First let me note that “nonhuman human” is not a phrase I use lightly or would apply to all psychopaths. However it certainly applies to psychopathic murderers of their own families.
Two decades ago, Janet Malcolm published “The Journalist and the Murderer,” her classic story of the story of a murder trial. Her subject was the relationship between the writer Joe McGinniss and the Army doctor Jeffrey MacDonald, who gave McGinniss full access to his defense team when he stood trial for the death of his wife and children — and then discovered that over years of apparent friendship, McGinniss was writing a future best seller portraying MacDonald as a psychopathic killer. In her brilliant dissection of this betrayal, Malcolm exposed the “morally indefensible” nature of the work of her journalistic tribe. http://franciscovazbrasil.blogspot.com/2011/05/janet-malcolms-cross-examinations-by.html
This is total nonsense, Jeffrey MacDonald was seeking to play, use, manipulate (user whatever word you want) the author Joe McGinniss. He was propelled by his psychopathic level arrogance and optimism (a mentally ill level of optimism is a flag of psychopathy, see Ronald Reagan). Joe McGinniss owed him nothing.
I’m afraid these Silly Sallies don’t appreciate the reality of the situation. I can only conclude that they (together or separately) are murderer groupies (these are the women who show up at murder trials, write letters to serial killers, etc. propelled by a psychotic unwillingness to accept reality, all males for them are ‘tall, strong and gentle, just like Dad’ — the truth is too threatening to their world), or devotees of a particular psychopath (cultlike followers and true believers taken in by a psychopath), or children of a psychopathic father (who never meet a psychopath they don’t love), or psychopaths themselves (who can’t stand to see a psychopath taken down by non-psychopaths).
In 1989, the New Yorker published a two-part article by Janet Malcolm entitled “The Journalist and the Murderer.”
In the article, which was published in book form a year later, Malcolm offered her skewed perception of my relationship with Jeffrey MacDonald–the subject of my 1983 book, Fatal Vision–to support her bizarre hypothesis that “Every journalist…knows that what he does is morally indefensible.” So numerous and egregious were Malcolm’s omissions, distortions and outright misstatements of fact that I felt compelled to set the record straight in an epilogue to the updated edition of Fatal Vision that was published in 1989.
There is no statute of limitations on truth. Even now, twenty-two years later, Malcolm’s fictions ought not to be accepted uncritically. I reprint my 1989 response to her here.