthasomphone

On Monday, May 20th 1991, Dahmer purchased 16 gallons of muriatic acid and 6 gallons of Soilex cleaner and one pair of stripping-and-refining gloves from the National Ace Hardware [Store].

He decided to speed up the operation of acidifying the flesh and the bones. Buying this muriatic acid with the intent to facilitate the disposition of the flesh and the bones.

On Friday the 24th of May, 1991, he buys 60 more Hal¹– 60 more of the drug – from the Walgreens. Again prescribed by Dr. Hong.

On Friday the 24th – that very day of 1991 – another victim would fall. Tony Hughes. Mr. Hughes is 31 years of age at the time. Mr. Hughes is a a man that does not speak. He has a hearing problem. And Mr. Dahmer met him at the 219 Club, which is in the gay club area, and they both went to Dahmer’s apartment where Dahmer drugged Hughes, killed him and dismembered him. 

On Monday the 27th of May 1991 – and this is the Konerak Sinthasomphone incident – and I ask you to pay particular attention here. [Though] they’re all obviously vitally important.

At any rate, Dahmer tells us that he met Konerak Sinthasomphone in the mall, the Wisconsin Avenue Mall, and talked him into coming up to the apartment to pose for pictures. That they went up to the apartment and that, at that time, Mr. Dahmer prepared the drugged drink, gave it to the young man and – at first he does not say it, but later he said – he used a drill on this young man’s head.

But at any rate, the man – Mr. Sinthasomphone, young Sinthasomphone – is taken to that apartment and given the drug and Mr. Dahmer goes out to get more alcohol. He leaves Sinthasomphone in the apartment. Sinthasomphone has apparently enough altogether to get out onto the street. He is naked and he makes his way from the apartments – about roughly a block – down 25th Street to the area of 25th and State. He is under the influence now of this drug and, at that time, some citizens see him and the police are summoned.

A fire truck comes, the police come and Mr. Dahmer is there. Mr. Dahmer comes up in the scene. Mr. Dahmer, at that time, still claims he’s been drinking and young Sinthasomphone is there. Young Sinthasomphone is talking in native Laotian. He’s under the influence of the drug that Mr. Dahmer has administered to him. These are somewhat experienced officers – one of them has at least eight years – and there, on the street corner, they start talking. And they will testify, as I told you during the voire dire², they will testify their observations.

Dahmer persuades them that this is simply a gay friend of his. That Konerak is a gay friend of his, Dahmers, and the police and Dahmer go back to Dahmer’s apartment. Dahmer shows them some pictures that he has taken of Mr. Sinthasomphone. Before he left Sinthasomphone, he had taken some pictures. The officers talk for several minutes with Mr. Dahmer. Well, young Sinthasomphone is there and they will testify they’re not talking to an incoherent man. They’re not talking to a man out of control. They’re not talking to a man that’s incoherent, that’s got a flight of ideas, that’s suffering from a delusion or suffering from hallucinations. He persuades those officers – he is in control of the situation – he persuades those officers that Konerak Sinthasomphone is a friend of his that’s been staying there for several days and the young man – who was 14 years of age – [Dahmer] persuades the officers that everything’s okay and they leave. And not long after they leave, or after they leave, he decides that he will undertake some additional drilling with Konerak Sinthasomphone – and Sinthasomphone dies.

I hope you will listen carefully to what those officers say, because you have persons [who were] right there near him that can testify as to whether he’s in any out of control state.

Does a man who was out of control leave Sinthasomphone there in the apartment in the first place to go and get more beer? Or is it a person that needs more alcohol to continue with a job that even he finds grizzly.

The Last of the 17

On May 27th 1991, after Dahmer [met Konerak] at the Grand Avenue Mall… We’ve gone over that – what happened inside the home and outside the home. [Dahmer also] performed oral sexual activities and anal sexual activities on Konerak Sinthasomphone.

The day after that, which is a Tuesday, Dahmer took a day off – a personal day off – from the Chocolate Company. On Tuesday the 28th of 1991 – which is two days later – he meets again with Donna Chester. Complains, as he often does in those meetings, and agrees to see Dr. Crowley.

On June the 30th of 1991, victim number 14 – Matt Turner – meets Jeffrey Dahmer at a bus station in Chicago. Dahmer has been going down to Chicago. He meets this man, Matt Turner, at the bus station in Chicago and induces him to come up to Milwaukee. That’s got to take some persuasion, you can bet on that. Do you think he was dealing with an out of control incoherent man – or a person who could be persuasive? All these people that go out to the to the apartment with him. At any rate, Mr. Matt Turner comes up from Chicago. 

Dahmer gets him into the apartment, drugs him, has sex with him, uses a strap to strangle him to death. On the 5th of July 1991, Mr. Dahmer is again down in Chicago. He meets Jeremiah Weinberger in a bar, they take a Greyhound back to Milwaukee and go to Dahmer’s apartment. That time they have oral sex, Dahmer drugs him and proceeds to strangle the victim.

On the 15th of July 1991, Mr. Dahmer meets Oliver Lacy at 27th Street (between State and Kilburn) and induces him to come to his apartment. They go to Dahmer’s apartment, he says, to pose for photos. Dahmer drugs him and strangles the victim and Dahmer says he then had anal sex with him after that – and that he saved the head of Mr. Lacy. Again, on the 15th of July of 1991, he has [now] been so often late and missed so many days at the chocolate factory that his boss meets with him and suspends him. And you’re going to hear from his boss. This is a man that he worked for and spent, as I say, thousands of hours [with him] who will tell you whether he thinks he suffers from any – in fact, he will tell you that he does not suffer, in his opinion, from any mental difficulty. At least from his experience with work. 

On the 16th of July, Dahmer called his probation office, Donna Chester, and said that he had missed an appointment with her and told her that he had been fired. She urges him to see Dr. Crowley. 

On the 19th of July 1991, Mr. Dahmer meets – at a bus stop on the west side of our city – Joseph Bradenhoft and persuades Joseph Bradehoft to go to the apartment with him. There’s drugging involved and oral sex and Dahmer strangles this man with a strap and then proceeds to dismember him.

That was to be the last of the 17 victims of Mr. Dahmer. 

On the 22nd of July of 1991, Mr. Dahmer had contact with one Tracy Edwards at the Grand Avenue Mall and induced him to return to the apartment. Mr Dahmer did not have the sufficient drugging pills [but] at any rate, a dispute developed between he and Mr. Edwards and Mr. Edwards made it out of the apartment alive and summoned police – who returned and the arrest of Mr. Dahmer ensued.

Dahmer was then first interviewed early in the morning of July 23rd, 1991.

Out of Curiosity

I’ve been taking a great deal of time on this and I’m sorry, but I think it was important to see all those dates. To see what was transpiring to get a picture that is not just starkly [but of] the slayings as they occurred.

Let’s talk briefly about the taking of any flesh for the purposes of eating it. There were two persons that he spoke of that he took flesh to eat [from]. He told both doctors he was curious about it – that he did it out of curiosity. The first one was Ernest Miller. By that time the full backboard was covered with the number of people that he had slain by that time. It’s whatever it is – seventh or eighth or nine – [but] this is the first man (Ernest Miller) that he decided, out of curiosity, to try it. To take some of his flesh. The other person whose flesh he cut was Oliver Lacy. And he took some of Oliver Lacy’s. 

At first he didn’t say anything to the police about that. Then he said yeah, he had taken flesh once – then told the police he had taken it several times. He told one of our psychiatrists that he did it six times with flesh from these two men. He told another one of our psychiatrists 10 times. But basically it started out of curiosity and this is a man now that has killed a number of men [and] who is, in every sense, outside the law in every sense of the word.

I’d like to speak to the zombie issue as well – or the attempt to inject something into the head. In both cases, he did not want to kill these men, he wanted to keep them alive. His idea was to have, what sometimes in the literature, might be called a ‘sex slave’. A person of very reduced mentality that would be under his power. Not dead, mind you, but alive.

Indeed, as he said to our expert, in terms of what his wishes were – and what his choices were – he preferred the person to be alive. Both of the experts indicated that, rather than a dead body, he preferred a live body. He would’ve preferred a totally compliant live body and that meant a drugged body. And he preferred the body drugged. It was a diminution when life was taken. It wasn’t as interesting. He liked to hear the heart, he liked the the aliveness of the body. But the drug only lasted so long.

Indeed, he told the police that he tried to extend it with ether (they found ether in the apartment) but he tried to keep them under when, after a period of time, the drug would wear off. He didn’t have intravenous apparatus to put the drug in, so as they try to come out of it he attempted to extend the drug period by the use of ether but he was not successful in that attempt and eventually he heard one time, on tv or radio, that you could freeze. People were dry-freezing their pets and you could dry-freeze a pet as though it were alive and that he would prefer even that.

First [preference]: the alive, very compliant person (such a person you do not find). Then the drugged compliant person. [Then] the dry-freeze, if you will. And last, the body. Having the body – a dead body – that was the last choice. Not the first choice.

He Painted the Skulls

*The boards marked with the victims names and dates have been removed. Now McCann stands alongside a projector screen with the definition of insanity, as per Wisconsin law, projected onto it*

I’d like to talk to you about the law. This is the law that you will be deciding [and] that the judge will be instructing you: 

Alright. There’s no issue of defect here. Everyone agrees Mr. Dahmer is of at least average intelligence. We’re not talking about a person that is a mental defective, that’s not in this picture at all. So the issue is mental disease and there will be discussion and disagreement between the psychiatrists on this. 

However, the doctor will say – Dr. Dietz particularly will say – that that mental disease, that you see in this statute, is not the type of mental disorder that they’re talking about in that manual. And, indeed, that manual on its face will tell you that you can’t overlap the two merely because it’s called a ‘mental disorder’. The manual itself warns you that that doesn’t mean it’s going to be a mental disease under the law. So there will be a discussion about that. 

There is what’s called the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association³. They list what they call ‘mental disorders’ and paraphilias is one of those mental disorders. It’s a new type of word. The old word used to be ‘sex deviant.’ That was a word that some viewed as an insulting word because of the various categories that were under that – and the word ‘paraphilia’ is a relatively new word.

The deviation that would be involved here would be an interest in a dead body – a sexual interest in a dead body. Well, the newer word for it is called a paraphilia and the doctors for the defence and the doctors for the State will say “yes, he had a paraphilia. He did take pleasure out of a dead body and that is referred to as a disorder within that manual.”

You will hear testimony about that and then you will hear testimony about whether he lacked substantial capacity to either appreciate the wrongfulness of misconduct or to conform this conduct to the requirements of the law.

And these are some of the examples that you will see to appreciate it. When Dr. Dietz – and I’d like to take a minute or two to introduce Dr. Dietz in his absence: 

Dr. Dietz is educated at the Cornell Medical School. A Cornell undergraduate. Took Advanced Medical Education and Advanced Psychiatry and studied in that process at Johns Hopkins. He went to Harvard and taught at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Went to the University of Virginia where he held an assistant professor position in both the faculty of law and the faculty of medicine. He was the key government psychiatrist in the Hinckley case. He has testified on other serial murder cases. He has written on serial murder cases, has lectured on serial murder cases and will bring to bear that experience. I will also ask you to check his thoroughness. Watch the number of hours that he spends before he formulates his opinion.

The doctors formulated their opinions and submitted them to the court prior to January 10th 1991. The court ordered, as is proper under the statute, that those opinions be submitted. See the number of hours – the thoroughness – with which the respective doctors, all of them, [spent with the defendant]. I invite you to measure my doctors against it, measure the defendant’s doctors. How many hours did you spend with the defendant interviewing him? Did you get all the facts? Did you discuss all the cases? How did you handle it? Did you work independently? And so on.

I invite you to evaluate my experts. I urge you to evaluate and, when we were doing the voir dire, I asked you to consider qualifications and thoroughness and experience. I invite you to do that. 

Dr. Dietz – in talking with the defendant over a three-day period – [said] Dahmer told him that, [in] the time that he killed each of these 15 victims, he appreciated that it was wrong to kill the victim. He further told Dr. Dietz the fact that Mr. Dahmer, in some instances, took steps to reduce the chances that he would be identified as the last person seen with the victim. We’re talking about his knowing that it’s wrong. He doesn’t want to be seen because he knows that it’s wrong. The fact that Mr. Dahmer, in each instance, committed the charged offence in a private setting, hidden from the view of others. 

You sometimes have heard of an ‘irresistible impulse’. There was a case in Michigan of a person – an angry man – rushing into a crowded bar and shooting someone else when he heard that this man had violated his wife. Going right in front of a crowd and shooting somebody. And [with] Mr. Dahmer, all these cases, all these incidences, were done out of view. 

The fact that Mr. Dahmer found it necessary to drink alcohol to overcome his inhibitions against killing the victims… He told the psychiatrist how he had to drink the alcohol to get down his inhibitions before he would go on killing. The fact that Mr. Dahmer feared being caught killing a victim or in the presence of a drugged, comatose or dead or dismembered victim… Didn’t want to be caught there because he knew it was wrong, obviously. The fact that Mr. Dahmer took elaborate steps to destroy evidence of his crimes and to get rid of the bodies and to secure against discovery by others – including his techniques for disposal of bodies (at one point he concealed a head in various cases and so on). How he secured his apartment, how he locked it, how he marked that it was protected with an alarm – how he had an alarm. How he put in this dummy camera. All of that reflecting [that] he knows what he’s doing is wrong. If he thought it wasn’t wrong, he wouldn’t be doing that, obviously. And then he painted the skulls. At one point he painted the skulls because he was afraid someone would see them and think they were real. So he got some spray paint and painted them so that they would look artificial. You perhaps have yourself seen artificial skulls.

In terms of whether he had the capacity to control himself: I think, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, [about] this particular point: He lacked substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct.

Mr. Boyle did not speak to that issue when he lectured to you… I have spoken to it. I have told you that Mr. Dahmer said often – when he was asked – [that] yes, he knew what he was doing was wrong. He said it to the police. Said it to our psychiatrist. And I do not know if you’ll see any evidence to the contrary.

A Carefully Controlled Environment 

All right. What about the capacity to control… 

*The projectors bulb has burnt out so McCann continues unaided by the projected outline of mental responsibility* 

The issue of control and was he able to control himself… I’ve addressed on that a number of times. Even with the first case – the jogger case – where he didn’t have to go out ravenous through the park looking for someone to knock down. The jogger didn’t appear and that was it and he didn’t do anything. He said he was 15 or 16. He didn’t do anything until the Hicks incident, two years later, [when] he decided to act.

All through the military he did not assault anyone. When he was at his grandmother’s house [and] the period that he was on work release, he didn’t assault anyone. That he went down to the bathhouses and didn’t assault anyone in the bathhouses in Chicago.

Never broke into an apartment to assault anybody. No evidence that he [did that]. A man out of control breaks into an apartment and assaults and kills another man so they can have his dead body. No evidence that he grabbed anybody on the street and used force to pull him off the street. Always a carefully controlled environment – where he picks a man that has no car, brings him back to his place where he operates, where he has the drugs ready. He’s prepared the drugs. He’s got an environment that’s protected – where he’s not going to be discovered and so forth. 

I’m going to touch upon some of the items that Dr. Dietz points out as evidences of the control that the defendant had, in his professional opinion. The fact that Mr. Dahmer told Dr. Dietz that, at the time he killed each of these 15 victims, he would have refrained from doing so had the victims agreed to remain with him voluntarily for a few weeks. If they had said no… 

Weinberger came up for two days – the man from Chicago, Weinberger. He didn’t kill him the first day. He enjoyed him. The second day, when Weinberger says he’s got to go back to Chicago, that’s when he kills Weinberger. And what he told Dietz is “no, if they had stayed for a couple of weeks I would not have killed them.” He wanted them alive. He wanted the pleasure while they were alive. 

Second, the fact that Mr. Dahmer told Dr. Dietz that, at the time he killed each of these 15 victims, he would have refrained from doing so had a witness entered the room. Under control. Would not have proceeded for [a] witness. You can think of the Flowers case – where the grandmother discovers that there’s a man in the house. That’s it. That’s the end of the plan for Flowers. He does not proceed to kill Flowers.

The same with the juvenile that he had struggled with – that he hit with a mallet. He let that man go when he came to his senses. Let that man go too.

The fact that Mr. Dahmer was able to suppress his sexual behaviour (other than by occasional masturbation) for prolonged periods of time in the military, at his mother’s house, at the grandmother’s house and so on. The fact that Mr. Dahmer was able to satisfy his sexual desires with masturbation at all times. The fact that Mr. Dahmer did, in fact, satisfy himself exclusively with masturbation from about 1973 until the murder of Mr. Hicks in 1978. And, from that time, until the Tuomi incident. Indeed until the incident after that – where he had whatever he had, whatever those desires were. He maintained them under control.

The fact that Mr. Dahmer prepared himself for some of the murders by clearing spaces in his apartment for victim storage. By powdering the tablets in advance. In a number of the cases, he powdered the tablets before he went out to look for a victim and had the tablets ready so then, when [they] would return, he would be prepared to drug them, to proceed with them sexually as he wished.

And by having occasionally worked himself up by watching movies that featured evil or particularly powerful characters. The fact that Mr. Dahmer generally limited the murders to the weekends – when he would have sufficient time to enjoy the sex with the drugged person and then, afterwards, with the dead body. The fact that Mr. Dahmer did not kill any of the men he was attracted to while in bars or on the street or at the mall or in the peep show booths – it was always controlled. Always controlled back to his house.

The fact that Mr. Dahmer did not kill those men whom he found attractive and had rendered unconscious – even after lowering his own inhibitions through drinking – where the bathhouse setting would preclude readily escaping detention. While he over-drugged people and there were complaints, there were no attacks in the bathhouses. And indeed, as the doctor points out, there were several men that came to his house – as we know – that he says visited his apartment that he drugged but did not slay. That he decided not to proceed with the slaying although he had drugged them. We do not know who those men are but Mr. Dahmer has spoken of them. The fact that Mr. Dahmer did not kill men he had drugged unless he continued to find them sufficiently attractive to warrant further steps. These are the men of which I have spoken.

The fact that Mr. Dahmer reported that, after rendering each of his victims unconscious, he voluntarily drank additional alcohol for the purpose of overcoming his natural inhibitions against killing them. And the fact that Mr. Dahmer did, in each instance, wait until the victim was in his place of residence, under his control and behind closed doors before killing that particular victim.

Consuming Lust

I would like to quote, finally, some quotes and I’ll end with this.

Quotes from Dr. Fosdal… A state psychiatrist. He’s experienced – as you will see – in the state of Wisconsin. A wanted psychiatrist from our state, he’s testified often in our courts. Found some people sane, found some people insane. You will see that he examined [Dahmer] over five times – over a substantial number of hours – and I’m going to quote from some of the things that he is quoting of Mr. Dahmer.

This is a quote from Mr. Dahmer:

When asked, Dahmer said: “I had been doing so many terrible things that I became desensitised. I was completely desensitised. It didn’t bother me. It had to be done to dispose of the remains. The Ambassador Hotel incident was a mistake. I had to rush around to make sure that it wasn’t discovered the only way I knew how to dispose of it. I couldn’t leave a whole body in the trunk. It got progressively easier to do the bodies. It was just a part of the procedure. 

In other words, agreed that a human being can adapt to anything. Like shooting people in combat.

[He] went on. Further said that killing “got so routine” that Dahmer was able to concentrate on his work. Said that “on purpose” he did not ask them who they were so that he would not get to know them – “so they were objects.”

You may recall the one young man, when he got to know him, he didn’t proceed to kill him. Didn’t want to know them, didn’t want to get to know them.

I testified, as I mentioned already, that he experimented with the portions – the slices – of the two bodies. Only two bodies: Mr. Lacy and Mr. Miller. 

Further quote from Dr. Fosdal:

“The urge was to keep them with me. To masturbate and play with them. This overrode any normal hesitation to have second thoughts about killing them.”

Then, on further with Fosdal: “I then asked him what he thought was wrong with him and he said “my consuming lust to experience their bodies. The desire never left. There were times that I couldn’t fulfil it because of time and work reasons.”

‘There were times I couldn’t fulfil it because of time and work reasons.’ He had to go to work. It’s what he said, at least, about the first juvenile that was the subject of the second degree sexual assault. You may recall he said: “I had to go to work. I couldn’t proceed with killing him because I had to go to work.”

“The focus of my life was to find fulfilment and satisfaction with good looking guys.”

The cannibalism, as he termed it, and the saving of body parts were just ‘offshoots’. “Just having them for a few nights was not enough. Then I got into the offshoots but they couldn’t be kept indefinitely.”

And, finally, he said – in talking about killing – [he] said: “Killing was not the satisfying part. Killing was just a means to an end.” 

I told you that he had preferred live people. He even preferred the zombie – the experiment there.

Said “no, I didn’t get a kick out of all that at all – the killing. That’s why I tried to make it as painless as possible while they were asleep. I wasn’t into torture.”

Again, he further stated that killing the individuals and dismembering them was not part of his sexual act. This is not a man that enjoys the killing, that says ‘I enjoy the killing’. He had to drink to overcome the inhibitions. Found it distasteful. Psychiatrists call it ‘aversive’. But it was a means – as he put it – a means to an end. He wanted to continue the pleasure. Had ’em while they were conscious, had ’em drugged. They’re coming out of the drugging – the ether wouldn’t do it – okay, you kill ’em. You have a couple more days, at least, with their body. You can do what you wish with their body. 

When Fosdal discussed with him the disregard for human life that was involved, Dahmer said: “I viewed them as objects, as strangers. If I knew them, I could not have done it. Also the alcohol helped.”

He talked about [how] he’d use the alcohol. He said that he was usually intoxicated when he gave the mixture of the drug. That a couple of times, when he was somewhat sober when he gave the mixture, he had drank earlier but he did not feel intoxicated. He said at that time it was harder.

It increased his lustful desires if he had had alcohol and – this is a direct quote – “it just put me in a better mood. It made me feel. It increased the lustful desire. It removes inhibitions.”

Now, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I’ve talked for a long time. You’ve been very patient. You’re probably wondering about lunch. We will put on not just the psychiatrists. We will put on numerous people that spent thousands of hours with Mr. Dahmer and I will ask you to listen carefully to what they have to say. To listen to our psychiatrists, evaluate their competence, evaluate their thoroughness in this matter.

I profoundly and deeply appreciate your attention. I know my decently dear mother used to say, whenever I’d be giving a public speech: “Mike, talk no more than 20 minutes. After that, everybody quits listening.” I know you haven’t quit listening. I’ve seen your eyes. That takes intense dedication. 

I thank you for it.

---

Sources:

• WI v. Dahmer: Prosecution Opening Statement on Court TV
• The Shrine of Jeffrey Dahmer by Brian Masters (1993)
• The Milwaukee Journal, The Milwaukee Sentinel, The Daily News

Transcribing is time-consuming and can be a financial expense. If you find this transcript useful, please consider referencing me. I’d really appreciate it! 🙂

1. The sleeping pill that Dahmer got on prescription and administered to his victims was Halcion. These days it is widely known that this was the drug McCann had been trying to avoid naming (although it was openly referenced in court by other people – like Gerald Boyle and, presumably inadvertently, by McCann himself when recounting the statement Ronald Flowers gave to police) ↩︎
2. Voire dire: A legal term for the pre-trial procedures during which prospective jurors are vetted, selected or rejected and the credibility of potential witness testimony is examined ↩︎
3. The DSM is published (and periodically revised) by the American Psychiatric Association. It clarifies mental disorders via their standard criteria and – despite some criticism – is widely considered one of the principle guides of psychiatry (especially at the time of Dahmer’s trial) ↩︎