In 1983, a single mother in Florida wrote a how-to-murder book titled, Hit Man: A Technical Manual for Independent Contractors. A decade later, a man used this book for instructions on committing a triple murder. Can the families of the deceased hold the publisher liable, or is the publisher protected by the First Amendment? It’s a fascinating case that gets crazier with a twist at the end!
1. Topics
2. Additional Resources
3. Merchandise/Support the Show
4. Contact Us/Follow Us/Rate/Subscribe
New episodes every week!
Listen, rate, follow, and subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts!
Follow us:
5. Credits
In 1983, a single mother in Florida wrote a how-to-murder book titled, Hit Man: A Technical Manual for Independent Contractors. A decade later, a man used this book for instructions on committing a triple murder. Can the families of the deceased hold the publisher liable, or is the publisher protected by the First Amendment? It’s a fascinating case that gets crazier with a twist at the end!
1. Topics
2. Additional Resources
3. Merchandise/Support the Show
4. Contact Us/Follow Us/Rate/Subscribe
New episodes every week!
Listen, rate, follow, and subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts!
Follow us:
5. Credits
This week, is a how-to manual for murder protected by the First Amendment? Welcome to Subpar Talks. Hey everybody. Welcome to Subpar Talks, where we have conversations about everything. I'm Jeff.
Chris:And I'm Chris.
Jeff:Thank you for joining us again, and you know what is coming, our standard disclaimer, listener discretion advised. There will be profanity in this podcast, maybe a lot of it. And from time to time we do touch on some mature subject matter and we inject humor into all of this stuff. So if that is not your thing, then perhaps this podcast is not for you. But for everybody else, sit back, because here we go with this week's topic. Let's talk about a murder. You wanna talk about a murder?
Chris:All right, yeah.
Jeff:It's always a good subject.
Chris:It's not mine, so...
Jeff:All right! Yeah, we're safe, as far as we know. The murder here though is not going to be really the focus of what we talk about because there is another issue, and I don't want to, I don't want to spoil it yet, so that's coming. But let me run through what happened in this murder and then we'll get into that, uh, other issue or issues. OK, we're going back to 1993. What were you doing in 1993?
Chris:Last century, wow!
Jeff:I know, yeah. The late 19 hundreds.
Chris:Yeah. 1993. I was in college. Yeah.
Jeff:And you were making it, everything was going fine?
Chris:I was, well, I was making it, you know, I made it to here, so I survived. We'll say that
Jeff:I was, um, still in high school. I probably thought I knew everything.
Chris:Oh, yeah. I definitely thought I had my life decently planned. Like this is what I feel like I want to do. This is how it's gonna happen and yeah, that it didn't.
Jeff:life is what happens when you're making plans.
Chris:That's right. I am here, but not because of those plans,
Jeff:Right. OK, so this is 1993 in Silver Spring, Maryland. The police get a call and it turns out there is a murder in this house. Turns out that three people have been murdered, so we got a triple murder here. It was a mother and her son who was a quadriplegic and his nurse all murdered. The mother and the nurse were shot in the eyes. The quadriplegic son, yeah, was smothered. So when the cops get there and they start looking at this, it becomes apparent that this looks professional. This doesn't look like somebody just flew off the handle and killed these people. This looks like a hit. Mm-hmm. And so they of course, start looking for clues. The only clue they found was that a file. Was found in the backyard and they figured that the file was used to pry open the back door because the back door, uh, every other door was locked except the back door. So they figured he, the, the person who did it pried it open. OK. We've seen enough in movies and TV and whatever else. Who's the husband? Who's the boyfriend? Is there an ex-husband? OK. No current husband. No boyfriend, but there is an ex. His name was Lawrence Horn. So they immediately start looking into him, but he is living in la so this triple murder happened in Maryland. He's out in California, and it turns out that there was a bank account set up because the reason the sun was quadriplegic is it was a medical malpractice case. When he was born, I don't remember the circumstances of it, but it was definitely the doctor's fault and they ended up getting a payout from that. Uh, and that was largely to have, uh, money to pay for medical care for their son who was gonna need it for the rest of his life. So there was a bank account set up that said Lawrence Horn, the ex-husband, he gets the money if the ex-wife and the son. OK, so if the mother and the son die, all this money goes to Lawrence Horn. OK. So the police get a warrant to search his house, cuz he's definitely a suspect and they discover a videotape of him. But all that was on this videotape was him watching the news. It is literally a videotape I've seen. It's a videotape of him sitting on his couch watching the news. And of course they ask him why is there videotape of you watching the news? Who does this? And he doesn't have a good answer for that. But the problem is this video was taken when they think the murders happen. So obviously he was not the one who pulled the trigger. So the police start checking phone records. and they noticed that he had made several calls to a payphone in Silver Spring, Maryland, and several calls from that payphone were made to his house in la and there were a bunch made on the night of the murders. OK? Mm. This payphone happens to be at a Days Inn in Silver Spring, Maryland. They go to the days in and they ask for a guest list. They want a guest list of everybody who was staying there around that time. And it turns out there's a guy named James Perry. And James Perry had known Lawrence Horn when they both lived in Detroit. James Perry still lives in Detroit, but he had obviously traveled to Silver Spring, Maryland around the time that the murders took place. It turns out they had talked to each other on the phone 25 times in the few months after the murder, and it turns out that there is a Western Union money order in the amount of$6,000 that was wired to James Perry after the murders. So the cops are, This James Perry guy, he's definitely in on it. We don't know in what capacity, but we're gonna search his home. So they get a warrant to search his home in Detroit, and he's got a bunch of books on crime, specifically murder. There's a bunch of books on weapons, and a bunch of these books are from a press called Paladin Press, P A L A D I N. Turns out he had about. Books in his house, and they were instructional books. That's what this press specialized in. They were instructional books. Books titled like How To Dispose of a Dead Body. Uh, another one was called The Ancient Art The Ancient Art of Strangulation. It's an art. I didn't know it was an art, but evidently it is. Yeah. So the cops contact pallet and press and they ask if this James Perry had ordered any books. And it turns out that why. Yes, he has. It was a book called How to Be a Hitman, A Technical Manual for Independent Contractors. Well, this is not looking good for Perry. No, it's not. So they. The detectives start reading this book. They get ahold of it, they start reading the book, and they notice that there are 22 similarities between instructions in the book and this murder that was committed in Silver Spring, Marilyn, and specifically, they look at things like the book says To Kill your victims, shoot'em in the Eyes. you don't want to get blood spatter on you, so you need to stand between three and six feet away, make sure you get a good shot, but you don't want any, you know, blood on you. So that's the proper distance that you need to stand when you're executing your victims. This is helpful Right? So he and Lawrence Horn, the ex-husband, were arrested. OK. This cracks me up because evidently this James Perry followed this book really closely. Like he took it to heart and did a lot of the things that the book recommended. But one of the things that the book recommended is you should never use your own name when you're carrying out a hit And he checked into the days in as James Perry. So there it was right there on the on the sheet, in the hotel. So he's an idiot. Aside from all this other stuff, um, James Perry was convicted and sentenced to death. Lawrence Horn was convicted and he was sentenced to life in prison with no parole. OK? So after that was done, the family of the nurse and the family of the mother and the son, they get together and they sue. Pallet and press because they said it's clear that James Perry followed the guidelines in this book, and so we think the publishers should be responsible, should be liable for something for this happening because they're the ones who put that out there. It's got detailed instructions on how to actually kill someone. OK? Mm-hmm. So through this discovery, they get all these books and, uh, turns out Timothy McVey had one of these books. Really? You, yeah. Before he carried out the, the Oklahoma City bombing, um, the author was a person named Rex Ferrell. Uh, now that's a pen name. The actual person's name is Nancy Crampton Brophy, B R O P H Y. She was a single mother at the time living in Florida, who for some reason wrote a book called Hitman, a technical manual for independent contractors, but that's who. Just your typical stay-at-home mom Exactly. Who are at Yeah. Writing, uh, instructions for murder. OK. So they sue the publisher and, uh, they sued in federal court. And so the publisher comes back and says, first Amendment. Mm-hmm. we have a right to publish this stuff. This person has a right to write this. what somebody does with it is on them. That's not on us. So it's a First Amendment issue. We can't be sued for this. And the district judge agreed. And so the families appeal that decision and the Circuit court overturns the decision of the district judge and the circuit court says yes. You can file a lawsuit. Now that doesn't mean they're gonna be liable, but you can at least proceed with the lawsuit. After that, the insurance company of palate and press freaked out and they said, we don't want to take this to trial, so we will settle. So they ended up settling. Each family got 2.5 million each. OK, so you tell me. I want to get your thoughts on this, and I have conflicting thoughts on this. Should a publisher or author be able to just totally hide behind the First Amendment and say, I'm not liable for anything that I put in a book. If the publisher publishes it, they can hide behind the First Amendment and say We're not responsible for anything that anybody does related to. what's in the book? What do you think? I obviously have conflicting thoughts on it too. The very first thing that I thought as this was kind of unfolding with you telling it is yes, they have a right to say what they want to say and basically what their defense was. If someone chooses to use it, that's not on us. Then, A flip side to that is the idea that the First Amendment is not a blanket ability to say anything you want under any circumstances. Mm-hmm. you know, you've got the classic, oh, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater kind of thing. Yeah. And the whole reason for that is safety. Right. I mean, you, you can't do that because that's going to incite panic and. And ultimately cause other issues. So in this case then you could say that is, Hey, the very idea that you're putting out these instructions could be leading clearly clearly to a safety issue. So you can't do that. But then now that you generalize it a little bit more and say, what can an author do or not do? There are authors that write fictional works that are murder mysteries and they may or may not be have, you know, something underlying them based on some prior facts, but the overall idea is that they are works of fiction. But anyone could take that and say, Hey, I used that as a blueprint. Yeah. Now, I think one thing that comes to mind here is intent. So what was their intent in writing something or publishing something that was written intended to be, or that was written with the purpose of instruction versus a fictional work that is, for lack of a better word, for entertainment, not for instruction? Right. Uh, to me, when I first learned about this case, And I, and I learned what the Circuit Court said that yeah, the, the publisher can be sued. I had a problem with that because what is the difference in saying, like, if you're writing this as a novel, John stood three feet away from his victim as he shot them in the eyes so as not to get blood spatter on him versus saying, When you do this, stand three feet away from your victims and shoot'em in the eyes so you won't get blood spatter on them. Exactly. So when I think of it like that, I think no, it's, it's ridiculous. But on the other hand, like, yeah, the intent, what is the purpose of this? Clearly it's not just for, well, I was gonna say it's not for entertainment, but maybe some people do find this entertaining. They buy these books, they don't. Actually carry anything out. I don't know. I could kind of see that I have no intention of becoming a, a hitman, but seeing, Ooh, what did they say should be done? Well, that's pretty smart. Oh, that's pretty stupid. You know, whatever. I could see it for entertainment purposes to myself, but that's because I have no intention of being a hitman. If you do. If you do want to be a hitman and therefore you're looking at it as instructional material, then, and I, I said, you know, before that, that I think intent could be something I just said. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater, but you can, if there's a fire. And, and and what's the difference there? The difference is intent. If you yell fire, because there is a fire, your intent is to clear the theater, to save people. If you yell, fire, when there is no fire, your intent is clearly to incite some panic, and there is a difference then in how that plays out. So, It seems like there should be some latitude there in terms of, you know, OK, someone's writing a fictional word that is clearly or has the appearance of being for entertainment versus, did someone write this apparently for the purpose of education. Do you know about a book called The Anarchist Cookbook? Have you heard of that? I've heard of it, but I don't really know anything about it. I don't know a lot about it. Um, I have seen it in a bookstore. I saw it in a Barnes and Noble once, uh, and just thumbed through it. But it was published in the late sixties, maybe early seventies, but it was all about how to. Basically participate in guerrilla warfare, like how to construct pipe bombs and Molotov cocktails and stuff like that. And I know they've tried to ban that book and, and the publisher's been sued and the courts just put the breaks on that cuz it's a First Amendment issue. Mm-hmm. So I don't know any book where any publisher has been successfully sued because of what somebody did and relying on. The information. There's a case, I remember this from law school. There were a couple of guys who bought the, uh, I don't know what it was called. I think it was called the Encyclopedia of Mushrooms or something along those lines. And they went out and they were mushroom hunters. And so they're relying on. Mushroom hunters, whatever you call'em.
Chris:Well, I didn't even know hunting mushrooms, regardless of what
Jeff:you call it was a thing. Well, yeah, there are people who go out and look for mushrooms. I don't know. Why are these
Chris:mushrooms like, OK, I'm, I'm not educated on mushrooms for, for the, uh, psychedelic. Properties. Is that what I should say? Is that, I mean, I guess, but yeah, so I, I don't know about that. I know that there are mushrooms you can buy in the store that are perfectly OK to eat. I know there are wild mushrooms that could kill you. And then I know there's mushrooms that you can, I guess you eat them
Jeff:for the drug effects. Yeah. Right. Yeah. But I
Chris:have no idea what the difference is in all of those.
Jeff:I don't either. So how do you even know what you're after Well, maybe that's why the, these two guys bought the encyclopedia of mushrooms or whatever the hell it was called, because they wanted to know too, and I guess people do this. Yes. I have no interest in that at all because I find mushrooms repulsive. It's just disgusting. They're disgusting in anything. Yeah. Would you take one if you knew it was going to make you hallucinate and all that? I
Chris:am concerned for myself about taking something that's going to make me hallucinate. Yeah. And that's, that's just in general. It's not about, oh, I'm afraid I'm going to die, like, and I'm saying that ahead of time. It's not about I'm afraid I'm going to die if I knew 100%. 100% that I wasn't going to die. I would still be afraid to take it because I'm afraid of what I'm going to see and think, and imagine is happening. I might die from that
Jeff:Right? Yeah. If I could be guaranteed that, that I wasn't gonna die, I don't know that that's enough to say, OK, I'll go ahead and do it. Cause what's. Journey gonna be like, what's that trip gonna be like? Yeah, it'd be freaky. So anyway, so this is from that case, the mushroom case. And I remember just from law school that the publisher was not liable. That's what the judge's ruling was. But I didn't remember exactly why, but I pulled this. Let me just read this really quickly. This is from, uh, I'm taking this, I mean, it's from the court's, the, the judge's opinion, but the website is rights of riders.com. Although there is always some appeal to the involuntary spreading of cost of injuries in any area, the cost in any comprehensive cost benefit analysis would be quite different. Where strict liability concepts applied to words and idea. We place a high priority on the unfettered exchange of ideas. We accept the risks that words and ideas have wings we cannot clip, and which carry them. We know not where. The threat of liability without fault, financial responsibility for our words and ideas and the absence of fault or a special undertaking responsibility could seriously inhibit those who wish to share thoughts and. As the New York Court commented with the specter of strict liability, quote, would any author wish to be exposed for writing on a topic which might result in physical injury? For example, how to cut trees, how to keep bees. One might add, quote, would any undertake to guide by ideas expressed in words, either a discreet group, a nation, or humanity in general. So what so much of this comes down to is if. If you totally stop somebody from publishing something or you hold them liable for the content that they have in a book, then you are stifling ideas, and that's gonna have a chilling effect on other people who want to, to have, you know, similar writings. Very true.
Chris:Yeah. I, I came across, uh, something on YouTube recently where a guy showing how to do some maintenance. And he specifically says, has printed on the, you know, words across the video at the beginning. Have your dealer do this work? This is for entertainment purposes only. well, I'm not just watching it for entertainment, obviously. And that's obviously not why you did it. Yeah. You're doing it for educational reasons, but I get the whole thing. Yeah. You don't want to have to assume liability when somebody fucks their
Jeff:shit up. Right, exactly. And I remember from this mushroom case, um, a guy got, I don't think he died, but he had like severe liver damage from eating this particular mushroom.
Chris:Yeah, I'd, I'd want to check into the people that wrote a book like that before. I just take their advice on, uh, this looks like a good
Jeff:mushroom to eat. what are your credentials?
Chris:right? So all of this has reminded me a little bit of basic instinct. Do you remember the whole premise
Jeff:of that? I mostly remember the images from basic instances,
Chris:Yeah. So the whole idea was, you know, she was a, a fictional, uh, fictional author Yeah. Of murder
Jeff:mysteries. Oh, that's right. OK. Yes. Yeah. And
Chris:her boyfriend had just been killed in almost the exact same way. as what was described in her most recent book. That's right. And so they're like, um, clearly you did this. Mm-hmm. and she was like, um, it obviously could have been someone else. Anyone could have read my book and used that as a, you know, kind of a blueprint of how to kill him. And then one of. One of the things that she said in her defense was, why would I write a book describing exactly how a killer would kill this person? And then I would do it like I would be the obvious suspect and the. Police in the situation. The detective said that would be a perfect thing for you to do. Yep. Is to use that as the defense that you're trying to use and say, clearly that's not what I would do. So it's very interesting how all of that plays out in real life though.
Jeff:So this author, the actual woman's name again, Nancy Crampton, bro. She went on to become a romance novelist. So she wrote, uh, romance books in 2007. It's a logical jump right? Isn't it? From, from instructions on how to commit triple murder to uh, to romance stuff. In 2007 for a website, she wrote a piece called How to Murder Your Husband. Alright? in 2018. She was arrested for, guess what? No Yep. I could not believe this. So I heard about this case last year. So 2022. I heard about this case, a woman because the media all dubbed this. A woman wrote on a website, uh, an author. How to kill your husband. Mm-hmm. And now she's actually arrested for killing her husband. And yeah, turns out she did it. She was found guilty and she's 72 years old. and she was sentenced to 25 years to life. She's eligible, eligible for parole and well, she, she'll be dead probably before she could even, yeah, she won't make it. Hoping to hope to get out, but I could not believe that because I was looking into this, you know, this murder back in 1993 and the issue with the publisher and, uh, it turns out, you know, we now know this, this person's name that not just their pen name. And so I just googled. Nancy Crampton Brophy, and holy shit, that's the woman who murdered her husband and who wrote a piece called How to Murder Your Husband. I couldn't believe that. I was floored. That's awesome, isn't it? I mean, not for him. we're
Chris:probably not her either, but seriously,
Jeff:right? Like,
Chris:can you not do better than that? Wait, but she also wrote the book. It was on being a hitman, right? Yeah. Seems like she should have hired
Jeff:one. That's what I wondered when I found out that she did it herself. Like why didn't you follow the instructions over your own book, I dunno. I dunno. Not too bright. No, she's not. I just want to
Chris:pick somebody's brain like that. Like
Jeff:seriously? Yeah. What was going through your
Chris:head? I, I mean, was this a, I mean, you could find out looking more into the case, but was this a, a crime in the moment? Was it planned? How did you not do any better than this?
Jeff:Well, she botched the whole thing. So I read about it and I, again, I knew about this like four or five months ago cause I was interested in it and I think the New York Times had an article in it, uh, or. and, uh, her husband was an instructor at some, uh, chef school in Oregon. Mm-hmm. And, uh, she drove her minivan there and the minivan was on camera, like they had surveillance cameras and so they clearly could see that she was driving the car. She had ordered parts to, to construct a. uh, but to make it untraceable. And so they had all that and that they had some of her Google searches and she was just, again, not very bright. Wow. Yeah. But how many people who carry out a murder are actually bright, like, good enough to get away with it? Yeah. Not so much. Yeah. I guess we'll never know. OK. So I found this, uh, Hitman book online and I think I'll. I think I'll post this in the episode notes. Maybe we need a maybe we need a hold harmless clause. Before we put this I was gonna say, are we gonna get sued now? Um, but I wanna read some of the preface to it.
Chris:Wait, so did you look this up off of their site or something?
Jeff:I just, no, no, I just Googled, I just googled the title and then PDF and this. So you can get it for free. Yeah, it's free Now. I don't know if it's supposed to be, I, I mean, maybe, maybe, uh, it's not in the public domain. I, I have no idea. But anyway, here it is. Uh, it's on a website archive.org. I don't know what that is all about, but they've got this, uh, book. Here's the preface. OK. A woman recently asked how I could in good conscience write an instruction book on murder. How can you live with yourself if someone uses what you write to go out and take a human life? She, wh I'm afraid she was quite offended by my answer. It is my opinion that the professional hitman fills a need in society and is at times the only alternative for personal justice. Moreover, if my advice and the proven methods in this book are followed, certainly no one will ever know Well, OK, That's pretty arrogant, and I think she's been proven wrong on that. I think so. Although he didn't totally follow the instructions. He used his own name. True. But he followed enough. Yeah. OK. Pick him back. Some people would argue that in taking the life of another after premeditation, you act as God judging and issuing a death sentence. But it is the employer, the man who pays for the service, whatever his reason might be, who acts as judge. The hitman is merely the executioner, an enforcer who carries out the sentence. There are many, many instances when atrocities are committed that the law cannot or will not pursue, and other times when the law does its part, but the American legal system is so poor that real justice is not served in those cases, as in cases of personal revenge and retribution. A man must step outside the law and take matters into his own hands. Since most men are capable of carrying out their threats and wishes only in their heads, it becomes necessary for a man of action to step in and do what is required. A special man for whom life holds no real meaning and death holds no fear. A man who faces death is a challenge and feels the victory every time he walks away The winner. Some men could not kill under any circumstances. Others could kill only in self-defense or to protect what they hold. One man learns to kill in times of war and spends the rest of his life trying to forget the horror. While his brother may consider all his wartime efforts a justifiable part of his past, having no effect on his present. How many times have you shared a few beers with a group of macho buddies who eventually turned the subject of conversation from women in sports to that of guns, ammunition, wars, and. it seems that almost every man harbors a fantasy of living the life of Mac Bolan. I have no idea who that is, or some other fictional hero who kills for fun and profit. They dream of living by their reflexes of doing whatever is necessary without regard to moral or legal restrictions. But few have the courage or knowledge to make that dream a reality. so dream. All right. Yes. She is assuming so much there, uh, conversations about killings and OK. Maybe, but how many people dream of actually being a hitman and going around killing people? Well, maybe it
Chris:says something about the circle she's
Jeff:running in. Yes. I don't know exactly. Yes, but man, people see the world through their own bubble. Right? Makes me wonder what her husband, dead husband. Did he know about? Surely he did about this book, right? I would think. You would think.
Chris:But I mean, I guess under that false name, maybe you wouldn't have had
Jeff:to maybe, I don't know. Seems like if you knew about it, wouldn't he have second thoughts of being with this woman? Fucking psychopath, I don't know, but that's wild. Nancy Crampton Brophy. She's never getting outta prison. No. Two guys. Maybe she should write a book from prison. She should. Speaking of never getting outta prison, those two guys both died in prison. So James Perry was sentenced to death. I think his death sentence was overturned and he might have died. Uh, he might have gotten another sentence like, Um, but then the other guy got life with no parole and he died in prison as well. So fuck them. And fuck Nancy. Cramped. And Broy too. She may
Chris:be getting it too That's right. You know,
Jeff:grabbing her ankles. Yeah. Yep. Caged heat. So there you go. That is a story of murder and the first amendment and assholes and idiots and all of that good stuff. And if you like this kind of stuff, then you should absolutely follow us on whatever platform you listen to, podcast on, subscribe, follow us. That way you will get new episodes every single Tuesday, and we will have more of this good content while you are. you should rate us. We would be really, really happy if you'd give us five stars and while you're there, go ahead and say something. It doesn't matter what you say, just put something there. Because when you do that, it makes it easier for people to discover the show. You can go to our website, that is Subpar Talks dot com. You can email us there. You can leave us a voicemail. We will always listen to what our listeners have to say and we will read, if you email us, whatever you have to say there. You can even make suggestions for us, uh, for topics we should cover in future episodes. We'll always take that stuff into consider. We are on social media. If you wanna follow us on Twitter, you can do that on there. We are at subpartalks.com on Facebook. We are subpartalks.com. You can follow our personal Twitter accounts on there. I am at@independentjeff and I am at
Chris:Chris Bradford tx.
Jeff:And we have other social media links on our website. You can check those out. And finally share this with your friends. Tell them about Subpar. Talks. Share it with your colleagues family. Put it on social media, however you can think of to get the word out, because the more listeners we have, the easier it is for us to get this content to you every single week. Chris, final thoughts on murder? Triple murder books. First Amendment assholes. Not
Chris:condoning any of it, but mercy, if you're gonna do. Be smarter than
Jeff:these people. Yeah. There's no doubt, no doubt. Kind of makes you wonder who else relied on this book and got away with it. No kidding. Yeah. Something we'll never know. All right, very good. That is another episode of Subpar Talks and until next week, so long.