Murderous partners

I’m going to address a disturbing subject: the motives, the thinking, of men who eliminate—yes, who murder—their partners.

But first a caveat: Females also sometimes eliminate their partners and share, I suspect, similar mindsets and motives with male murderous eliminators. 

And so what I write, here, applies, I suspect, across gender lines.

One other caveat—when I use the term “eliminate,” as you might suspect, I’m excluding killings in self-defense, of passion, and as responses to insufferable abuse.  This will be apparent as the discussion unfolds.

Last, by “eliminate,” I refer to two possible means of disposing of a partner—by one’s own hands, or by outsourcing the job.

So let’s hit the ground running: Why would a man murderously eliminate his partner?  Here’s the short, but surprisingly complete, answer: He’d eliminate her because he perceives that she’s in his way.

That is, he experiences her as an unacceptable obstruction; and he concludes, eventually, that the only solution is to remove, to eliminate, the obstruction (her).

In the mind of the murderous eliminator, the partner to be eliminated is impeding something very important to him; something that feels vital to his selfish interests; something that promises him gratification that he must have; and something to which he feels strongly, compellingly entitled.

These factors of his thinking, in combination, support and groom his eliminationist mindset.

The idea that he should be denied access to what he wants feels wrong, intolerable. Worse, it feels like an injustice. And so he grows to resent, increasingly, the obstructive entity (his partner); and increasingly, he rationalizes the validity of his growing resentment.

The murderous partner believes, in his entitlement, that he is meant to have this “something,” this “experience” that he covets, as if destiny has promised it.

Consequently, whatever or whoever stands in his way assumes antagonistic, hostile properties, further supporting his rationalization that the obstruction (or obstructor!) isn’t just an inconvenient nuisance, but worse, malignantly undermining.

And so he develops a warped, almost paranoid view that the thwarting factor is inimical to the fulfillment of his agenda. This is a view that supports his inwardly germinating position that he is justified, if necessary, to remove the source of the interference.

It follows, then, that for the murderous eliminator, his partner isn’t just an object to him, which, of course, she entirely is; more than that, she is an object that is in the way of his getting something he’s determined to have, and to which, by now, as I’ve suggested, he feels completely, even desperately, entitled.

I repeat: the combination of these attitudes conspires to ripen his receptivity to the budding idea, to the cold-logic necessity, of eliminating his partner, if this is what’s necessary to ensure his access to what he covets and believes deeply is his right to possess.

Consider the archetypal case of the man who eliminates his spouse to end up with his mistress. In this scenario, from the murderous eliminator’s perspective, the spouse impedes, obstructs his access to his mistress.

Because he is desperate to have his mistress, and because his desperation is inextricable from his sense of entitlement, he experiences his spouse’s existence as less than merely a frustrating inconvenience than as a threat to his determination, capacity and right to possess what he feels he must, and deserves to, have (his mistress). 

I’ve used the word threat carefully. Remember, threats must be trouble-shot. Whenever anything, in our minds, reaches a level of threat, we feel justified to act to remove it. This is a normal, and not necessarily sociopathic, reaction.

However the sociopath, in his abject narcissism, will experience limits to, constraints on, the gratification he is pursuing as threats! He will feel outraged, if not enraged, at circumstances that interfere with his pursuit of intensely coveted gratifications.

In his mind, these obstructions are perceived as threatening.

I stress: he will perceive these obstructions not just as the unwelcome, inconvenient life interferences with which most of us, grudgingly, come to terms; rather, from his more paranoid, grandiose perspective, he’ll perceive them as personal threats to his right to feel gratified in the way that he wants to feel gratified.

For the murderous eliminator, nothing must interfere with his plan—in this case, to clear a path to his mistress!

There may be children involved. He may spare the children if he thinks they won’t obstruct his plans. If this is the case, it may be enough to eliminate only their mother, who is in the way, while sparing the youngsters, who may not be.

To be clear, his decision to spare the children is made easier if he perceives that, in so doing, he isn’t jeopardizing his access to his mistress, the paramount consideration.

Conversely, it’s possible that he may deem the children, too, and not just their mother, as irremediable obstacles, in which case they, too, will be perceived as threats.

In this case he may feel the need and, on a twisted level, the right, to eliminate them as well.

This is all morbid stuff, of course, but we know that it happens. But who thinks like this? What kind of individual thinks like this? Most sociopaths don’t murder their spouses, or eliminate their families, to be with a mistress.

At the same time, only a sociopath is capable of conceiving, and executing, such a calculated, callous, coldblooded, selfish, murderous plan.

Comment on this article

72 Comments on "Murderous partners"

Notify of


I suspect that you’ll be okay. I know what you mean about wanting to be out of the marriage. It’s hopeless with these folks, literally driving you nuts. As far as I’m concerned, these guys act out the part that is coded into their cells. It sounds like you’re headed in the right direction, moving away from craziness, going toward sanity, stability. Good Luck.

Keep yourself safe……but never cowtail down to a spath.
This is what they expect and aspire to….us conforming.

I think what has given me ‘power’ over my spath….is that I ‘shook it up’ and changed my buttons……I didn’t react to his expectations….and now….I don’t think he knows what i’ll do. I know he knows I will follow through with anything legally. But me personally…..he doesn’t know what to think.

As soon as I booted him…..I didn’t do any of my ‘normal’ behaviors or responses.
No COntact blew his mind.
For 28 years he knew I’d come crawling back…..and through the years….it took a bit more effort from him. NOW….it won’t take anything from him….I’m DONE! Period!
And my actions and behaviors have confirmed this.

He may think it’s a game…..but i’m making the rules for how I play now. not him!

Once we gain control back……the world is in front of us!
If they think we are intimidated….they will alwyas think there is a chance of getting ‘under’ us.

Now….he sends others to try to intimidate us…..and NOW….I respond to those peeps as I do him! Call police, report and file orders…..against THEM and HIM!
We have to show they DO NOT intimidate us…..or there are consequences.
We can’t ‘nice’ them into going away!

Good luck….and stay safe darlen.


I h ave been doing some reading on violence and stalking etc. in psychopaths and other DV abusers, the most LIKELY TIME they will really hurt you is at the TIME YOU ARE LEAVING so be EXTRA cautiouis. They think they OWN you, so they use the old saying:

“If you love something, set it free, if it doesn’t come back to you, HUNT IT DOWN AND KILL IT.” LOL but really NO JOKE!


Of course they used it all against me because they KNEW MY PLANS asnd I did NOT know theirs—so SECRETS ARE IN ORDER.

Plan like you are expecting him to try to hunt you down and kill you, worst case then you are wrong and took too many precautions. BETTER too many precautions that too FEW.

DO NOT live in TERROR but DO live with CAUTION and good sense.

DO NOT worry about your “stuff”—put it into storage if you have to, YOUR personal safety is the utmost importance. I almost let my worry about my house and stuff keep me here to be available for them to kill me. I realize now that STUFF is just STUFF and not all that important.

There are several good books available on line about stalking and about how to avoid being found either short term or long term and how serious you are about thinking he might actually kill you. It may mean giving up your job for a while, and that can be financially tough.

California has some GREAT stalking laws and is very victim friendly, like will allow you to change your name, get new SS# and a lot of other things if you really need to go into deep cover.

I am living pretty openly, but cautiously, now, but if my P-son gets parole or my egg donor dies and leaves him a bunch of money to hire a new hit man with, I will have to leave here and go into DEEP COVER to feel safe and secure, but I have all my ducks in a row PRE-NEED and can be GONE in less than a half day with everything I REALLY need and value along with me.

Mine was a little different. At first I thought he had been acting so oddly himself that he was just thinking I was saying and doing things. After all, I’d told him my previous ex had tried to gaslight me and it hadn’t worked. X probably thought he had me so drugged up and submissive it would work. After all, I was nearly dead and he had upped his drug usage.

I really think for him it was about his story line. He put a lot of work into his “nice guy” image. Nice guys do not abandon dying wives they say they adore. For him, I’d become part of his story, devoted loving husband sacrifices HIS life and happiness to take care of his soul mate, but alas, she dies anyway. He loves to act and can turn tears on and off at will. I doubt he ever thought of it as murder, because that would be “bad”. He just told himself he was helping me by knocking me out for days at a time. The fact that I was so miserable in the first place because he was drugging me probably didn’t make it to the surface of his mind. I wasn’t real to him. I don’t think anything is real to him except himself. Once I was dead, he would believe his own story completely. Evidently when other people caught on and he realized it wasn’t going to work, he started a slander campaign against me because suddenly everyone was treating me like I was rabid.

He’s not at all happy I am a live ex with knowledge instead of a dead soul mate. Luckily he’s so lazy since we live far enough apart I doubt he’ll do more than stupidly calling me on the phone and not saying anything. I don’t think that was much fun for him, because I always answered the phone really chipper and happy sounding. When I moved, I got a new number and that was that.

BTW don’t know if its like this everywhere, but I can’t afford an unlisted number. I just have them put me under a different name in the book, same last name. He could find me, but it would take work, and he’s pretty allergic to that. And on the internet I never use my real name, and do periodic searches to make sure there is no trail leading back to me. Hey, I don’t think he’ll bother, but then I never thought he’d try to drug me to death either.

Steve, getting back to your article on “murderous partners” … as Oxy mentioned, most psychopaths will never acknowledge what they are thinking. I do remember a friend of Laci Peterson’s stating that when he congratulated Scott on the news that they were to be new parents. Scott made a snide comment that he was hoping for infertility …. or something along that line.

With that being said to someone in the inner circle of Laci’s and Scott’s, shouldn’t that be considered a BIG RED FLAG that needs to be reported, not only to the unsuspecting partner (Laci) and her close family and friends, but police as well? I firmly believe that we should try and tell the partner of what was said or done against the unsuspecting partner even if it does fall on deaf, loving ears. Better safe than sorry philosophy.

Are you coming out with an addition to this post? (e.g. what happens to the mistress after the wife moves out of the way, the psycho gets what he wants, then of course, doesn’t want the mistress any longer …. and the saga continues).

DEar Rromanticfool, I am so glad you got away! STAY cautious, though.

Wini, even if you were the friend and reported this to Laci, chances are Scott would have had some “explaination” for it—just a poor taste joke or whatever.

My GUESS is though, that as arrogant as Scott was that he was abusing Laci at least emotionally if no other way….that man was a snake in the grass, and he was SOOOOO arrogant and sold on how smart he was. He reminds me of my P son’s arrogance. Like going golfing while everyone else was out looking for his “missing” wife. DUH! He did NOT get it. The dying his hair and gonna make a run for it. DUH! His mother is just like him, so he didn’t fall far from that tree.

Calling the girlfriend only days after he had murdered his wife. WHAT STUPID ARROGANCE that he was so smart no one could ever catch him. Well, he did get caught at least!

Oxy, the weirdest thing about Laci is that I wrote my respects to her mom and step dad on Laci’s and Connor’s memorial site. It was back in 2004 right after I retired. I was explaining to her mom that due to her horror story, it was great that she was educating people about psychopaths such as Scott. I remember I was still in shock and depressed over what I endured with my bosses and thinking to myself how lucky I was to have a loving, caring, person like John in my life.

I know I don’t have to tell you the rest of the story how 2 years later the other shoe feel blonk, blonk, blonk on my head. (SMILE).

I can see that I posted a blip about my nightmare on the wrong blog! won’t repeat it.

BUT something stood out in reading Wini’s post – that as Oxy mentioned, most psychopaths will never acknowledge what they are thinking.

I could actually get my husband to reveal his thinking sometimes. – for those times he didn’t know his thinking was WRONG, he’d accidentally speak his true mind.

For example, when we were watching a tv report about Scott/Laci, I made an observation in a matter-of-fact voice, and my husband responded in the same matter-of-fact tone of voice, without censoring himself. I said something that ALL of us would say was bizarre, but I said that bizarre thing in a calm, affirming tone of voice. My husband agreed and carried on to add his own completely chilling and bizarre observation. The difference between was MY statement was meant to be facetious. Of course, later he backpedaled and said the conversation never took place and that only a mental person like me would say such a thing.

Yea KatyDid, They do not get it, that they do not get it.

1 6 7 8

Send this to a friend