theprioryorange - Tumblr blog

theprioryorange · 20 hours ago

Text

thank you very much!!!

“Born Evil” and the Case of Shanda Sharer’s Killers

(Shanda Sharer 1979 - 1992) (Melinda, Laurie, Toni & Hope)

These past couple months I’ve been reading a lot more than usual on Shanda’s case, as it’s a particularly interesting one to me – and I recently received a DM asking me if I believed that her killers were ‘born evil’, and if I even agreed with that concept in the first place. I was really delighted that someone was asking my opinion of it and saw me to be educated on the topic enough to hold my opinion to that sort of value, so I replied. However, I have been wanting to do a full, more in-depth post on what I believe to be the motivations/psyche of the girls who took the life of Shanda Sharer, and whether or not they were “born evil.” I study psychology so I consider things like this all the time but having this blog I can actually write out these thoughts and perhaps hope someone may agree with me. Or at least find interest in it and perhaps want to share their own opinion.

Sidenote: The concept of “born evil” is regarded a lot when looking at people such as serial killers, but definitely more so when considering a young person or child who has committed a heinous act, which is interesting. I believe some individuals feel it is impossible to be warped enough by circumstance, trauma etc. enough by the time they are the age they are when they murder, so have to avert their attention to the fact that perhaps some individuals are just born capable of doing something such as murder, rape or torture. We tend to think of kids as innocent, helpless and trouble-free beings, but I do not feel that is necessarily true.

I want to preface by saying anything I say onwards is not an excuse for the atrocities committed, I’m just trying to simply make sense of the brutal crime committed by four teenage girls.

To begin with analysing and delving into the question on whether Melinda Loveless, Hope Rippey, Laurie Tackett or Toni Lawrence were “born evil” I first want to express that, on a conceptual level, I do not agree with the idea (in general, not just in this instance). Scientifically and philosophically, it is impossible. Human beings are born with very little emotional intelligence as babies and emotions/empathy are learned as you grow – I think of children as blank slates (as Sigmund Freud says, ‘moral blank slates’) rather than “good” or “bad.” Our brains are like sponges, we soak up whatever we are surrounded with, whether that be love, or something less positive. So, in short, no, these girls were not born “evil.” They were once young and innocent children who relied on the care and protection of their parents, they once knew nothing of how to hurt someone, or how to be hurt in return.

I think it’s quite problematic to write off an individual as ‘born evil,’ especially when considering the four I am going to talk about more in a moment. ‘Evil’ implies something paranormal or satanic I feel, unnatural, someone ‘born wrong.’ In reality, none of these are what cause individuals to be, or do things our society considers evil – it is almost always, if not always, due to the result of psychological trauma, or a mental illness/personality disorder. Writing off a person, even if they have done something morally reprehensible, as evil and ‘born wrong’ shifts away the blame from sociological, environmental, psychological factors (and more) that shaped them into who they are and caused them to do what they did.

For example, an abusive parent. Saying “Melinda Loveless was born evil” is first of all, scientifically impossible, as ‘evil’ does not exist as a concept in neuroscience – if you want to get technical people can be born with a predisposition to things such as anti-social personality disorder, which can lead to “immoral” or “evil” behaviour, but this is not guaranteed. And like most things, a social construct (immorality I mean, ASPD is very much proven). Not only is it scientifically and some could argue philosophically impossible but claiming this by proxy neglects to hold her abusive father accountable for the years of rape and abuse he subjected her and her mother & sisters to. It fails to critique and hold accountable the system that failed to prevent this too, and causes no blame to fall onto her mother, blame which is deserved as she, as I will get into later, let her children be abused for so long.

The same statements can be made for Laurie, Hope and Toni, but are all (in my opinion) very incorrect, even Toni or Hope, who compared to the other two had somewhat easy and abuse free upbringings. Aside from that, humans are complex individuals and can’t be summed up in one word as a general rule.

Another argument I see quite often is the one of: “Well, XYZ had an abusive upbringing/traumatic experience too and didn’t go on to XYZ” (in this instance we can use the actions of Melinda and co. as an example). This argument to me has many flaws. The first being the inarguable truth that all humans are different. We have different biological, psychological, emotional makeup and therefore will experience things differently. We are affected differently and deal with things such as emotion and trauma in different ways. You can put two people in the same room and have them experience the same exact thing, and they will come out with different responses. People are born with different foundations too, which are formed by genetics and also their environment.

Secondly, abuse can occur in many different ways, (this is a main reason for my first point on this topic I feel) and for different periods of time. Someone may have also experienced CSA, but it is nearly impossible the experience was the exact same as another person’s – specific details can vary, and although they can seem insignificant in the whole situation, they can still have a noticeable change. There is also a point to be made that not everyone has the same resources when coping or attempting to heal from their trauma, whether that be money, support (emotional or otherwise), access to proper medical care/therapy.

In short, people respond differently to trauma that is perceived similar or “the same” compared to other people in society due to a combination of individual differences in personality, foundation in their worldview/prior experiences, coping mechanisms, and the specific details of the traumatic event. I believe these girls, Melinda and Laurie specifically, chose to respond to their situations in the worst way possible for a multitude of different reasons – hurting and killing a human instead of trying to end the cycle of abuse. Does that make them bad people? Yes. Does it give an excuse for Shanda’s murder? No.

I cannot stress enough that I don’t excuse their actions, and I no doubt feel the torture and murder of poor Shanda *was* evil, but the act itself. Not the girls as individuals. Evil by its very definition is “an act devoid of morality, compassion or mercy.” The murder was evil – the girls were not. You may ask how I can separate the two, and I admit it is not easy to do so sometimes, but I shall try to explain as best as I can.

I believe on that night, and in general, the girls were all suffering with mental illness, trauma, and/or a personality disorder, and were feeding off of each other in the worst way possible. Studies show some of the worst murders are committed by groups (e.g. Junko Furuta, Sylvia Likens), some of which consist of individuals who probably would not even murder by themselves. A group mentality makes someone double down, it makes them nervous to go against the grain, it makes them think “oh this person has done this, I’m going to one up them and do this.” It is why in cases like these the torture of the victim tends to get worse as time goes on and tends to escalate until death is used – not always because the individuals want to kill - but because they want to get rid of evidence.

All four girls; Melinda, Laurie, Toni, and Hope claimed that it was “peer pressure” that had caused them to do what they did, and whilst I do feel it played a part, I don’t feel that is necessarily all true.

Melinda Loveless’ Upbringing/Personality Before the Murder

(L: Melinda aged 5, R: Melinda aged 10) (Melinda with her friend, Crystal)

Starting with Melinda Loveless, Loveless had, as I described earlier, an extremely abusive and traumatic childhood from the ages of 1 to 14, so the majority of her life before the murder. Her father, Larry Loveless, was a violent, sexually, and physically abusive drunk. He would rape his wife in front of the Loveless children, forced her into swinging/orgies (some of which Melinda and her sisters witnessed), and would get drunk, proceeding to violently beat her.

Merely witnessing the domestic abuse occurring in her household would have had a serious impact on Melinda, as witnessing domestic violence in itself is child abuse (the individual is also considered a victim of DV too). Research highlights some of the effects of witnessing DA in the home which present when an individual is still a child, but also as they grow older into a teen/young adult: “acting out in negative ways such as missing school or fighting with family members, having low self-esteem, finding it difficult to make friends, engaging in risky behaviours such as using alcohol and other drugs.”

It is important to note even before Loveless met Laurie Tackett she was exhibiting all of these behaviours. Loveless was actually the oldest in her school at the time she met Shanda Sharer, she was sixteen whilst the other oldest kids would’ve been fifteen, as Loveless had been held back a year. This was not only due to her poor academic performance, but the fact she had been missing so much school she wasn’t able to graduate. The teen also had poor self-esteem, and would self-soothe with alcohol, having frequent periods of alcoholism throughout her early-mid teens (reminiscent of her father).

Melinda, despite being popular with boys due to her good looks, had few friends, and did not fit in with the popular kids due to her style, aggressive attitude, and sexuality.

(Melinda, aged sixteen) (Melinda with her mother, Marjorie)

Unfortunately, Loveless and her siblings did not just witness abuse, but were abused first-hand themselves. At trial Melinda denied her father had ever sexually abused her, however psychologists who analysed her said her behaviour was corresponding to those of a sexual abuse victim. Later on, she admitted having memories of sexual abuse occurring but had considered them simply nightmares she had as a child (perhaps as a trauma response). Furthermore, a cousin witnessed Melinda’s father, Larry Loveless, raping Melinda and her sisters on multiple occasions.

When Loveless was very young, and her father had become a religious preacher for their local church, he had ordered Melinda to receive an “exorcism” – which consisted of leaving her, still almost a toddler, alone in a motel room with a middle-aged man. No doubt abuse occurred in that instance too.

I am of the belief many underestimate the effects of sexual abuse, and that many believe it perhaps only effects your relationship with sex/your body. The truth is unfortunately that it has an impact on every aspect of your life to an immense degree. Some general and well-known long-term effects of CSA (child sexual abuse) include: emotional instability (intense anger, upset etc. for seemingly no reason), difficulty participating in healthy relationships – not just sexual but all forms, familial, romantic, platonic – immense shame and guilt, issues with power dynamics/persistent feeling of powerlessness accompanied by low self-esteem, sexual difficulties such as becoming hypersexual (not the same as a high sex drive) or developing an aversion to anything sexual, PTSD (nightmares and flashbacks to the instance are common), dissociation, memory problems, empathy deficit. Loveless exhibits most if not all of these.

Suprisingly also, despite acting older than her age in some aspects of her life (style, sexual activity, drug and alcohol use), Melinda was very immature in other ways. Some report she would watch cartoons, exclusively played with dolls and still wet the bed at aged 15 (a futher sign of sexual abuse in children and young adults) - her mother claimed this was true, and that she had a hard time accepting what Melinda did for this very reason, she still saw her daughter as a baby. Psychologists who later examined Loveless after the murder noted she "functioned emotionally at the level of a five-year-old child", that her childhood had "profoundly retarded her", and this would be the case no doubt before the murder too. I believe Melinda acted this way as she did not have the neccesary emotional development that is normal of healthy individuals due to the psychological and neurological effects of her abusive upbringing. Her brain never had the chance to mature along with the rest of her body.

(Melinda Loveless' bedroom at her home in New Albany)

Regarding other members of the Loveless family, and their role in the abuse, Melinda’s mother Marjorie was aware of most of this going on. Although one instance on the Maury Povich show which she participated in as a guest, she claimed she had “no knowledge” of the abuse. However, it is most likely that this is untrue as Melinda’s father was not secretive at all about his perversions and daily activities around the house – which included gathering his young daughters underwear and proceeding to masturbate onto them, and place the soiled underwear about the house as well as on the windowsills for neighbours to see. Marjorie attempted to end her life on multiple occasions, Melinda finding her once after her mother had swallowed a large amount of pills, no doubt a traumatic event.

As one can only imagine, Melinda’s home had no sense of normalcy, instability persisting until one day her parents divorced once she was fourteen. Having perceived her father as abandoning her, Melinda’s behaviour only spiralled – now losing one of her parental figures, who she was very attached to. She blamed her mother, and this caused tension in the family. An instance of a suicide attempt occured some months after Larry Loveless left the household for good, and sent Melinda a postcard saying he was getting married to another woman. She hadn't even been invited. Later that day her older sister Michelle found her lent over the sink having tried to swallow a large amount of pills, Melinda was 14 years old. It was around this age she first met Amanda Heavrin.

(Melinda's wardrobe) (Amanda Heavrin, Melinda's ex-girlfriend)

Individuals with Bipolar Personality Disorder, a personality disorder Melinda was later diagnosed with, tend to be very hot and cold in romantic relationships if their personality disorder is not recognised or given the proper management. I believe Melinda didn’t see things in shades of grey: everything was black and white. She either loved Amanda and viewed the girl as the centre of her universe, or hated her and would become very aggressive toward her. This is shown through the fact that originally the plan Melinda, Laurie and the others used to lure Shanda out the night of January 11th was also used months before in an attempt to “teach Amanda a lesson”. Melinda and her friend had planned to lure Amanda into the friend’s car under the same pretext, then in which they would drive her to a secluded section of the woods and beat her up. Even Melinda’s loved ones were not protected from her violent mood swings.

(Melinda's 8th grade yearbook photo) (Melinda Loveless, aged fifteen)

Her dichotomous thinking (black & white view of things) could also explain why she placed little blame on Amanda during the situation with Shanda and the love triangle. She didn’t see the shades of grey in the situation; that yes, although Shanda had a crush on Heavrin and that they had ‘gone out together’, Shanda in the end decided the relationship wasn’t worth it, yet Amanda kept up contact despite Shanda's refusals. Melinda also neglected to realise Amanda was more at fault for still pursuing the girl despite stringing Loveless along too. To Melinda, the situation was very simple, Shanda was stealing Heavrin away from her.

As well as dichotomous thinking and emotional mood swings, individuals with BPD can have what they refer to as their “favourite person” – a person, normally a crush or romantic partner, who they revolve their mere existence around. It is more than an intense crush; it is more akin to an obsession.

Knowing what I know about the case, and Melinda’s state of mind in the years she knew Amanda, I would not find it a stretch to say that perhaps Amanda was Melinda’s “favourite person.” It explains why her possessiveness and jealousy where her girlfriend was concerned went past mere protectiveness. In one instance, Melinda proceeded to pepper spray and seriously injure a boy who had been ‘bothering’ Amanda (either teasing or flirting with her). I believe Loveless’ attachment to Amanda Heavrin didn’t solely lay with her Borderline Personality Disorder though, I do believe Melinda’s central relationship with her abusive father played a part too. In multiple sources (mainly Aphrodite Jones’ book on the case, “Cruel Sacrifice”) it’s stated that Melinda was first drawn to/attracted to Heavrin as she looked like her dad, Larry Loveless (upon looking at pictures of the two I do find this to be somewhat true).

(Larry Loveless, Melinda's father) (Amanda Heavrin, aged 14)

Melinda seeing Amanda and her father one in the same also explains how aggressive and abusive Loveless would be towards the other girl. She would be rough during sex, would blow up at the mere notion of Amanda even breathing near another girl, and would slap her for the same reason. She definitely had a lot of pent-up anger at her dad for his abandonment of her, so perhaps used Amanda as an outlet for this. Loveless also admitted to Aphrodite Jones in an interview for “Cruel Sacrifice” that she’d “force Amanda to have sex” with her, highlighting how the sexual abuse she herself suffered had caused her to obtain a warped view of sex in relationships. (This also would later on fuel my suspicion that both Melinda and Laurie sodomised Shanda with the tire iron.)

This is not to say Amanda was a “perfect victim” though, despite the fact she was a victim of Melinda’s physical and sexual abuse (which should never be defended), throughout the relationship, and especially when she met Shanda, Heavrin would harm others. She would dismiss the feelings of both Shanda and Melinda, humiliate both of them, and overall would play Shanda and Melinda against each other during the months leading up to the murder. Heavrin clearly liked the attention and did not consider either girls feelings or safety during the whole ordeal – safety, as Melinda had threatened to beat up, and even kill Shanda, multiple times if her and Amanda continued seeing each other behind Loveless’ back. Heavrin was also a very bad influence on those around her, encouraging others to partake in destructive behaviours.

Laurie Tackett’s Upbringing/Personality Before the Murder

Moving onto Laurie Tackett, Tackett didn’t have a much easier childhood either. Her parents and family were very religious, oppressively so; her mother was a fundamentalist Pentecostal Christian, who claimed she had visions (in reality she was most likely suffering from religious psychosis). Her father shared the same faith despite being a convicted felon, there is no information anywhere explaining what he was convicted of, however it is of the belief he had a prison record starting from the 1960s. For a long period of time, Laurie went along with her family’s wishes of her, and they upheld strange standards. They (the children, Laurie and her brother Bubby included) did not own a TV, were not allowed to listen to non-religious tunes and could only wear conservative and gender-appropriate clothing.

(Laurie Tackett, aged unknwon) (Tackett's local church)

Tackett herself had never acted out, really, but found out the consequences for doing so one day of May 1989 at aged fourteen, when over a period of time she had been sneaking things to wear at school like jeans. Her mother caught her and proceeded to strangle her so hard the girl was left with bruises. Child protective services were called, and the Tackett’s later on agreed to unannounced visits to “ensure child abuse was not occurring.” I’d argue it already was occurring in a multitude of ways, as this was not the only instance Laurie had said her mother had physically attacked her. Laurie and her mother had an especially turbulent relationship; at one point, her mother went to Hope Rippey's house after learning that Rippey's father had purchased a Ouija board for the girls. She demanded that the board be burnt and that the Rippey house be exorcised. This highlights the strict religious doctrine the Tackett household was under, which must have been suffocating for a growing adolescent like Laurie.

In an effort to push back, she became increasingly rebellious after her fifteenth birthday and also became fascinated with the occult. This is quite a common occurrence with individuals raised in strict, religious households – many try to find the most outlandish thing that can anger their religious parents, and most of the time it has something to do with satanism or the occult. Research states the biggest reasons those raised in authoritarian and religious households’ rebel are strict rules, fear-based teachings, and a lack of personal connection with faith. Some individuals like Laurie, might feel stifled by the constraints of religious life & seek autonomy. They may also explore different belief systems – this can include questioning the teachings of the belief system that has been imposed upon them, many finding it incompatible with their own experiences or values.

Aside from the oppressive and abusive household she was raised in, Laurie also claimed she had been molested multiple times at different ages throughout her life. The last time being in her teens after her and a boy had taken drugs together. During the trial for Shanda’s murder, prosecution would point out the discrepancies in Laurie’s stories and put forward thinly veiled attempts to paint Laurie as a liar. Tackett was, in fact, a compulsive liar and lied multiple times throughout the trial. However, it would be wrong to dismiss her allegations of sexual assault, as the last accusation against a boy of the same age seemed rather credible. Whether or not she was a victim of CSA, either way Laurie had a very hard upbringing.

Due to this as she got older, she would act out often and would often attempt to impress her friends by pretending to be possessed by the spirit of "Deanna the Vampire", who she claimed to be another personality of hers. The 15-year-old began to engage in self-harm, especially after early 1991 when she began dating a girl who was involved in the practice. Laurie described it as a sort of “spiritual release,” she was incredibly depressed and frustrated with her life, with her parents’ treatment of her. Mr and Mrs Tackett discovered the self-mutilation and checked her into a hospital on March 19, 1991. Throughout her stay there, although her parents were concerned, Laurie found them to be angrier with her than curious as to why the incident had occurred in the first place.

(Laurie, aged seventeen) (The Tackett's family home in Madison)

She was prescribed an anti-depressant and released. But it seemed not to matter, as two days later, with her girlfriend and Toni Lawrence, she cut her wrists deeply and was returned to the hospital. After treatment of her wound, she was admitted to the hospital's psychiatric ward. There Laurie was diagnosed with BPD (Borderline Personality Disorder), the same as Melinda would be found to have during the murder trial and confessed that she had experienced hallucinations since she was a young child. Regarding the young woman’s BPD diagnosis, adolescents with borderline personality disorder (BPD) often come from households marked by adverse childhood experiences; abuse, neglect, or exposure to family conflict. Abuse and family conflict certainly applying to Laurie’s household, and all three applying to the Loveless household.

Specifically, maladaptive parenting styles have been found by research to be present in a lot of parents who raise children with BPD. A maladaptive parenting style consists of harshness, criticism, and a lack of emotional validation. Laurie’s mother was harsh, critical, and did not validate Laurie’s upset often, later on as her daughter got older tying her own emotional issues to her perceived rebellion/fascination with the occult. Her father is also guilty of not validating Laurie’s emotions – rushing her out of professional mental health care, which I will touch on in a moment. BPD is also often developed due to trauma, for instance the possible sexual abuse she had experienced.

Despite the very concerning admission, and the fact Laurie had now attempted to harm herself multiple times, author Aphrodite Jones wrote that during Tackett’s stay in the mental hospital, her parents seemed very eager to get her discharged. Her mental state seemed to come second to this goal, and Laurie’s father spent long hours convincing the therapists his daughter was fine. Laurie’s mother, was even worse, flying into rages, claiming Laurie was a devil-worshipper, and that this was the root of all her psychological issues. Unfortunately, the girl was discharged less than a month later, on April 12, seeming to be no better than she had been when she had been admitted. No therapy or counselling was set up (or at least followed through with) concerning Tackett’s new BPD diagnosis, and no further checks were conducted on her, leaving her in the exact same place she had started.

She dropped out of high school the same year (September 1991) with little resistance from her parents and stayed in the Louisville area. October 1991 onwards was a period marked with instability in Laurie’s life – she couch surfed and lived with various friends in different areas. Habits of alcohol, drugs and self-harm continued, by late November she had struck up a friendship with Melinda Loveless. At first Melinda was wary of her due to her intimidating physical appearance and strange behaviour, but soon the two found common ground. Their friendship developed more despite the fact in December Tackett moved back to Madison on the promise that her father would buy her a car. Despite the move she still spent most of her time in Louisville and New Albany, and, by December, most of it with Melinda Loveless.

(Laurie heading into her sentencing trial) (Melinda, aged sixteen)

Melinda was not Laurie’s only friend at the start of September 1991, but by January of 1992, she for the most part was (aside from another girl who would be present that horrific night, Hope Rippey). Regarding other friends’ views of Laurie Tackett, well, the girl was not very well-liked. Kary Pope, a friend of both Melinda and Laurie’s stated (as quoted by Michael Quinlan in his book “Little Lost Angel”), “Laurie doesn't keep friends for a very long time. When she makes a friend she'll lie to them, she'll steal for them, she'll do anything to keep that friend. When I stopped hanging around with her, she told people that she was going to put a death spell on me. She was into witchcraft and stuff like that. I got scared of her and tried to keep away from her, but she kept bothering me. She'd call me up and disguise her voice and threaten me. Melinda had told me that if she had a chance, she would kill Shanda. Laurie was the type of person that would probably help her just to keep her as a friend."

Her other ex-friends had noticed she exhibited behaviours that made even them, those deemed by society as the ‘outsiders’, extremely uncomfortable: Laurie would cry and scream at the drop of a hat, pretend to “switch personalities” (psychologists found she did not actually have DID), would participate in extreme self-harm, pretend to be possessed by spirits, ask to drink the blood of friends and girlfriends & more. Melinda was not of an extremely differing opinion, however thought she got on with Tackett well despite the girl’s obvious disturbances. In a way, the fact Laurie was so unpredictable and obsessed with violence made her a perfect right-hand man.

Hope Rippey’s Upbringing/Personality Before the Murder

The average person, upon learning of Hope’s childhood and home life would consider it, compared to Melinda and Laurie’s, relatively trauma-free. There was no emotional, physical, or sexual abuse, and Hope accordingly showed no symptoms consistent with any of this trauma. She did, however, seem to have a pretty bad attitude according to some reports. To me it seems the opinions on Hope would vary depending on who you asked: her parents regarded her as a normal healthy young girl, albeit rather sensitive and squeamish. Some teachers would agree and say she was an average student and did not have any glaring issues.

(Hope, aged thirteen) (Hope, aged fifteen)

However, a few select teachers and other individuals who knew the girl described her as having an “attitude problem” – she would talk back and would get into fights relatively consistently. It seemed she was a chameleon of sorts, her personality shifting around whoever she was with (this backs up general consensus that she was indeed a follower); her parents disapproved of her friendship with Laurie Tackett fearing the girl and the others she associated with were a bad influence. Hope, Laurie, and Toni would do things together such as self-harm, drink alcohol and take drugs.

The youngest girl out of the three wasn’t forced though, she willingly took part in these activities and was rather promiscuous. Regarding her argumentative side and tendency of solving issues with her fists seems to stem from some of the rougher aspects of her childhood: her two older brothers would physically fight each other constantly, in front of anyone. Some of these fights would occur over menial, mundane things such as her brothers reaching for salt at the dinner table at the same time.

Hope’s parents also went through quite a rough divorce, and they moved around multiple times during Hope’s pre-teen years – her home was not conflict-free.

It is of my belief that Hope Rippey during the years leading up to Shanda’s murder was a rather troubled and vulnerable girl who saw violence as the easiest way to solve a problem. She was also extremely conscious of what others thought of her; an example of this was when she started middle school, she abandoned beloved hobbies to fit in more with the cooler kids. Rippey from an early age showed signs of becoming an extremely talented musician, apparently being able to play a song on the piano after only hearing it a couple times but threw away her chances at a good career in music so she could further fit in at school. This was when she started partaking in things such as drinking, drugs and self-harm with Toni and Laurie.

Despite all this, Hope was found to have no underlying mental illnesses or personality disorders, never receiving any counselling growing up etc. or needing to visit any doctors regarding her mental health. I would disagree with the fact she was an entirely healthy young woman though, as she participated in the murder of a twelve-year-old. I am not discrediting the licensed therapists who were assigned to look at her during the trial, but surely, they should’ve found something? To this day, to me Hope is the hardest to understand of the four, and I don’t think that is changing anytime soon. Later on, I will put forward my theory on her mindset during the murder.

In conclusion, Hope’s personality in her life leading up to Shanda’s tragic demise was one of an average rowdy teenager with perhaps predisposition to an alcohol or drug addiction (which she would later go on to have in prison according to multiple sources), not one of a child murderer (and possible molester).

Toni Lawrence’s Upbringing/Personality Before the Murder

Like Hope’s, compared to Laurie and Melindas, Toni’s childhood is abuse free. Also, unlike Hope, Toni had no problems at home. Mr and Mrs Lawrence thought of their daughter as a sweet, smart young girl and treated her as such, spoiling her maybe more than they should’ve. Many report Toni’s childhood was rich both in affection and financially too – her family had a home in the more “affluential” area of Indiana. She attended kindergarten with Hope, and the two soon became inseparable. Despite drifting slightly as they grew up, they kept a good friendship, and not soon after meeting also befriended Laurie Tackett too.

Most who knew her considered Toni quiet and shy, an introvert by nature, even when she was a young child. She was very much into art and poetry, sketching, painting, and writing poems were some of her favourite activities even as she became an adult. And she was allowed to explore the arts freely, her family having the necessary resources to give her (mostly) whatever her heart desired. To Lawrence, this was standard in her home and way of life, however most would consider the control she had over her parents to be somewhat brattish. Many considered her spoilt, even when she was mid into her teens. One of her teachers recall how, despite the Lawrences living a short walk away from Madison Junior Highschool, she would demand her mother drive her there - which she did without complaint.

(Toni, aged sixteen) (Madison Junior Highschool)

However, Toni's life took a turn for the worse when a year before the murder occurred, at aged fourteen Toni was raped by a boy she knew (assumably from school). She had also been previously molested at the age of nine by a relative (no sources state whether any legal action was taken because of this instance though). However, when she was raped at age fourteen the Lawrence’s tried to press charges and reported it to the police after Toni’s mother had found a letter Toni had sent to a friend detailing the incident. Despite her mother and father doing the right thing, nothing came of the report due to police incompetence; the police simply told the boy to stay away from Toni (no official restraining order was filed).

This was the incident that saw the start of Lawrence partaking in the destructive behaviours already being exhibited by Hope and Laurie too. She became even more withdrawn and depressed as once some of her classmates found out about the SA, they victim blamed her, and slut shamed her, defending the boy who had violated her. Clearly, she saw the acts of self-harm, unprotected sex, and drugs/drinking as a means of escape and release from her pain – distracting herself long enough to forget anything was ever wrong.

I also imagine her first run in with the police, regarding her trying to report an acquaintance for raping her, and the subsequent dismissal of her victimisation and pain, would have had placed extreme distrust in the police on her end. If a boy could rape her and get away with it, what was the point of the police? They hadn’t helped her then and certainly wouldn’t if anything were to happen in the future.

Psychologists who analysed her for the murder trial discovered she had ASPD and PTSD (which I will touch on later). ASPD, Anti-Social Personality Disorder has many markers, one of the main ones being: self-destructive and attention seeking behaviour, proneness to substance abuse/misuse, disregard for morals or rules, and extreme opposition to authority. These were definitely exhibited by Toni prior to the incident with Shanda and manifested in her spoilt and defiant behaviour with her parents, self-harm, reckless behaviour/rule breaking and substance abuse. Some would be exhibited more clearly later on, too.

Whether she had ASPD from a young age or developed it as a response to the rape is not concrete, however I would theorise it was developed in response to the trauma from her SA – as there is a clear shift in behaviour pre and post incident (you can also argue if you agree with this too that she perhaps had it from a young age, but it became more severe due to her trauma).

The Girls During & After Shanda’s Murder

(Melinda Loveless aged sixteen) (Hope Rippey aged sixteen)

Going back to the initial question I received in my inbox, I do not believe that Melinda Loveless, Laurie Tackett, Hope Rippey or Toni Lawrence were “born evil,” or are “evil.” To sum up my opinions of them that night, I think they were four teenage girls high on adrenaline, most with mental illness and 3/4 having personality disorders, feeding off of each other in the worst ways. Returning back to the theme seen in some group murders of “one-upping” I do not necessarily think that applies here, as it suggests a level of competition. As much as Laurie and Melinda would be at each other’s throats for the trial and so on, I don’t think they were competing. They were working together, in that moment they were co-existing and helping each other. Laurie more so helping Melinda than the other way around. The same applying for Hope, and in a way, Toni too.

Starting with Melinda, I think her reasoning and mind-set is one of the clearer and easier ones to understand – however I do regard it a little more complicated than some originally assume. I think yes, it was mainly fuelled by jealousy, but I think there was more to it than that.

As shown of course by Melinda remarking she’s “glad Shanda is out of me [Melinda’s] and Amanda’s life now”, Melinda expressed the desire to kill Shanda to stop her ‘interfering’ in her and Amanda’s relationship. And to remove any threat of Amanda being “taken away” from her. Individuals with BPD can be emotionally volatile at the prospect of losing their partner if their disorder is not regulated or treated with the proper care, and I believe this was a part of why she was so desperate to keep Amanda in her life. Another reason though why I think Melinda was so unstable and devastated at the idea of losing Heavrin was the relation she had with Melinda’s father.

Relation in the sense Amanda reminded Melinda greatly of her father, both in some interests and also appearance – perhaps Amanda leaving her would echo her father’s abandonment of her. This would be, to a girl as attached and immature as Melinda, the end of the world. I do not think Melinda was just jealous of Shanda, she was frightened of her, terrified of the prospect that Shanda could take away the one person who (Melinda thought) showed her affection, now that her father was gone and had started another family.

The murder had a practical aspect in the fact that Melinda committed the main atrocity of killing her innocent victim to be rid of her, sure. But the main reason for the torture was so that Loveless could teach her a lesson, inflict as much pain and humiliation as possible due to the girl’s jealousy and anger that had arisen from something that frankly was none of Shanda’s fault.

I think certain aspects of the torture such as the sodomy and stripping of Shanda’s clothes highlights a sexual element though. And I do believe Melinda had some sort of sick psychosexual obsession with Sharer, she displayed this multiple times, claiming to friends that Shanda “had a nice butt”, or was “sexy” and that she’d “like to sleep with her”, theorising maybe it would help her hate Shanda less if they had sex. In fact the night of the murder, Aphrodite Jones recounts in her retelling of the murder (backed up by witness statements from multiple individuals) that Loveless told Toni shortly before they headed to the slam concert that evening (after failing to lure Shanda into the car), and also before they had left and had been in Melinda’s room, that she "wanted to eat Shanda out”, that she wanted to “tease her with the knife, and run it up and down her stomach.”

Considering the stark age difference between them, Melinda being sixteen and Shanda being twelve, it highlights a very concerning disturbance in Melinda’s psyche. It shows she views relations between younger and much older individuals as socially acceptable (at least enough to talk to friends about how she’d like to sleep with a 12-year-old girl without worry they will find it concerning). I theorise this is tragically because of her father, Larry Loveless and the sexual abuse she suffered at his hands. He clearly normalised such relationships and conduct in her mind.

As well as the obsession, I think the sexual abuse inflicted on Sharer was also due to the fact that Melinda wanted to “conquer” her, if it will. A reason why I hold this viewpoint is that after the murder, Melinda kept one of Shanda’s rings, describing it to crime author Aphrodite Jones as “almost a wedding ring”. Shanda’s sister, Paije, appears on the Dr Phil show years later claiming it’s "weird that Melinda thinks she’s like, married to her [Shanda]”. I find Loveless to be a very immature and possessive individual, and I don’t think this necessarily was a characteristic only when Amanda was involved – I believe Melinda was immature enough to have the view that if she done these things to Shanda, she would therefore “own” her in some perverse way (this would also mean that she no longer ‘belonged to’ Amanda).

Despite the sexual abuse most likely being committed by Melinda and Laurie, or Melinda alone, Loveless was claimed to have exhibited squeamishness at certain points of the murder: being grossed out when Laurie told her to smell the bloody tire iron, refusing to lift Shanda out of the car as she was once again squeamish because of the blood. She also was believed to have slapped a fragment of Shanda’s skull out of Laurie’s grasp when the blonde was showing it to her, claiming it was “disgusting”. Due to this I believe that although Loveless was very aggressive and did not shy away from physical fights, she did not get much gratification of any type from seeing the gory results of the violence (Shanda’s blood, fragments of her skull), unlike Laurie who very much did.

The stark contrast in her outwardly displayed behaviour; aggressive and apathetic during the murder, tearful and childlike other times could be attributed to mood swings or perhaps mania due to her BPD, however I am unsure of the likelihood of this, as if this was the case defence could have perhaps used it in Melinda’s favour as a mitigating factor. There was also no mention of it in the court documents I could find, however it is still a possibility. Either way, it is possibly the cause of her fluctuating attitudes to Shanda’s death – either she genuinely feels remorse sometimes and lacks it during others, or is overall apathetic and feigns emotion very well.

(Melinda Loveless, aged seventeen, being escorted by police)

When looking at Laurie though, from just after the murder took place it is clear she had very little remorse and probably still does not. Her role in the murder was more practical and hands-on, acting as the brawn to Melinda’s brains in a way. I believe this was the case not only because the other three definitely were more squeamish and less physically capable, but also due to the fact Laurie revelled in violence. Others who knew her said she had been fantasising about killing someone for a while – and Loveless gave her a perfect opportunity, as well as a perfect victim; due to Shanda’s age, the pair of older girls would have no doubt the advantage to overpower her. Shanda was vulnerable and Laurie would easily function as the aggressor, whereas if the victim had been older, or a male, they might have struggled. Perhaps Tackett saw the murder as a free trial for the things she had been wanting to do to someone. I do agree with most that Laurie probably would have killed again if the four hadn’t been apprehended in the end.

(Laurie Tackett, aged seventeen, being escorted by police)

Tackett and Melinda’s meeting was the final nail in the coffin, as Melinda had the motivation but not the needed mindset or penchant for violence/brutality: she was squeamish and not as physically capable as Laurie, and Laurie had the needed mindset, penchant for brutality and physical capabilities. She had the car and the thirst for blood – she didn’t even need a motivation. Both her and Melinda were feeding off of each other the most out of the four during the incident. They both were high on adrenaline and were very emotionally volatile, not only due to the high-stress and violent situation, but also due to the fuel of them both having borderline personalities.

As well as being obsessed with homicide, death, and violence in general, Tackett also had years of built-up anger against many things, the main being her parents and society in general. Some of this anger could have been directed towards Shanda too, as the girl was everything Laurie was not: “stereotypically” beautiful, academically successful, athletic, but more importantly, incredibly popular. Everyone loved Shanda, and for good reason, the girl was incredibly magnetic and gentle to those around her. There is also the argument that if Laurie truly were sexually abused (either by relatives or schoolmates, or both), that this could explain the sodomy inflicted on Shanda.

My opinion of the crux of Melinda and Laurie’s relationship is that it was not only transaction (they both could give each other what they wanted) but anger, both girls were deeply angry at their lives and the world in general. They probably could relate to one another in ways others couldn’t (this is one of the reasons that they are still friends to this day.)

The easiest of the fours mindset to grasp is Toni, as technically she did not act at all during the murder, which rules out any sadism or thirst for violence. Her main motive for her inaction I believe was fear, she was focused on self-preservation and the prevention of the other girls turning on her. Concern for herself outweighed empathy for Shanda & the natural protective instinct most people have when children are concerned, explaining why she only called a friend in one instance that night to ‘calm herself down’ rather than to report that a little girl was in danger.

Lawrence’s diagnosis with ASPD can explain her apathy & lack of concern for Shanda’s life and safety, and how she prioritised herself over another in a life-threatening situation. Her mindset on the situation after the murder, which remained the same after being released from prison, was that she could not have acted in a way which could have saved Shanda’s life. And that, she wanted to “put the whole thing behind her” – this is not words of someone who holds themselves properly accountable. Lawrence seems to be somewhat remorseful, but like she did that night, prioritises her own self over doing what is right for others. Toni saw herself as another victim of the situation, rather than taking accountability.

Finally, moving onto Hope, she for me was the hardest to understand due to there being no (known) personality disorders or mental illness present – psychiatrists said she was abnormal because there was no abnormality. So unlike Melinda, Laurie and Toni, no scientific/psychological/medical reason can be given. Rippey claims she participated due to peer pressure, however that is unlikely to be entirely true. I do think that played a part, especially with how she ended up in the situation in the first place. However, the extent of torture she inflicted on Shanda, and her reactions/attitude to it all does not corroborate her story of her being terrified and peer pressured into helping, and in turn doing the bare minimum.

It does not explain why both times she went to Shanda’s door to lure her out, it does not explain her stealing Shanda’s belongings and laughing at the girls upset, taking Shanda’s bra and putting it on. Nor does it explain her getting out of the car to help hold Shanda down whilst Laurie and Melinda try to slit her throat, then spraying Windex on her wounds with, according to Melinda, an expression akin to one you’d have when dissecting an animal in an experiment, then mocking her. It does not explain the molestation Hope possibly took part in. It does not explain her helping move the 12-year-olds body out of the trunk, then proceeding to pour the first half of the Pepsi 2L of gasoline onto her. Hope claimed herself she knew they were going to “just beat Shanda up,” and even then, that gives a statement of character – Rippey thought nothing of beating up a defenceless girl for entertainment.

It is clear from my last point, that Hope was incredibly desensitised to violence, and going back to what I said earlier in the analysis of her personality before the murder, saw violence as a solution to even the littlest of problems.

Perhaps Hope’s mindset changed and grew as the night went on, first being excited and uncertain at the prospect of going to beat Shanda up. Then my opinion is that after they had taken her to Witches castle, beaten her up and stolen her belongings, and that once Laurie and Melinda started trying to cut and strangle her, Hope realised Loveless really was serious about ending Shanda’s life. Toni stated that in the car Hope seemed upset, but then got out to help hold Shanda down whilst the two girls attempted to cut her throat – I believe this could’ve been the turning point, Hope’s acceptance of the fact that the only way this night was going to end was with Shanda dead. Otherwise, they would be caught, otherwise Laurie would drop her as a friend, otherwise Melinda and Laurie might hurt her and Toni.

It’s possible that she, from then, had an attitude which could have been possibly half practical and objective, and half sadistic enjoyment. Rippey was the most hands on, aside from Laurie, helping move Shanda’s body, pour the gasoline etc. this was probably her way of trying to get it over and done with, so no one found the body. It is stated in some sources that Hope told the others the best way to ‘get rid of a body’ was to burn it – she was also the one who directed them to Lemon Road, where it is speculated Shanda was molested, then confirmed to have been set on fire and later found there. She did not necessarily seem to enjoy these parts based off the others’ testimonies.

However, going back to what I said earlier about sadistic enjoyment, I do believe she felt a rush of power, and was very excited at the prospect of having full control over Shanda. She definitely enjoyed spraying the Windex over her wounds, and mocking her. These parts of the night show her attitude towards the situation were at points also one of enjoyment rather than just practicality and self-preservation. This is the case too if Hope did partake in the sexual assault. When asked on the 2011 episode of Dr Phil that covered Shanda’s case, with Sharer’s mother and sister present, what she felt during the night of the murder, Hope claimed she “felt nothing”. And that she had no reason for doing what she did “that would make sense or excuse it.” These answers show apathy, but also some shame too – the case is most likely she did have an answer to those questions, but they were either too shameful to say or too hard to explain, most likely both.

Mentioning the Dr Phil episode, which is an interesting watch, it does show a degree of remorse on Hope’s part, and helps me believe she is the most remorseful of the four. Showing her face on live television was not something that was a positive opportunity for her, rather the opposite. By that point she was living her life in privacy and trying to attract as little public attention as possible, in one instance being fired from a job she had due to the business getting hate reviews etc. for employing her. So, the motive of her wanting publicity would not make sense, as outside of that one televised interview, she has not been in the public eye. Leaving the only other explanation to be the one she gave to Dr Phil and Shanda’s relatives; that she wanted to help answer any questions and give them closure.

youtube

Jacque, Shanda’s mother, makes a really interesting point on the show, that if any of them were really remorseful they would’ve stayed in jail. I am not going to go too into detail with my opinion on this, but I do think perhaps both things could be true at once. Hope in her mind, to her, could be remorseful, but still want to get out of prison. Rippey said on the show that she got herself out of prison because whether she was in it or not would not make a difference on the fact she was now a different person, and that she could still could do more good on the outside than in jail. I think some individuals are very complicated and Hope is one of them, even in the aftermath, she does and says things that contradict each other – one minute doing the right thing, the next saying something borderline offensive (her attitude towards Jacque and Shanda’s sister did give me a bit of a bad taste in my mouth.) My personal opinion is that Hope is somewhat remorseful, definitely, but whether it is in the socially acceptable and general way most tend to view it as, or in her own way I do not know.

I am of the opinion that, although no one told or forced these girls to do what they did – and that they made the conscious decision to murder an innocent girl, in a way, all of these girls were failed at some point in their lives, shaping them into the sort of person who could do that. Whether that be by their parents, or doctors, or teachers, or society in general. Shanda was failed most of all by the four girls who took her life, however there were others at fault – or who at least contributed.

This is one of the frustrating cases where this could have been very much prevented – and future prevention needs to start with the people around us; Melinda was horrifically abused by her father, yet her mother said nothing, no police were involved, and she only received counselling later on in life. Mental health professionals turned a blind eye to her symptoms of borderline personality disorder, and she never received specialised help for her trauma, only general family counselling. Laurie’s parents ignored her frankly very concerning behaviour, and once she was receiving psychiatric treatment, she was rushed out of it by her parents, who believed her issues were due to satanism rather than abhorrent parenting leading to the development of a personality disorder, as well as depression. There were no frequent check ups from mental health professionals either after she was discharged, and going back to when CPS came to their home after Laurie’s mother literally attempted to strangle her, no further CPS checkups were made either.

If Tackett’s claims of sexual abuse from a family member/s were true, this would also highlight further failure by Laurie’s parents. However, even if they had reported the sexual assault, it is possible the police would have failed her like they did Toni – completely dismissing the credible case she had made against the boy who had raped her. Social services and teachers ignored all the girls’ destructive behaviours, at some points Toni, Laurie and Hope literally self-harming in the middle of class (which to my knowledge never was addressed by an adult).

In conclusion, these girls were not “born evil,” as no one is. We can never know for sure what they were thinking that night, but from the evidence compiled and the information read we can be certain they were not always the type of people who would be able to murder an innocent child. They had potential, they could have led normal lives, Shanda could have lived. A persons own motivations for murder, and their journey into becoming someone capable of it are deeply complicated and personal, however objectively many glaring failures by the people around them (and society in general) can be seen, and can help explain why the girls turned out the way they did, and the way this even happened in the first place.

May Shanda Sharer rest in peace.

26 notes · View notes

theprioryorange · 3 days ago