Many persons steal for more than one major reason; individuals are complex and their actions are usually multi-determined. For this reason, relatively few theft offenders can be accurately described as pure or ‘classic’ examples of either ‘typical’ or ‘atypical’ theft offenders. In fact many theft offenders display both atypical and typical features. 

Below we shall consider the bases upon which such a differentiation can be made.  A number of important questions, articulated in the next chapter, will be employed in seeking the answer to the question of whether, and to what extent, a particular offender should be considered more of an Atypical or Typical Theft Offender. To illustrate the desirability of such a differentiation more clearly, let  us draw upon differing assessment impressions of two theft offenders, James (Case #23) and Geraldine (Case # 24), both of whom committed acts of theft that  involved relatively large amounts of money.  As will be clear from the descriptions offered of these cases, James is clearly an Atypical Theft Offender while Gerald epitomizes the Typical Theft Offender syndrome.

************************************

Case # 23: James, a major fund-raiser who stole a lot!

James, a 45 year old husband and father had been apprehended after an audit showed that he, as a senior fund raiser for a major hospital, had siphoned off over $500,000 for his own purposes over a two year period. Further investigations uncovered that James had, during that period,  treated himself to numerous trips to Los Angeles, where he had splurged on upscale hotel accommodations, limos and the best tables at the most expensive ‘in’ restaurants.  He had been the top fund raiser for his public ally run institution for nine years running and had frequently worked sixty hour weeks. He was a boy’s club leader, an active member of his church, the assistant conductor of the church choir, and had been awarded several commendations for his high-profile volunteer work in the community.

Shortly after he was apprehended, a psychiatrist-friend of his had recommended that he seek a professional consultation in advance of his trial, in order to perhaps provide himself  with a forensic professional’s report that might be used by his lawyer to  speak to the possibility of a reduced sentence. He refused to do so however, saying that he did not want to ‘cop out’ of suffering the full and, in his view completely deserved, punishment for his offensive actions. 

Incidentally, when initially confronted with the auditor’s report of probable wrongdoing, James had immediately confessed his guilt, and refused to even be defended by a lawyer. He told his friend that while he didn't understand why he had carried out his theft behavior (which was an affront to his ethical code and religious beliefs), he reiterated that he nevertheless believed he deserved to be severely punished, and he did not want to enter a plea that would attempt to either excuse his conduct and perhaps reduce his sentence.

James contacted me only after he had served his full term in penitentiary. 

He  told me that now that he had served his sentence he believed that he had paid some of his debt to society, and he was now ready to undertake an examination of his conduct.  He said that he was actually very confused and frightened by what he had done, as he had always believed himself to be an honest individual, had always prided himself for not being a clock-watcher, and had thought of himself as a person who gave ‘more than full and fair value’ for his wages. He believed the hospital did marvelous work in his community and it was well regarded by the nation’s medical ‘who’s who.' 

What scared him most was that he did not have any idea why he had defrauded his employer of a half-million dollars, and why he had acted out by living such an extravagant and bizarre life-style, which was so out of keeping with his upbringing and usual mode of middle-class living.  Furthermore he was afraid that unless he dealt with this matter, he might do a similar thing again at some time in the future.

During our early sessions I learned that James and his mother had been abandoned by his father when James was 12 years old.  He had very fond recollections of his father although he admitted that he still at times experienced brief but almost overpowering rages whenever he thought of his father having left him and his mother in such dire straits.  They had been forced to live with his grandparents for several years until his mother had remarried when James was 18 years old.

James’ father was an accountant who had held a very responsible managerial position with a pharmaceutical company. He was also a very authoritarian individual who had a major drinking problem, and when drunk he would mete out brutal punishment to James for his youthful misdemeanors.  James remembered only too well the sounds and sights that accompanied his father’s weekend binges, and the beatings he had endured.  His recollections included painful images of his mother trying to get his father to stop his drinking, and father’s violent responses to her pleadings.  Father chose to leave rather than change, and shortly afterwards his mother heard through mutual friends that her spouse had moved to another city with a woman he had met months before he left the family home.  James never forgave his father, and he never saw him again, other than once at a relative’s funeral a few  years later. James did not acknowledge his father’s calling out to him on that occasion.

James’ anger towards his father remained undealt with, although he had prayed for guidance regarding how to handle his feelings of hurt and rage.  When he received a promotion at work to the post of chief fund-raiser he also found himself reporting to a vice-president who was a much older man and whom James viewed as unreasonable and authoritarian, a man who was an alcoholic and who seemed to be continually berating James over an unending number of petty matters in spite of his obvious competence and success in fund-raising.  It was after nearly three years of working under that supervisor that James’ stealing began.

During his clinical treatment James had to learn to deal in more appropriate ways with his anger generally and towards authority figures in particular.  He also had to confront his unresolved feelings regarding his father.  When he had faced these issues and other related matters in the course of several months of intensive therapy, he became much more appropriately assertive with peers as well as authority figures, and learned to get his needs met through means that gave him greater feelings of satisfaction and contentment than he had experienced in a long  time.  He also requested and received a transfer to another department with a supervisor who was fair and welcoming.

A full assessment of James and his behavior suggested that he was a classic example of  Atypical Theft Offender. His theft behavior likely occurred in response to the deep-seated anger that dated all the way back to his father’s mistreatment and eventual abandonment of James and his mother. These feelings were aroused by his being mistreated by a supervisor whose conduct towards James and blatant addiction to alcohol so closely paralleled those of his father.

************************************

Let’s now consider a very different case, that of Gerald, a classic Typical Theft Offender.

************************************

Case # 24: Gerald: A psychology professor who stole $1,000,000 from his siblings

Gerald was a psychology professor at a major university in the Northeast. He was reasonably well regarded in his academic department although his attitude often seemed rather self-centered and rebellious to some of his colleagues. Also, it turned out, he  lived a shadow life. 

 When his father was setting up his estate, about five years before he died, Gerald persuaded him that, as the eldest of five siblings, he would be the logical one to be the executor of his father’s estate. His father, a successful businessperson but a rather socially isolated individual who ran his own retail women's wear store, acceded to Gerald’s request.

 A year after their father died, and in response to having had distributed to them by Gerald what they considered a surprisingly meager inheritance compared to what they had been led to expect, Gerald’s siblings hired their own lawyer to conduct an independent investigation into their late father’s financial affairs. After a substantial search some key documents surfaced which showed that Gerald had hidden the existence of several very substantial investments their father had made during his working life.  These documents included a handwritten note by Gerald to his old high school friend who was also the lawyer that had handled the writing of Gerald’s father’s will, indicating Gerald’s clear intention to acquire most of father’s estate for himself. The amount that he kept for himself and refused to even acknowledge the existence of to his siblings, was exposed by the acquisition of a computer printout of the contents of an offshore bank account where he had placed the funds. These documents  clearly showed that Gerald had planned for at least four years prior to their father’s death to abscond with the bulk of his  estate. 

 Gerald denied to his siblings that his actions constituted any wrongdoing until he was confronted with the written documentation. At that point he changed his story and told his siblings that their father, a month  before he died at the age of 85, and when he was very ill indeed, had decreed that Gerald alone should acquire most of the estate. Gerald could not explain away, however, his own handwritten note to the lawyer, written four years earlier, that clearly showed his intention to abscond with the bulk of their father’s estate, nor could he produce any written documentation signed by their father to support his claim. Faced with going to court Gerald and his siblings reached a financial settlement.  In my office Gerald said, “Dr. Cupchik, I am only here to satisfy my lawyer’s suggestion that I do so. Be advised, however that I have no remorse whatsoever for my behavior, either about the sale of drugs to my friends, or  the taking of the bulk of my father’s  estate. It was simply his dying wish, and I agreed to comply.”

A close examination of the cases of James and Gerald reveals many major differences in their motivations, behaviors, and the ways in which the criminal acts were carried out.  James represents the classic Atypical Theft Offender; Gerald is an excellent example of a Typical Theft Offender.

While in both cases the amounts stolen were substantial, and both James and Gerald used the funds for their own enjoyment, James had clearly suffered from mental and emotional exhaustion, had acted out from a regressed state of mind, and experienced considerable remorse. Gerald, on the other hand, had coolly planned to steal from his siblings several years before their father died and neither experienced nor expressed any remorse about his theft behavior.  

When apprehended, James not only admitted his guilt immediately, but refused an opportunity to gain a favorable forensic assessment; he did nothing to escape his punishment. Meanwhile, Gerald had, for years, denied any wrongdoing, and when caught red-handed so to speak, he refused to take responsibility for his actions, claiming he was merely serving his father’s wishes. He never did acknowledge any wrongdoing on his part.

As a way of facilitating clinicians in more formally differentiating between Atypical Theft Offenders and Typical Theft Offenders we shall next present two valuable pen-and-paper devices, the Cupchik Theft Offender Questionnaire and the Cupchik Theft Offender Spectrum. (chapter 16 is continued...)