! E L M E N T SE "#! $!%&' &( "#! )!*(+, !"#$%&!'(&!"' &)$ $#*+,&!*" *- &)$ .$""/ .0$%% ("1 &)$ $22(",$+ 3),03) 2,01$0% ALSO FEATURING • The Digital Pandemic • The Force on the Front!"# $%&#'(')&$)!# '#*#)'+" ,-$'%). -/ 0-*!-% +-..#(#-. +/ ' 0 2 0 21 · 1 &* 2 % ! 1 7 · / -- 2 ! 1 !"# $#%%& $'#((’( (#%()!*+%), -+.#')/# +0 !"# 1895 #11)%2#, -"2'-" 12'3#'( (-+1- 1*!!#3 4& ()% 0')%-*(-+ 1#3*-), (!23#%! !"#+3+'# 32'')%!) "*/",*/"!#3 !"#*' +4(#(- (*+% 5*!" 3#.*)%! (#62),*!& )%3 /'2#(+1# .*+,#%-#. -+%!#1$+')'& %#5($)$#'( -+%- !*%2),,& -*!#3 32'')%!’( ,)-7 +0 '+1)%!*- (2--#((, "*/",*/"!#3 "*( $#-2,*)' 1#3*-), 4)-7/'+2%3, ($#-2,)!#3 )4+2! "*( *%!*1)!# '#,)!*+%("*$ 5*!" "*( 1+!"#', )%3 #1$")- (*8#3 !"# 1)*3#%"++3 +0 "*( !5+ &+2%/ 0#1),# .*-!*1(—),, 5"*,# #%/)/*%/ *% 5")! (-"+,)' 7)'#% "),!2%%#% !#'1( !"# “$+'%+/')$"& +0 .*+,#%-#.” (-"+,)'( ").# %+! (200*-*#%!,& (!23*#3 "+5 %#5($)$#'( )%3 +!"#' 1#3*) 32'*%/ !"*( !*1# '+1)%!*-*8#3 !')3*!*+%), (#62), '#,)!*+%("*$( 5"*,# (*12,!)%#+2(,& 0#!*("*8*%/ .*+,#%-#—#($#- -*),,& *0 !")! .*+,#%-# 5)( (#62), *% %)!2'#. !"*( $)$#' 5*,, )'/2# !")! ')$*3,& -")%/- *%/ -+%-#$!*+%( +0 (#62), %+'1)!*.*!& 32'*%/ !"# /*,3#3 )/#—)%3 !"# -+%0,*-! 4#- !5##% '#$'#(#%!)!*.#( +% 4+!" (*3#( +0 !")! 0*#'-# 3#4)!#—1)%*0#(!#3 !"#1(#,.#( *% !"# *1$,*-*!,&, )%3 +0!#% !*1#( #6$,*-*!,& (#62),*8#3 -+.#')/# +0 32'')%!. !"# $#%&' &( !"# )#*(+, Investigating the Evolution of the Penny Press and the Emmanuel Church Murders (#)% (!#44*%( “…prosecutors charged Durrant with the murders of both women, sending San Francisco into a frenzy. Newspapers nationwide picked up the story, marveling at the ferocity—and significantly, the sexual brutality—of the so-called “Demon of the Belfry” On April 3, 1895, William Henry Theodore Durrant— Theo, as his friends called him— made his way down 21st Street in San Francisco, California. A young student at Cooper Medical College, now Stanford Medical School, was heading to the Emmanuel Baptist Church, at which he was a Sunday school teacher. He was accompanied by 21-year-old Blanche Lamont, a fellow parishioner, and friend. Eventually arriving in the early afternoon, the pair entered the building one after the other. Though Durrant left the church at around 5 PM, Lamont was not seen again. Nine days later, Durrant entered the church with another parishioner—21-year-old Minnie Williams—be- fore eventually leaving to attend a friend’s house party a few hours later. Williams, too, had disappeared. As word began to spread throughout the city of the two young wom- en’s disappearance, suspicion turned on Durrant. Several witnesses had seen Theo enter the church with both wom- en, and rumors of the young man’s purported romantic failures began to spread. On April 13th, as a few women of the church decorated for the upcoming Easter holiday, one of them opened a cup- board—finding the unclothed and mutilated body of Min- nie Williams. It was only a matter of hours before police had reached the church’s belfry, finding Blanche Lamont’s rotting, naked body draped across the floor, her blood- stained head stu!ed between two wooden planks. Police arrested Durrant just two days after discovering the bod- ies. Doctors confirm both women were raped just before or even after death, and prosecutors charged Durrant with the murders of both women, sending San Francisco into a frenzy. Newspapers nationwide picked up the story, mar- veling at the ferocity—and significantly, the sexual brutal- ity—of the so-called “Demon of the Belfry.” The rise of the American penny press reached its height during the Gilded Age as newspapers across the country pumped out story after story detailing thrilling criminal investigations, daring feats of athleticism, astonishing technological innovations, and most profitably: chilling murders. The penny press’s sensational coverage of Theo- dore Durrant highlighted their obsession with deviant sexuality and gruesome violence. Contemporary newspa- pers continually cited Durrant’s lack of romantic success, highlighted his peculiar medical background, speculated about his intimate relationship with his mother, and em- phasized the maidenhood of Lamont and Williams—all while engaging in what scholar Karen Haltunnen terms the “pornography of violence.” This paper will argue that rapidly changing conceptions of sexual normativity during the Gilded Age—and the conflict between representatives on both sides of that fierce debate—manifested them- selves in the implicitly, and often explicitly, sexualized cov- erage of Durrant. CONTEXTUALIZING THE EMMANUEL CHURCH MURDERS While there is no scholarly study of Theodore Durrant, there are books and articles that help contextualize his murders of Blanche Lamont and Minnie Williams and their obsessively sexual reportage. Jesse Battan’s articula- tion of the linguistic and political divide between Victorian moralists and members of the Free Love movement, for example, counteracts traditional notions of the Gilded Age as an era dominated by sexual repression. As John D’Emilio and Estelle B. Freedman point out in their com- prehensive history of American sexuality Intimate Matters, Americans during the late nineteenth-century were far more accepting of non-traditional sex than they had been in prior decades as forces opposed to sexual suppression (like the Free Lovers) became significantly more promi- nent and birthrates across the country steadily declined.1 In her study of late-nineteenth-century sexuality, Freed- man argues that during the Gilded Age, sex became less associated with procreation and more related to personal pleasure—a reality that engendered immense hostility on both sides of this new sexual divide.2 The conflict between tradition and liberation played out in all facets of American 42 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 society. However, it was especially pronounced in the pen- ny press, which often made light of bizarre or eccentric sexual behavior to sell more newspapers. In the early days of the Durrant case, the press obsessed over his rumored lack of romantic success as some harbin- ger of wrongdoing. Oliver Chan and Kathleen Heide’s re- search on sexual homicide somewhat vindicates this suspi- cion, revealing that most sexual murders of adult women happen at the hands of adult men seeking sex, as Durrant was.3 James Alan Fox and Jack Levin’s study of patterns common to di!erent instances of “multiple homicide[s]” confirms that the desire for sex is often a chief motivation for crimes of passion.4 Contemporary newsmen also sug- gested Durrant’s status as a medical student—particularly his supposed interest in studying “female diseases”—all but proved his complete guilt. Herbert Kinnell’s insightful research on potential connections between the medical field and serial homicide reveals several unambiguous re- calities relevant to this thesis: people interested in death seem to gravitate to the medical field.5 Erich Fromm’s psy- chological inquiry into motivations for violence further reveals the numerous links between necrophilia, which many of Durrant’s classmates stated he had, and violence.6 As the penny press at the time lacked access to this body of research, they indicated that the dominant force behind their relentlessly sexual coverage was likely a battle over sexuality at the time rather than well-sourced psychology. Contrasting these sexual accusations with the ones later hurled at famous dancer, and Durrant’s sister, Maud Allen speaks to the gendered dichotomy of sexual discourse in the late nineteenth-century. Toni Bentely’s comprehensive review of numerous dancers reveals how the male audi- ence commanded Allan to “cover up” during many of her performances despite her growing popularity among women, illustrating this gendered divide.7 Lacy McDear- mon’s research detailing how Allan’s career ended because of a highly publicized scandal involving a British parlia- mentarian who accused her of countless sexual “vices” il- lustrates the broader battle over sexuality during the Victo- rian Era—and the ways in which media sensationally exploited this battle to their own advantage with incidents involving both men and women.8 Newspapers often speculated about the unknowns of Dur- rant’s murders in graphic detail, continually engaging in what Karen Haltunnen calls the “pornography of violence.”9 Americans, she notes, developed a keen inter- est in horror and death during the mid-nineteenth century that accelerated in later decades, peaking during the Gild- ed Age with thrilling stories of murder and violence being published daily in newspapers across the nation. Haltun- nen explains that as interest in violence grew, so too did its “pornography,” with books, newspapers, and other media detailing brutal crimes—like the Emmanuel Baptist Church murders—in increasingly graphic detail. THEODORE DURRANT, ROMANTIC FAILURE Newspapers that covered the Durrant story obsessed over his perceived romantic failures in several di!erent ways but did so initially by exploring his failed attempts at an intimate relationship with both his victims: Blanche Lamont and Minnie Williams. An early report from the San Francisco Call explained how the two women “received a lover’s attention from Durrant,” with journalists already hinting at some sort of failed attempt at courtship.10 When an acquaintance of Williams’s informed readers that she had “‘indignantly repulsed’” a marriage proposal from Durrant early last summer, the penny press confirmed its sexualized narrative.11 Reporters soon seized upon the claims of Blanche Lamont’s aunt, Mrs. C. G. Noble, who testified to “the frequency of Durrant’s visits at her house and his attentions to her niece,” and lauded her assertion that Durrant had also “proposed marriage to Blanche last December, but had been refused when the girl learned he was engaged to another woman.”12 Papers also empha- sized Durrant’s supposed suggestion to Noble (before be- ing arrested) that they search for Lamont’s body together “in a house of ill-fame”—a brothel.13 In the early days of his case, the penny press established Theodore Durrant as a !"#$%&' "#()$* #* &'%"#, ()$*#$# +,*& &'- .*/0'$*., 1893 (!"#$%&'( ") *+,+-&.+/ !"--"0') 43 !"# $#%&' &( !"# )#*(+, sexually-deprived romantic failure who murdered to fulfill his brutal perversions, an inhuman monster so despicable he was even inclined to visit brothels while pretending to search for the bodies of women he killed. While some were later proven to be accurate , these relatively unfounded ini- tial characterizations illustrate Gilded Age fetishizations of sexual violence. Another element of the penny press’s obsession over Dur- rant’s romantic failures relates to his physical appearance, which strongly suggested his guilt. The San Francisco Call, for example, diplomatically described how a murderer (not necessarily Durrant) “will not be generally attractive to other men, [who] will have a feeling of utmost repugnance for him […]. For women, especially girls, he will be found to have a peculiar fascination, but he will lack the skill to use it shrewdly”—characteristics newspapers claimed Durrant happened to have.14 A later story from The India- napolis Journal contended that Durrant’s “dominant” facial characteristics “are vanity and sensuality,” and that the shape of his head “would indicate not only extreme sensu- ality, but that its owner would be inconsistent, changing the object of his admiration frequently.”15 Months later, once Durrant’s trial had begun, newspapers still editorial- ized about how Durrant’s “clean-shaven lips reveal the coarse sensuality of his mouth,” continuing to tie his phys- ical features with sexual criminality.16 Contemporary newspapers’ fascination with Durrant’s physical fea- tures—and their claims that those features somehow il- lustrate all manner of romantic perversions—reflect the intensifying Gilded Age sexual divide between those com- mitted to traditional conceptions of heteronormativity and those seeking to change them. Newspapers also explored Durrant’s attitude toward wom- en, casting him as an aggressively sexual (if often unsuc- cessful) womanizer who frequently solicited their compa- ny. The Salt Lake Herald, for instance, charged that “Durrant was more than passionately fond of women, and at every opportunity sought their society,” but that “he con- fined himself to the purer and better girls of his circle of acquaintances,” like Lamont and Williams, who the press continually deified.17 Others stunned readers with highly sexualized headlines like “The Man was as Licentious as He Was Pious,” “Insulter of Women,” “His Baseness was Boundless,” or even “No Woman was Safe.”18 And some newsmen unambiguously blamed Durrant’s murders on his womanizing personality, with one paper directly stat- ing that “no other motive for the crime can be assigned [than] passionate jealousy, which is known to have a won- derful power to transform the most peaceable into fiendish brutes.”19 Again, Durrant’s actual romantic proclivities— he often (though not always) did live up to his reputation in the press—are not entirely relevant. More significant is that the late nineteenth-century penny press exploited his rape and murder of two women to publish implicitly and explicitly sexual content for their readers, exposing the rap- idly changing conceptions of sexuality during that time. While the press continually covered Durrant’s perversions in a general fashion, they did analyze some of his specific romantic failures from time to time, most notably with a woman named Lucile Turner. On one soon-to-be infamous occasion, Durrant accosted Turner, another parishioner at the Emmanuel Baptist Church like Lamont and Williams, and asked “if she had never been examined. She was somewhat surprised at his question and answered no. Durrant then said she ought to be and that he could do it.”20 Turner’s testimony engrossed journalists covering Durrant, and they referred to it throughout their coverage of the case.21 The press also took special care to note Dur- rant’s unusual apprehension during Turner’s testimony, a break from what they characterized as his typically unfeel- ing demeanor: “During Miss Turner’s examination,” one paper noted, “Durrant looked very pale and anxious, and has not shown such pronounced symptoms since his arrest.”22 For contemporary journalists, the Turner inci- dent was a goldmine. It o!ered readers licentious details “Months later, once Durrant’s trial had begun, newspapers still editorialized about how Durrant’s ‘clean-shaven lips reveal the coarse sensuality of his mouth,’ continuing to tie his physical features with sexual criminality.” 44 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 day after day and perfectly conformed to their already well- established narrative of a sex-deprived monster whose ro- mantic failures had triggered a murderous rampage—the perfect story for an American populace that craved scan- dalous sexual details like never before. The Lucile Turner episode presented the penny press with a profitable window into one of Durrant’s specific roman- tic failures, but they relentlessly published details about his generally “poor luck” with women, too. The Call, for instance, reported the vague remarks of several di!erent people throughout the course of the case, all of whom re- marked things like “’ from what I knew of Durrant he was not of the kind of men who are very successful in making love to young women.’”23 Another man o!ered his investi- gative services and insisted that he had “’ located three young women who claim to have been taken into the church by Durrant and compelled to leave the edifice on account of his improper conduct.’”24 Other papers, like The Arizona Republican, discussed an instance in which Dur- rant escorted another young parishioner to a room in the Emmanuel Baptist Church, left her there for a few min- utes, “and returned entirely nude,” further feeding into the sexual narrative.25 Newsmen often followed detectives at- tempting to track down women rumored to be former lov- ers of Durrant, like one case in which investigators trav- eled to neighboring San Jose “looking for a young lady who is said to have received insulting proposals from The- odore Durrant, who selected Emmanuel church as the place for his attempt.”26 Even the strategy of Durrant’s own lawyers hinged on the same kinds of sexual details being published by the press. The Salt Lake Herald reported less than a month after Durrant’s arrest that the defense would try to demonstrate his innocence by proving that “he did not have a reputation as a lady-killer; that another member (now an ex-member) had; that this person was one whom all the young ladies of the church distrusted; that he fre- quently took liberties with them; that upon one occasion he was alone with a young lady in the vestry and that his actions were such as to cause her to have a serious hysteri- cal attack.”27 The barrage of details about Durrant’s roman- tic ineptitude with a variety of women solidified his initial image in the penny press as a sexual freak driven to mur- der. But that barrage also underscored the penny press’s obsession with the most erotic aspects of his character pos- sible rather than with the main bulk of evidence in an ap- parent e!ort to appeal to their sex scandal-driven readers. INVESTIGATING DURRANT’S PAST While they did devote much of their sexual reporting to his romantic mishaps, the press also examined other aspects of Theodore Durrant’s past through a sexual lens, begin- ning with his time at Cooper Medical College. “Durrant was looked upon as queer when at college,” one Call report notes, going on to explain how even though he “was fond of the society of women he declared the year he entered college that his relations with them had never been intimate.”28 Newsmen also jumped on comments from fel- low students admitting that “he spoke strangely about women from time to time and read much on subjects which are safest in the hands of hard headed specialists,” indicating a “trend of mind which dwells upon the morbid.”29 Other papers directly linked Durrant’s medical schooling with his sexual perversions, one story describing how some faculty at Cooper believed “Durrant was a"ict- ed with psycho-mania sexualis, a not unknown though in- frequent mental disease,” another simply inquiring, “Dur- rant studied surgery. Did he study murder at the same time?”30 A particularly scathing assessment of Durrant’s character out of The New York Tribune went even further: “Medical experts who have studied Durrant’s case unite in declaring that he is an abnormal crank, whose perverted *&')0)-' 0/--#$*’. (/1.&)* (!"#$%&'( ") +0%&$0&% /$!1+2&) 45 !"# $#%&' &( !"# )#*(+, nature has been stimulated by the study of sexual crimes. His medical college associates say that in private talk about women he revealed a foul imagination, and that his fondness for discussing topics that are usually ignored, even between men, gave him the reputation of being an erotic maniac. As assistant superintendent of the Emmanuel Sunday-school he performed all his duties in an irreproachable way, but since his arrest it is known that he insulted several young women and that he was in the habit of making weekly visits to the local [brothel].”31 Rather than focusing on Durrant’s bungled attempts at ro- mance, these reports confirm newspapers’ narrative of his sexual perversions by approaching them from an altogeth- er di!erent angle—medicine. They exemplify the penny press’s fixation upon Durrant the sexual maniac rather than Durrant the murderer and illustrate the growing di- vide between forces opposed to and supporting changing conceptions of sexual norms during the Gilded Age. Contemporary newsmen further directed their readers’ attention to rumors that Durrant committed the murders, as one paper put it, “for the purpose of medical investigation,” fueling sexualized narratives of his crimes even further.“32It is known that Durrant was an ardent medical student and took a great interest in diseases of women,” one report from The Herald read, “and being unable to conduct his investigations in any legitimate manner, murdered the girls for that purpose.”33Journalists turned to his suggestion to Miss Lucile Turner “that she allow him to make a medical examination of her, [him] telling her that he knew of a good place in the church where it could be done without anyone being the wiser” to link an already well established aspect of their coverage to these rumors.34 Ironically, even by publishing dismissals of such reports, newspapers gave them more credence, one article outlining in great detail the rumor “that Blanche Lamont was lured to the church by Durrant’s promise to perform a criminal operation on her to save her from disgrace” before briefly admitting that “the city autopsy physician [stated] the rumor was without foundation.”35 Ultimately, the more analysis the penny press devoted to Durrant’s supposed medically-motivated investigative appetites, the more they became part of the story. Newsmen recognized this fact and intensified the practice anyways, reflecting their preoccupation with the sexual aspects of the Emmanuel Baptist Church murders before all others. Another part of Durrant’s past scrutinized by newspapers relates to his actual academic performance at Cooper Med- ical College, which most outlets depicted as suspiciously strong. “[Durrant] read textbooks, crammed science for his examinations and is said by his family to have read little or none of the lighter literature of the day” alleged one story from the Call, hinting at Durrant’s supposed peculiarity.”36His standing in none of his classes fell below 97 percent” read another out of The Herald, the author conconcedes that “Theodore Durrant is the last man whom anybody would suspect of committing a murder.”37 Even in jail, as multiple outlets discussed, “Durrant is studying medical books and says upon his release he will continue his course until graduation”—an interest that surely bordered on an obsession.38 Newspapers’ juxtaposi- tion of these details chronicling Durrant’s academic suc- cess with the aforementioned side e!ects of studying mod- ern medicine constitutes another example of their sexualization of the Emmanuel Church murders. While not as explicit as lengthy tirades explaining Durrant’s many perversions, these kinds of oblique associations nonetheless contributed to the penny press’s erotic narra- tive of Durrant and his crimes. Outside of his actual experience as a medical student, newspapers littered their stories with a variety of psycho- sexual speculation regarding Durrant’s past behavior, all of which conveniently played into their depiction of him as a romantically deprived carnal maniac. Durrant’s main in- '((#$/'" !#2*,.* %&/-%&, +&'-' 0/--#$* (/-0'-'0 *+) 3'(#"' 2#-,.&,)$'-. ,$ 1895 (!"#$%&'( ") "3&0') 1+'%"$() 46 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 terest, as newsmen had already established, was his medi- cal studies—but one story claimed that because he “was very much interested in his studies and work, fond of de- scribing the horrors of a dissecting room,” he had in fact lost “any feeling of reverence for the human body.”39 When the city’s autopsy physician concluded his report, several stories almost excitedly noted the fact “that the murdered girl had been outraged [raped] prior to the murder,” adding an entirely new element to the existing sexual narrative.40 Other stories made light of “expert” opinion linking Dur- rant’s academic interests with seal violence, like that of police surgeon Summers, who claimed medical backing for the theory that there were “‘men whose animal pas- sions could not be aroused without the sight of blood,’” and insisted that “’the post mortem examination clearly proves that the victims were killed and afterwards outraged.’”41 An incredibly early report from The Herald— released mere days after Durrant’s arrest—testified to his “Jekyll-Hyde character”: “In Emanuel church he was noted for his religious fervor. Other residents of the Mission dis- trict say he was a frequenter of saloons, played cards and billiards in wine rooms, nightly visited with other youths saloons with side entrances for women. His classmates at the medical college say that Durrant was blasphemous and flippant in conversation, especially about women.”42 Re- porters gravitated towards the most outrageous and openly erotic elements of the Durrant case in an unprecedented way, and often without much evidence. The uniformity of their narrative—and the fact that papers favored the sexu- ally eccentric over the accurate—underscores the ways in which the changing sexual values and attitudes of the Gild- ed Age impacted reportage of Durrant. SCRUTINIZING DURRANT’S PRESENT Another angle in the penny press’s coverage of the Dur- rant case sought to examine not his past, but his present. More specifically, his behavior following his arrest. Jour- nalists initially directed this kind of reporting at Durrant’s deportment in court and jail, which they claimed illustrat- ed his guilt in the same implicitly sexual manner his ro- mantic failures had. Articles marveled at Durrant’s lack of emotion throughout the legal proceedings, especially when the evidence was stacked against him. One report noted that “whether their testimony is strong against him or only inferentially accusing, his expression is the same. […] He talks very little to his lawyers, pays absolutely no attention to the crowd […], and watches the proceedings with unconcern.”43 Other papers mentioned his “calm, imperturbable expression,” his “stolid indi!erence,” or his “air of unconcern,” hinting at an almost unnatural level of disinterest in his fate.44 Reports discussing Durrant’s be- havior in jail were no di!erent—“Durrant keeps up his wonderful composure,” one article observed, adding that at “about 10 o’clock yesterday morning several students, the majority being ladies […] paid him a visit.”45 To the American penny press, Durrant’s lack of emotion in court and jail, his already well-established sexual perversions, and the fact that women flocked to see him throughout the legal proceedings (despite his apparent guilt) confirmed his status as a carnally-motivated villain that defied every traditional conception of sexuality. Many newspapers’ vilification of Durrant’s deportment in the courtroom reached entirely new heights during discus- sions of violence, especially when that violence was sexual in nature. Newspapers described how Durrant “showed no emotion” during descriptions of Minnie Williams’s brutal rape and murder, sitting “calm and unconcerned” with “about the same degree of interest that is manifested by the Sphinx as it gazes over the sands of Egypt.”46 Descrip- tions like these hardly stood out. According to many news- men, the person in whom the evidence “produces the least mental perturbation is the prisoner itself,” this particular “To the American penny press, Durrant’s lack of emotion in court and jail, his already well-established sexual perversions, and the fact that women flocked to see him throughout the legal proceedings (despite his apparent guilt) confirmed his status as a carnally-motivated villain that defied every traditional conception of sexuality” 47 !"# $#%&' &( !"# )#*(+, author choosing to revoke Durrant’s humanity by simply referring to him as “it.”47 The same article cast Durrant as “an enigma, a monster of crime and depravity”—a man whose sexual crimes were so heinous he no longer de- serves that title.48 These reports continually ostracized Durrant in truly remarkable ways. However, their main objective was to single out the sexual nature of his crimes as the thing that held the most significance. By portraying Durrant as a violent sexual freak who listened to recitals of savagery “with no more emotion than he would display at a college lecture,” the penny press solidified their unabash- edly erotic narrative to please their voracious readers’ yearning for that kind of content in ways Americans had not in prior decades.49 In addition to their use of his cold demeanor as evidence of sexual impropriety, the penny press also examined Dur- rant’s many female admirers as a means of amplifying the sexual undertones of their reporting. The first incident dis- cussed by the national press occurred on April 24th, short- ly after Durrant’s arrest, when “a female crank” claiming to be “a Gypsy queen” talked briefly with Durrant in his cell before announcing to a pool of reporters “‘he is not the man.’”50 The episode sparked visits from women around the Bay Area, a development which journalists seized upon. “Women are Daft Over Durrant” declared one Silver Blade headline, its author marveling at how “the county jail is besieged with women daily, anxious to see Durrant and leave flowers for him.”51 Other articles reviewed the young women “who seem to regard [Durrant] as something of a hero,” visiting his jail cell “to gape at him through the bars.”52 Stories of his female admirers perfectly played into the already well-grounded sexual nature of his crimes, with Durrant now appearing as some sort of hypnotic force with unnatural sexual charisma—at least enough to convince “foolish women,” as one author lamented, of his innocence.53 Such stories typified the sexualization of the Emmanuel Baptist Church murders, exposing yet more instances of the penny press’s obsession with the most erotic elements of his crimes. Gilded Age newsmen further pointed to Durrant’s close relationship with his mother as evidence of his guilt thanks to some kind of troubled upbringing, often implying pos- sible sexual impropriety. One Call report, attempting to find a justification for Durrant’s imperturbability in the courtroom, guessed that “the proximity of the mother of the defendant may have something to do with his easy manner.”54 What began as a series of seemingly innocent remarks about a mother and her son’s close relationship quickly spiraled out of control with speculative innuendo soon dominating all discussion of Durrant’s mother. A story out of The Louisiana Populist, for example, found that “his mother is his staunchest advocate, just as was the aged mother of [infamous murderer and medical student] Carlyle Harris, whose history in some respects resembles that of Durrant’s.”55 Another story from The Seattle Post- Intelligencer speculated that a young miscreant out of Spo- kane, Washington named Karl Gerul!—“the son of a pros- titute [and] a born criminal”—compared quite fittingly with “[monstrosities] like Tom Blanck or Theodore Dur- rant,” other criminals said to have troubled upbringings.56 Newspapers’ scrutiny of Durrant’s relationship with his mother indeed stemmed from, at least in part, nineteenth- century conceptions of women as mothers (and therefore the primary architects of their children’s future behavior). But articles discussing their interactions, especially given the totality of their licentious coverage, unquestionably took on some sexual undertones, another reality that ex- poses the penny press’s fetishization of sexual violence. Significantly, papers’ coverage of Durrant’s mother active- ly excluded his father from nearly all discussion of his crimes. One article from the Call took this exclusion to al- most comical levels—after briefly mentioning Durrant’s father’s entrance into the courtroom, the author remarked that “all eyes were turned in that direction to see if the mother of the prisoner would follow.”57 Of their interac- tions in the courtroom, one journalist alluded to an unusu- ally intimate relationship, writing: “The mother of the pris- oner was, naturally, the object of a good deal of curiosity. But very few in the courtroom had seen her before, and “What began as a series of seemingly innocent remarks about a mother and her son’s close relationship quickly spiraled out of control with speculative innuendo soon dominating all discussion of Durrant’s mother.” 48 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 were anxious to see how she was bearing up under the or- deal of her son’s imprisonment and approaching trial. Those who expected to see red eyes and tears and agony was depicted upon the face of the unfortunate woman were disappointed. Her eyes were bright, there were no traces of tears, and no agony was reflected in the counte- nance of the prisoner’s mother. She was calm—more than calm—talking to her son and smiling cheerfully upon him during the entire day in court.”58 The author followed this passage with a single line mentioning the presence of Dur- rant’s father. Again, while much of this undue focus on Durrant’s mother can undoubtedly be attributed to nine- teenth-century conceptions of women as the parents re- sponsible for raising children, the penny press’s conscious exclusion of his father from the conversation underscored the implicitly sexual narrative they established from the very beginning of his case. ROMANTICIZING LAMONT AND WILLIAMS Though they devoted the vast majority of their coverage to Theodore Durrant himself, newspapers sexualized the Emmanuel Baptist Church murders in another way: by emphasizing the maidenhood of his victims. Blanche Lamont in particular, received much praise from the press, who frequently reiterated her womanhood. The day after her disappearance, for example, the Call published a story concerning “a beautiful girl” that had gone missing.59 establishing her femininity from the outset. A subsequent report alleged Lamont “had a filled-in frame and was a ro- mantic,” paving the way for later stories that outlined Dur- rant’s exploitation of those characteristics.60 Indeed, after Durrant’s arrest, papers highlighted witness testimony to this e!ect. One acquaintance, Dr. Vogel, told the Call that “‘Blanche was such a good girl that she thought everybody was as good as she was and she might have been taken advantage of.’”61 An early assessment from The Herald epitomized journalists’ portrayal of Lamont, the innocent victim of an erotic maniac, describing her as a “slender, graceful, well dressed, brown-haired, accomplished […]. She was simply a very pretty girl, romantic, according to some of her school friends, intensely matter-of-fact accord- ing to her relatives.”62 Emphasizing Lamont’s femininity alone would not necessarily have constituted a sexualiza- tion of the murders. But given that reporters juxtaposed such fawning descriptions of romantic purity with grue- some ones outlining sexual brutality, they clearly sought to create an apparent dichotomy between Durrant and his victims with sex at its center. The penny press subjected Minnie Williams to similar treatment. However, given her temperamental di!erences from Lamont, they highlighted distinct aspects of her char- acter that could have (in their narrative) contributed to her murder. However often reporters brought up Blanche Lamont the romantic— “the picture of the girl in the Fire- side Companion stories who has adventures among the traps of a great city,” according to one report from The Herald—they just as often brought up Minnie Williams the vulnerable.63 Shortly after her disappearance, for in- stance, the Call wrote that Minnie Williams, “frail, weak, [and] inexperienced,” had vanished.64 Whereas reporters had argued Lamont’s confident personality and extensive romantic experience could have gotten her into trouble with potential wrongdoers, with Minnie Williams, they claimed the opposite: her romantic, and, yes, sexual “inex- perience” made her an easy target for predators like Dur- rant. From opposing, nearly contradictory angles, Gilded Age newsmen had identified both women’s unique sus- ceptibilities that had contributed to their murder—doing so through an exclusively sexual lens. Newsmen usually published stories discussing each vic- tim individually, but they likewise sought to uphold their joint maidenhood by grouping Lamont and Williams to- gether from time to time. Some San Franciscans accom- plished this job for them. Judge Conlan, the justice presid- ing over Durrant’s case, personally informed the San Francisco Call of the unfortunate nature of his crimes: “’[Jack the Ripper’s] crimes had for their victims women of bad character,’”65 he argued, suggesting it was Lamont and Williams’s sexual purity that made Durrant’s murders all the more unacceptable. If, like Jack the Ripper, he had simply murdered prostitutes, perhaps the public outcry would not have been so severe. The Call further summa- rized the remarks of a Rev. Mr. Boynton (of San Francisco’s First Baptist Church), who launched into a protracted ti- rade during one sermon that instructed women of the city to “promise themselves ‘I will not go anywhere, under any pretext whatever, unless accompanied by my father or my brother. I will not enter anyplace where there are not others.”66 Opinions like those of Conlan and Boynton dominated reporting on Durrant’s murders, at least dur- ing discussions of his victims. And while they certainly exposed the misogynistic conceptions of womanhood that pervaded late nineteenth-century America, they also exem- plified the kind of sexual division the press sought to estab- lish between Durrant, the savage, and Lamont and Wil- liams, the romantically vulnerable. 49 !"# $#%&' &( !"# )#*(+, THE “PORNOGRAPHY OF VIOLENCE” Another phenomenon present in nearly all newspaper cov- erage of the Durrant case is something historian Karen Haltunnen terms “the pornography of violence”—that is, nineteenth-century America’s widespread fetishization of violence through its “pornography” in books, papers, and other media—all of which featured descriptions or images of vicious crimes in increasingly graphic detail.67 The pen- ny press’s coverage of the Emmanuel Church murders embodied this pornography to the extreme. An early report from the San Francisco Call detailed how a “knife had been driven again and again and again into [Minnie Williams’s] breast” before delving into the minutiae of Durrant’s vio- lent acts in later coverage.68 Durrant “cut her wrist so that she would bleed to death, and to complete the murderous work, had driven a knife to her heart and in a bestial fury slashed her breasts,” one story out of The Wichita Daily Eagle read, concluding that “the stabbing and slashing was done after the girl was dead.”69 Ironically, the violent por- nography cultivated more violent pornography, much of this variety speculative. Call reporter John McNaught, for example, informed his readers of the (unquestionably ra- cialized) divide between what he called the “brute” and the “fiend,” the latter of which Durrant must be: “There are just two classes of criminals who outrage women and murder them. One of these is the low, brutish criminal whose lust and ferocity are tempered by an intellect hardly su!cient to lift him above the level of a gorilla. The second is the man of intellect whose intelligence is distorted by a species of sexual madness growing out of some perverse diabolism of nature. All criminal history attests that only these two classes often, the brute and the fiend, commit crimes of this kind.”70 As violent speculation ran wild, other stories began con- demning the Emmanuel Baptist Church itself, one report from The Anaconda Standard claiming “a stain of human blood marks its history.”71 The author, apparently horrified, went on to detail how one of the church’s former pastors “killed a newspaper proprietor,” while another, he added rather abruptly, “blew out his brains.”72 Such absurd de- scriptions epitomized the pornography of violence pro- duced by Durrant’s murders, with newsmen devising ever- more outlandish reports to satisfy the insatiable public. While newspapers certainly fetishized all types of violence in the Durrant case, they especially did so if that violence was sexual in nature. In the immediate aftermath of the murders, newsmen raved whenever the police released shocking details, as in one Call report which gawked at their discovery that the murderer had shoved “a portion of [Lamont’s] underclothing” down her throat.73 Indeed, such outrageously sexual details sent both newspapers and readers into a frenzy. Another Call story almost gleefully recounted how Lamont’s dress “had been unbuttoned and then torn from the body through impatience,” leaving her lying on the floor of the church’s belfry “absolutely nude.”74 Reporters even complained of a lack of excitement as the months went on—(authorities had finished collecting most of the facts over the course of April and May 1895)— the volume of licentious details released on a weekly basis waning accordingly. The Herald, for example, lamented that “as the trial progresses interest in it seems to lag,” somberly describing how “the crowd of morbidly curious people who have assembled at the courtroom door day af- ter day is growing less” as newspapers ran out of new Dur- rant-related “pornography” to distribute. However, such sobering realities failed to dissuade the penny press, which found entirely new, and unconventional ways to fe- tishize the murders. One facet of this unorthodox approach involved reporting on the astonishing July 1895 development concerning a San Francisco playwright who planned to dramatize Durrant’s murders in his theatrical production. Manager of San Francisco’s Alcazar theater W. R. Daily, reported The “Another visual assessment out of The Louisiana Populist depicted two versions of Durrant posing as Robert Louis Stevenson’s infamous villain Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, complemented by illustrations of a knife embedded in a skull” 50 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 Oregon Mist, “closed arrangements with Richard C. White to make a dramatization of the Durrant case,” adding that “Mr. Daily believes that there is plenty of material in the story of the Emmanuel church murders.”75 Lacking substantive coverage as Durrant’s attorneys took their time selecting jurors, the penny press milked the theatrical development for weeks. Reporters amplified the divide between those eager to see the performance and others, like the pastors discussed in one Herald report, who believed the play would “demoralize the community.”76 As it became increasingly clear the play would not end up being performed, The Dalles Times-Mountaineer went so far as to entertain the theory that “if the fiend Durrant is acquitted of the charge against him he will be engaged at a remunerative salary to play the leading role in the play based on upon the heinous crimes.”77 In short, the penny press spent nearly a month producing new “pornography” by fetishizing the outrage over a theatrical production, the play itself a fetishization and pornographic o!shoot of Theodore Durrant’s violent crimes. Such absurdities exemplified the pornography of violence produced by the penny press in their obsessive coverage of the Emmanuel Church murders. Another way the penny press fetishized the murders when they lacked new developments involved publishing read- ers’ violent poetry. The Call, for instance, published a “re- markable” poem by a man named George King, who put his unique spin on the church murders: “Into the church they were decoyed by some fiend, but I won’t speak his name. / There to commit the bloody deed, he understood the game. […] There he did assault her [Williams] in a fiendish way, / Then took her life by strangling, that’s what the Coroner’s jury say. […] The perpetrator of the deed did it in cold blood, / More than human nerves he had, his business he understood. […] Young girls all take warning by the two innocent girls’ sad fate, / And be aware of all false young men, with them don’t stay out late. […] Mothers all take warning by this sad a"air, / Guard your girls day and night, of them take good care, / For if you don’t some day you may rue it when it is too late, / So remember well and bear in mind the two innocent girls’ fate.”78 Newspapers littered their discussions of the church mur- ders with similarly targeted poetry, highlighting the man- ner in which they relentlessly pumped out, or at the very least gave voice to Durrant “pornography.” Newspapers further accompanied their reportage with various gruesome illustrations that escalated their pornog- raphy of violence for voracious readers to new levels, visu- ally. The Dalles Times-Mountaineer, for instance, positioned several illustrations of Blanche Lamont’s rotting, naked corpse, the blood-stained floor of Emmanuel Baptist Church, and one of the knives used to stab Minnie Wil- liams next to their discussion of Durrant’s romantic fail- ures, rather heavy-handedly establishing their belief (or rather, lack thereof) in his innocence.79 Another visual as- sessment out of The Louisiana Populist depicted two ver- sions of Durrant posing as Robert Louis Stevenson’s infa- mous villain Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, complemented by illustrations of a knife embedded in a skull. At the bottom of the drawing, a snake slithered past Durrant’s feet.80 Be- cause the cost of photography precluded most news outlets from using it during the late nineteenth-century, the pen- ny press took an illustrative approach instead. Their quest to reveal the most licentious and sensational details of the Emmanuel Church murders- they produced yet another variety of violent pornography that overshadowed the en- tirety of their coverage of Durrant. MAUD ALLAN, DURRANT’S FATE, AND CONCLUSION Durrant’s sister, erotic dancer Maud Allan, su!ered simi- lar treatment at the hands of the press a few years later af- ter a brief (but successful) career in Europe. Whereas Dur- rant’s accusers often straddled the line between implicitly “Ultimately, print coverage of “the Demon of the Belfry” and his crimes during the Gilded Age underscores the ways in which media dramatically shapes public perception, an enduring reality that continues throughout the contemporary United States” 51 !"# $#%&' &( !"# )#*(+, #$%$&'#( 1. John D’Emilio and Estelle B. Freedman, Intimate Matters: A History of Sexuality in America, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013), 300. 2. Estelle B. Freedman, “Sexuality in Nineteenth-Century America: Behavior, Ideology, and Politics,” Reviews in American History 10, no. 4 (1982): 196–215, www.jstor.org/stable/2701827. 3. Oliver Chan and Kathleen M. Heide, “Sexual Homicide: A Synthesis of the Literature,” Trauma, Violence & Abuse 10, no. 1 (2009): 31-54, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26636179. 4. James Alan Fox and Jack Levin, “Multiple Homicide: Patterns of Serial and Mass Murder,” Crime and Justice 23 (1998): 407- 455, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1147545. 5. Herbert G. Kinnell, “Serial Homicide by Doctors: Shipman in Perspective,” BMJ: British Medical Journal 321, no. 7276 (2000): 1594-1597, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25226531. 6. Erich Fromm, War Within Man: A Psychological Inquiry into the Roots of Destructiveness (Philadelphia: Peace Literature Service, American Friends and Service Committee, 1963), 7-23. 7. Toni Bentley, Sisters of Salome, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), 49-84. 8. Lacy McDearmon, “Maud Allan: The Public Record,” Dance Chronicle 2, no. 2 (1978): 85-105, http://www.jstor.org/ stable/1567472. 9. Karen Haltunnen, Murder Most Foul: The Killer and the American Gothic Imagination (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001), 60-90. 10. “Blacker Grows the Cloud Over Emmanuel Baptist Church,” San Francisco Call, 15 April 1895, 3. The newspapers used for this essay come from the Library of Congress’s website, Chronicling America, at chroniclingamerica.loc.gov. 11. “Forging the Links On Him,” The Salt Lake Herald, 17 April 1895, 1. 12. “Not a Missing Link,” Rock Island Argus, 5 May 1895, 2. 13. “Durrant’s Examination,” The Dalles-Times Mountaineer, 4 May 1895, 2. 14. Weaving a Web Round Theodore Durrant,” San Francisco Call, 16 April 1895, 3. 15. The Frisco Mystery,” The Indianapolis Journal, 26 April 1895, 1. 16. “Durrant in the Courtroom,” The Herald, 23 July 1895, 1. 17. “Forging the Links On Him,” The Salt Lake Herald, 17 April 1895, 1. and explicitly defining his sexual misdeeds, critics of Allan and her rumored homosexuality showed no such hesita- tion. They characterized Allan and her rumored sexual “degeneracy” as the antithesis of Lamont and Williams, idols of traditional nineteenth-century womanhood.81 Scholars Toni Bentley and Lacy McDearmon have chroni- cled Allan’s very open vilification in the British and Ameri- can press because of those accusations, exposing the gen- dered dichotomy of sexual discourse in the Victorian era—and how the media theatrically exploited this dis- course with events involving both men and women.82 Eventually, interest in the Emmanuel church murders and their licentious details waned. After a media storm follow- ing the jury’s ruling, which found Durrant guilty of mur- der on November 23, 1895, public interest moved else- where. The court sentenced Durrant to death by hanging, and police transported him to San Quentin prison just north of San Francisco shortly after the conclusion of his trial—decisions which won much media praise. Though he maintained his innocence and appealed the court’s rul- ing several times, (generating the occasional article in the San Francisco Call, The Herald, or other papers that had covered his case), he was ultimately executed at San Quen- tin on January 7, 1898, with his mother by his side. The late nineteenth-century penny press’s overtly sensual coverage of the Emmanuel Baptist Church murders influenced Theodore Durrant’s conceptions, his crimes, and his victims in a sexual way, and was itself the product of changing conceptions of sexuality during the Gilded Age. Both entire newspapers and individual journalists romanticized Blanche Lamont and Minnie Williams, whom they cast as icons of traditional sexuality, while simultaneously fetishizing Durrant’s violence— particularly its sexual aspects. Their emphasis on his romantic failures, scrutiny of his academic career, and sentimentalization of his victims all contributed to the development of his extraordinary image in the American public’s mind: not a murderer driven to kill in traditional ways by traditional means, but a sexual deviant hell-bent on destroying traditional notions of sensuality. Again, such representations influenced Theodore Durrant’s public knowledge in specific, but they also—and more importantly— influenced the public’s conceptions of sexuality more generally. Ultimately, print coverage of “the Demon of the Belfry” and his crimes during the Gilded Age underscores how media dramatically shapes public perception, an enduring reality that continues throughout the contemporary United States. 52 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 18. “New Evidence Against Durrant,” The Seattle Post- Intelligencer, 21 August 1895, 3; “Insulter of Women,” The Indianapolis Journal, 21 August 1895, 2; “His Baseness was Boundless,” The Salt Lake Herald, 21 August 1895, 2. 19. “Further Testimony in Regard of the Crime for which Durrant is Held,” The Dalles Times-Mountaineer, 20 April 1895, 2. 20. “Blood Stained Church,” The Herald, 15 April 1895, 1. 21. “Durrant Murder Case,” The Record-Union, 24 April 1895, 1. 22. “Miss Turner Weaves a Web,” The Salt Lake Herald, 24 April 1895, 1 23. “Blacker Grows the Cloud Over Emmanuel Baptist Church,” San Francisco Call, 15 April 1895, 3. 24. “Pawned a Ring Like Blanche Lamont’s,” San Francisco Call, 3 August 1895, 14. 25. Weaving a Web,” The Arizona Republican, 17 May 1895, 1. 26. “Durrant’s Trial Continued Until Tomorrow Morning,” The Herald, 24 July 1895, 1. 27. “Seeking to Stem the Tide,” The Salt Lake Herald, 6 May 1895, 1. 28. “Weaving a Web Round Theodore Durrant,” San Francisco Call, 16 April 1895, 3. 29. “Review of Durrant,” The Louisiana Populist, 21 June 1895, 4. 30. Ibid., 4; “Forging the Links On Him,” The Salt Lake Herald, 17 April 1895, 1. 31. “The Church Murders,” The New York Tribune, 21 April 1895, 22. 32. “Looks Dark for Durrant,” The Herald, 16 April 1895, 1. 33. Ibid., 1. 34. “Further Testimony in Regard of the Crime for which Durrant is Held,” The Dalles Times-Mountaineer, 20 April 1895, 2. 35. “Footgear is Found,” The Wichita Daily Eagle, 23 April 1895, 1. 36. “Their Request Denied,” San Francisco Call, 1 May 1895, 5. 37. “Blood Stained the Church,” The Herald, 15 April 1895, 1. 38. “Durrant Runs a Big Blu!,” The Salt Lake Herald, 10 May 1895, 1. 39. “Blood Stained the Church,” The Herald, 15 April 1895, 1. 40. “The Examination Resumed,” The Dalles Weekly Chronicle, 4 May 1895, 1. 41. “Looks Dark,” Arizona Weekly Citizen, 20 April 1895, 3. 42. “Looks Dark for Durrant,” The Herald, 16 April 1895, 1. 43. “Told on the Witness Stand,” The Herald, 24 April 1895, 1. 44. “Durrant Murder Case,” The Record-Union, 24 July 1895, 1; “Miss Lamont’s Death,” The Indianapolis Journal, 2 May 1895, 5; “Same Old Bravado,” The Salt Lake Herald, 30 May 1895, 1. 45. “A Bloody Shoe is Found in the Church,” San Francisco Call, 21 April 1895, 6. 46. “Key Carried by Durrant,” The Salt Lake Herald, 23 April 1895, 1; “Blood-Stained Coat is Found in Berkeley,” San Francisco Call, 23 April 1895, 5. 47. “Theo Durrant is Again Before the Bar,” San Francisco Call, 24 April 1895, 5. 48. Ibid., 5. 49. “Murder of Miss Williams,” The Record-Union, 20 April 1895, 1. 50. “The Trial Continues,” The Daily Morning Astorian, 24 April 1895, 1. 51. ”Women are Daft Over Durrant,” The Silver Blade, 27 July 1895, 2. 52. “The Durrant Examination,” The Record-Union, 25 April 1895, 1. 53. Ibid., 3. 54. “The Durrant Jurors, San Francisco Call, 24 July 1895, 14. 55. “Review of Durrant,” The Louisiana Populist, 21 June 1895, 4. 56. “Notable Dead,” The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 24 April 1895, 8. 57. “Durrant Moves for Change in Venue,” San Francisco Call, 23 July 1895, 15. 58. “Durrant is Denied Change of Venue,” San Francisco Call, 26 July 1895, 14. 59. “The Mystery of a Girl,” San Francisco Call, 10 April 1895, 14. 60. “Blacker Grows the Cloud Over Emmanuel Baptist Church,” San Francisco Call, 15 April 1895, 3. 61. “Must Stand Trial,” San Francisco Call, 3 May 1895, 5. 62. “Blood Stained the Church,” The Herald, 15 April 1895, 1. 63. Ibid., 1. 64. “Blacker Grows the Cloud Over Emmanuel Baptist Church,” San Francisco Call, 15 April 1895, 3. 65. “Must Stand Trial,” San Francisco Call, 3 May 1895, 5. 66. “Clews Still Lead to Durrant,” San Francisco Call, 18 April 53 !"# $#%&' &( !"# )#*(+, 1895, 5. 67. Haltunnen, Murder Most Foul, 60-90. 68. “Blacker Grows the Cloud Over Emmanuel Baptist Church,” San Francisco Call, 15 April 1895, 3. 69. “Goes Into More Detail,” The Wichita Daily Eagle, 21 April 1895, 1. 70. “Clews Still Lead to Durrant,” San Francisco Call, 18 April 1895, 5. 71. “Verdict of the Jury,” The Anaconda Standard, 20 April 1895, 1. 72. Ibid., 1. 73. “Stuck Down in the Shadow of the Altar,” San Francisco Call, 14 April 1895, 6. 74. “Blacker Grows the Cloud Over Emmanuel Baptist Church,” San Francisco Call, 15 April 1895, 3. 75. “To Dramatize the Murders,” The Oregon Mist, 19 July 1895, 1. 76. “Durrant in the Courtroom,” The Herald, 23 July 1895, 1. 77. “No Title,” The Dalles Times-Mountaineer, 10 August 1895, 2. 78. “In Cell Twenty-Eight,” San Francisco Call, 5 May 1895, 5. 79. “Further Testimony in Regard of the Crime for which Durrant is Held,” The Dalles-Times Mountaineer, 20 April 1895, 2. 80. “Review of Durrant,” The Louisiana Populist, 21 June 1895, 4. 81. Lacy McDearmon, “Maud Allan: The Public Record,” Dance Chronicle 2, no. 2 (1978): 85-105, http://www.jstor.org/ stable/1567472. 82. Toni Bentley, Sisters of Salome, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), 49-84. )#*#)#$+#( Bentley, Toni. Sisters of Salome. New Haven: Yale Univer- sity Press, 2002. “Blacker Grows the Cloud Over Emmanuel Baptist Church.” San Francisco Call, April 15, 1895. “Blood Stained Church.” The Herald, April 15, 1895. “Blood-Stained Coat is Found in Berkeley.” San Francisco Call, April 23, 1895. “A Bloody Shoe is Found in the Church.” San Francisco Call, April 21, 1895. Chan, Heng-Choon (Oliver), and Kathleen M. Heide. “Sex- ual Homicide: A Synthesis of the Literature.” Trauma, Vio- lence, & Abuse 10, no. 1 (2009): 31–54. https://doi. org/10.1177/1524838008326478. “The Church Murders.” The New York Tribune, April 21, 1895. “Clews Still Lead to Durrant.” San Francisco Call, April 18, 1895. D’Emilio, John, and Estelle B. Freedman. Intimate Mat- ters: A History of Sexuality in America. University of Chi- cago Press, 2013. “To Dramatize the Murders.” The Oregon Mist, July 19, 1895. “The Durrant Examination.” The Record-Union, April 25, 1895. “Durrant’s Examination.” The Dalles-Times Mountaineer, May 4, 1895. “Durrant in the Courtroom.” The Herald, July 23, 1895. “Durrant is Denied Change of Venue.” San Francisco Call, July 26, 1895. “The Durrant Jurors.” San Francisco Call, July 24, 1895. “Durrant Moves for Change in Venue.” San Francisco Call, July 23, 1895. “Durrant Murder Case.” The Record-Union, April 24, 1895. “Durrant Runs a Big Blu!.” The Salt Lake Herald, May 10, 1895. “Durrant’s Trial Continued Until Tomorrow Morning.” The Herald, July 24, 1895. 54 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 “The Examination Resumed.” The Dalles Weekly Chroni- cle, May 4, 1895. “Footgear is Found.” The Wichita Daily Eagle, April 23, 1895. “Forging the Links On Him.” The Salt Lake Herald, April 17, 1895. Fox, James Alan, and Jack Levin. “Multiple Homicide: Pat- terns of Serial and Mass Murder.” Crime and Justice 23 (1998): 407–55. https://doi.org/10.1086/449274. Freedman, Estelle B. “Sexuality in Nineteenth-Century America: Behavior, Ideology, and Politics.” Reviews in American History 10, no. 4 (1982): 196–215. https://doi. org/10.2307/2701827. “The Frisco Mystery.” The Indianapolis Journal, April 26, 1895. Fromm, Erich. War Within Man: A Psychological Enquiry Into the Roots of Destructiveness; A Study and Commen- tary. Philadelphia: Peace Literature Service of the Ameri- can Friends Service Committee, 1963. “Further Testimony in Regard of the Crime for which Dur- rant is Held.” The Dalles Times-Mountaineer, April 20, 1895. “Goes Into More Detail.” The Wichita Daily Eagle, April 21, 1895. Halttunen, Karen. Murder Most Foul: The Killer and the American Gothic Imagination. Cambridge: Harvard Uni- versity Press, 2001. “His Baseness was Boundless.” The Salt Lake Herald, Au- gust 21, 1895. “In Cell Twenty-Eight.” San Francisco Call, May 5, 1895. “Insulter of Women.” The Indianapolis Journal, August 21, 1895. “Key Carried by Durrant.” The Salt Lake Herald, April 23, 1895. Kinnell, Herbert G. “Serial Homicide by Doctors: Ship- man in Perspective.” BMJ: British Medical Journal 321, no. 7276 (2000): 1594–97. https://doi. org/10.1136/bmj.321.7276.1594. “Looks Dark.” Arizona Weekly Citizen, April 20, 1895. “Looks Dark for Durrant.” The Herald, April 16, 1895. McDearmon, Lacy. “Maud Allan: The Public Record.” Dance Chronicle 2, no. 2 (1978): 85–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/01472527808568721. “Miss Lamont’s Death.” The Indianapolis Journal, May 2, 1895. “Miss Turner Weaves a Web.” The Salt Lake Herald, April 24, 1895. “Murder of Miss Williams.” The Record-Union, April 20, 1895. “Must Stand Trial.” San Francisco Call, May 3, 1895. “The Mystery of a Girl.” San Francisco Call, April 10, 1895. “New Evidence Against Durrant.” The Seattle Post-Intelli- gencer, August 21, 1895. “No Title.” The Dalles Times-Mountaineer, August 10, 1895. “Not a Missing Link.” Rock Island Argus, May 5, 1895. “Notable Dead.” The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 24, 1895. “Pawned a Ring Like Blanche Lamont’s.” San Francisco Call, August 3, 1895. “Review of Durrant.” The Louisiana Populist, June 21, 1895. “Same Old Bravado.” The Salt Lake Herald, May 30, 1895. “Seeking to Stem the Tide.” The Salt Lake Herald, May 6, 55 !"# $#%&' &( !"# )#*(+, 1895. “Stuck Down in the Shadow of the Altar.” San Francisco Call, April 14, 1895. “Their Request Denied.” San Francisco Call, May 1, 1895. “Theo Durrant is Again Before the Bar.” San Francisco Call, April 24, 1895. “Told on the Witness Stand.” The Herald, April 24, 1895. “The Trial Continues,” The Daily Morning Astorian, 24 April 1895, 1. “Verdict of the Jury.” The Anaconda Standard, April 20, 1895. “Weaving a Web.” The Arizona Republican, May 17, 1895. “Weaving a Web Round Theodore Durrant.” San Francisco Call, April 16, 1895. ”Women are Daft Over Durrant,” The Silver Blade, 27 July 1895, 2. 56 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 !"#$ %& '($)%(* !"# $%!!&# '( !"# )'**# +'*,+: !"# )!'-. '( /,&&,%* *+(%01#%2 © Creative Centenaries. (n.d.). The Battle Of The Somme comic: The story of William McFadzean | CCEA. CEA. Retrieved January 19, 2022, from https://ccea.org.uk/learning-resources/understanding-1916/creative-centena- ries/battle-somme-comic-story-william 13 15 28 28 28 28 29 29 (,34-# 1 © originally tweeted by User:@realDonaldTrump (account suspended) on 26 May, 2020. #%)!#- 5-'+&%*%!,'2 '( 1916 © originally uploaded to the English Wikipedia by w:User:Jtdirl (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Easter_Proclamation_of_1916.png), „Easter Proclamation of 1916“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-old (,34-# 2 © GDI report: Ad-funded COVID-19 Disinformation: Money, Brands, and Tech (https://disinformationindex. org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/GDI_Ad-funded-COVID-19-Disinformation-1.pdf), „Share of ad revenues generated by COVID Disinfo Sites“. (,34-# 3, 5%2#& % © originally published in Bursztyn, Rao, Roth, Yanagaziwa-Drott: Misinformation During a Pandemic (https:// www.nber.org/papers/w27417), „RF estimates of e+ect of di+erential viewership on cases and deaths (extend- ed)“. (,34-# 3, 5%2#& $ © originally published in Bursztyn, Rao, Roth, Yanagaziwa-Drott: Misinformation During a Pandemic (https:// www.nber.org/papers/w27417), „2SLS estimates of e+ect of di+erential viewership on cases and deaths (ex- tended)“. (,34-# 4, 5%2#& % © originally published in Bursztyn, Rao, Roth, Yanagaziwa-Drott: Misinformation During a Pandemic (https:// www.nber.org/papers/w27417), „Implied COVID-19 Curves, Panel A: Estimates on Cases“. (,34-# 4, 5%2#& $ © originally published in Bursztyn, Rao, Roth, Yanagaziwa-Drott: Misinformation During a Pandemic (https:// www.nber.org/papers/w27417), „Implied COVID-19 Curves, Panel B: Estimates on Deaths“. 35 38 43 45 !"#$%$&$!' ()*!+(,( -!(,. /* %,""/-,',&#"$& #0**,' 10*&#$/*( © Mike Davies Intel Labs, Intel Corporation et. al: (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Artificial_syn- apses_based_on_FTJs.png), https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode #!-', $$$ $*%,",*&, +/2," !*. +/2," 0#$'$3!#$/* © Tasbolat Taunyazov, Weicong Sng, Hian Hian See, Brian Lim, Jethro Kuan, Abdul Fatir Ansari, Benjamin C.K. Tee, and Harold Soh: (http://www.roboticsproceedings.org/rss16/p020.pdf), „Table III: Inference Speed and Power Utilization“ -'!&4, '!5/*# !# 4,&'!, 5/*#!*!, 2$#4 4," (#0.,*#(, 1893 © Unknown authorUnknown author (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blanche_Lamont_with_stu- dents.jpg), „Blanche Lamont with students“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US #4,/./", .0""!*#’( 506(4/# © originally published in Report of the trial of William Henry Theodore Durrant (https://archive.org/details/ reportoftrialofw00durr/page/10/mode/2up), marked as public domain. 60 61 61 61 6"!+4 $''0(#"!#$*6 #4, (4$%#( $* +"$&, !*. 70!*#$#) (0++') © originally published in 31.11 E!ciency and Deadweight Loss (https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_economics- theory-through-applications/s35-11-e!ciency-and-deadweight-loss.html), „Figure 31.8 Deadweight Loss“ 6"!+4( (4/2$*6 #4, *05-," !*. 8!'0, /% 5,"6,"( !*. !&70$($#$/*( © originally published in Statista: Mergers and acquisitions in the United States (https://www.statista.com/ study/65232/mergers-and-acquisitions-in-the-united-states). 6"!+4( (4/2$*6 6'/-!' 70,") (4!", -) (,,'&# (,!"&4 ,*6$*,( © originally published in Statista: Global market share of search engines 2010-2022 (https://www.statista.com/ statistics/216573/worldwide-market-share-of-search-engines). 6"!+4( (4/2$*6 ./5,(#$& 0( (,!"&4 70,") (4!", -) (,',&# (,!"&4 ,*6$*,( © originally published in Statista: Market share of search engines in the United States 2008-2022 (https:// www.statista.com/statistics/267161/market-share-of-search-engines-in-the-united-states). !"#$ %& '($)%(* !"#$"#%&' &'!()"*"+, -)."#/%&-") 0'#1-!'0 © unpublished tabulation from Corptech Database 62 62 71 75 78 80 82 .-+2#' 1 © Samadi, Moradi, Moradinazar, Mostafai, Pasdar: Dietary pattern in relation to the risk of Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10072-019-03976-3), „Figure 2: Healthy and unhealthy diet in relation to AD.“ &(' 3#'%45"6) ". "$-)-") #'+%#5-)+ 3#'%4-)+ 2$ ‘3-+ &'!(’ © Statista : Majority of Americans in Favor of Breaking up Big Tech (https://www.statista.com/chart/19440/ survey-responses-breaking-up-big-tech) $"&')&-%* 0-+)%&"#-'0, 0-+)%&"#-'0, %)5 $%#&-'0 &" &(' %--3 © L.tak (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank_map.svg), https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode !(-)%’0 ")+"-)+ &'##-&"#-%* 5-0$2&'0] © O+ce of the Secretary of Defense (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:China’s_Disputed_Territories. PNG), „China’s Disputed Territories“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https:// commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US 20 5'$%#&/')& ". 720&-!' %/")+ "&('#0 %))"2)!'5 23 !#-/-)%* !(%#+'0 © U.S. Department of Justice (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Commerce_Secretary_Wilbur_ Ross,_Acting_Attorney_General_Matthew_Whitaker,_Homeland_Security_Secretary_Kirstjen_Nielsen,_FBI_ Director_Christopher_Wray_Announces_23_Criminal_Charges_Against_China’s_Huawei_&_Wanzhou_ Meng.jpg), „U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, FBI Director Christopher Wray Announces 23 Criminal Charges Against China’s Huawei & Wanzhou Meng“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https:// commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US %/'#-!% +*"3%* &#%5' 5'.-!-& © Statista: U.S. Trade Deficit in Goods Reaches Record High, (https://www.statista.com/chart/17281/us-trade- balance). 98 !"#$%&' !()*"%+,, %&#-&$ (. /"& !"$+'/+#, .$(,/ © Craine, Detroit (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CharlesCouglinCraineDetroitPortrait.jpg), „CharlesCouglinCraineDetroitPortrait“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US 100 *&$0#, #0&$+!#, 1),- $#%%2, ,&3 2($4, 0#-+'(, '5)#$& *#$&,, .&1 1939 © Department of Defense. Department of the Army. O!ce of the Chief Signal O!cer. (09/18/1947 - 02/28/1964); ARC Identifier 36068 / Local Identifier 111-OF-2 1943 (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Nazi_Strike_2.jpg), „Nazi Strike 2“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US