You may remember the movie Catch Me if You Can, which was released in 2002. Frank Abagnale is played by Leonardo DiCaprio, then still in his teen heartthrob phase (Titanic had been made just five years before). His chief pursuer from the FBI is Tom Hanks, who gamely plays the role of an incurable square, a mere foil to the brilliance of Abagnale/DeCaprio.
Abagnale is portrayed as a charming con man, and we delight in his cleverness as he gets away with various impersonations and scams: how quick he is on his feet! How clever he is! What nerve! The movie allows us to experience the delight a sociopath takes in fooling others. (When a sociopath fools you, that "proves" to him that he is smarter than you; and when he fools the world, that proves he must be the smartest man in the world.) Abagnale's cons are portrayed as relatively harmless youthful pranks.
This is life inside a sociopath's head.
Abagnale would have to have been a sociopath in order to want to, and be able to, pull all his scams off. So he may be charming, but he's also incurably impulsive, completely narcissistic, and untrustworthy -- as are all sociopaths. And even if the movie makes him seem lovable, well, rest assured he would never return that feeling.
A quick look at the rest of Abagnale's (real, not cinematic) life reveals plenty of other hints to his sociopathy. His parents divorced when he was 16, and he was the only one of the four children to be remanded to the custody of his father. However, his father was also his first scam victim. According to Wikipedia, "As Frank Jr. grew interested in women, he found that he could not stop spending money on them." (What kind of person has so little self-control that he cannot stop spending money?) Frank was given a credit card from his father with which to buy gasoline, then entered into an arrangement with various gas stations to false charge him, then split the profits with him.
Anybody who would scam his own father like that must would have to have a very weak parental bond, always a likely signifier of sociopathy.
Abagnale went on to a prolific career as a check forger and impersonator. Among the roles he claims to have played are airline pilot, teaching assistant, doctor, and attorney. (Think of the potential damage he could have caused as a "pilot" or "doctor.")
Abagnale later escaped federal custody twice, once from an airplane.
On top of this, it turns out that he may not even have pulled off the cons he claimed to. A later investigation into the veracity of his claims turned up no proof that he did any of them. Abagnale claimed that no one was willing to admit it because of the embarrassment involved. But his glorious history of nervy impersonations is, at best, murky. Either way he is a sociopath. Had he the nerve and lack of compunction to pull off all his scams, he would have to be a sociopath. And if he is enough of a pathological liar to weave a past which is entirely fiction, that is also sociopathic. (The surest sign of sociopathy is to be a serial killer; the second surest is to be a "pathological liar.")
Since Abagnale got out of jail, he has gone legitimate, and is now a consultant on fraud for banks, and even consults with the FBI. This is the kind of "character arc" that Hollywood loves: ah, see, he really was a good person beneath it all!
However, while one may change one's occupation, one may not change one's psychology.
Posts
39 comments:
Absolutely. I thought the same thing. I spoke with some people about this movie recently and as usual people find excuses for this type of behavior other than sociopathy; 'he had such a tough childhood' bla bla. It doesnt matter, when you can scam people to that extent without having a hard time at one point emotionally dealing with it, youre a sociopath. Ofcourse in the movie Leo is made a more loving character for the viewers to get more attached to him...
Diane --
You understand perfectly. And yes, people will always make excuses for a charmer. But that's part of a sociopath's stock in trade, as they tend to have a lot of charm.
What part of the world are you from that you're writing at 3:39AM NY time?
I knew this man personally. He didn't do any of it. He lifted his stories from The Great Imposter and what he didn't steal, he made up. Hard to believe no one has investigated it.
The problem with 'Con men and Con Women' is the heartless breach of trust they inflict on the bystander victims they come into contact with. For instance the hotel receptionist might be fired from her job for being gullible enough to cash a cheque for him. The Hospital Administrator might be dismissed for not checking his references or credentials closely. Many a small business owners business might fold by the losses he inflicted on them. In other words these people leave a trail of hurt and wounded pride and the loss of hard earned income or profits. A sociopath surely is nothing more than an heartless person, a lazy person, a bully, a person who wants everything to be easy, quick, fast and to hell with the tomorrow-land consequences they have to face. In jail I imagine they say to themselves "Well, it had to happen". But you know it didn't have to happen, these people choose to be criminals. The FBI had no right to consult with Abagnale, to speak to him, nor to use his alleged services. He's off limits for the rest of his life to them, to banks, to the Military or to any employer, and to those who work honestly. To use an old expression this man Abagnale criminal scum and to be cold shouldered for evermore.
Fairplay --
You are completely right. I don't see any possible way Abagnale is not a sociopath, and as such, he should be isolated from the rest of society. At the very least he shouldn't be hired as a consultant to the FBI, banks, etc.
John Craig said...
"Abagnale is not a sociopath, and as such, he should be isolated from the rest of society."
What?! Or maybe he should have therapy and be fixed? Jesus Christ. A psychological problem now means exile and to be shunned? Are you serious?
Anon --
W/hat I actually said was "I don't see any way Abagnale is not a sociopath, and as such...." which has an entirely different meaning.
And I did not say that any psychological problem should mean exile, even though you're trying to imply that I'm suggesting neurotics, phobics, schizophrenics, etc, should be exiled somehow.
But yes, in an ideal world, sociopaths would have to live with each other, and not have innocent people to prey on. And sociopaths, by the way, don't see themselves as having "a psychological problem." They see themselves as stronger and smarter than normal people, and above the rules that govern others. So, yes, I'd like to see them isolated, the same way murderers are. Now obviously, you can't convict someone if they haven't committed a crime; but all sociopaths leave a trail of bitter, disappointed people who end up feeling used at the hands of the sociopath.
Nice effort at trying to twist things around though. Do I miss my guess or are you a sociopath yourself? (Don't worry, I don't expect you to answer honestly.)
the psychopathic description sounds very familiar to our current political arena, and explains a lot of behavior there in.
Anon --
YES!
You guys are going crazy.
For starters, sociopaths aren't all violent or criminals. They have a tendency towards the same, but that does not mean it is a certainty. In fact, the vast majority of sociopaths live among us virtually undetected. This may make you feel uncomfortable, but I can think of a list of even worse traits in humans that do not technically break the law [and are therefore permissable, if not socially acceptable].
In any case, Frank Abagnale Jr. is clearly a Grade A b|▬|▬|▬|▬|▬|▬|tter. Investigations on his life have turned up virtually NO evidence of his [elaborate] crimes. We essentially have to take his word for it.
Some of the stuff he talks about when dealing with current modern electronic security are clearly misinformed. I am not surprised he claims to be an "expert", and the FBI/national security folks just follow everything he says. As someone familiar with electronic security and computers in general, I have heard Frank talk about possible ways of breaking the law [in modern times] that are clearly silly to anyone who has some technical expertise in the matter. He is a fraud. But clearly a "con man" in the original sense of the word [charlatan]. In that he can get many people to believe the stories he tells and fool them into thinking he has competence [where he clearly does not].
Irritating that he gets paid so much for it, too.
♣ MusaIbra
Musalbra --
I'm no expert on electronic security, so thanks for that info. Certainly the fact that Abagnale would portray himself as more of an expert than he is is in keeping with the rest of his personality. And yes, he is a Grade A bullshitter. (Spelling out swear words is permitted on this blog.)
But I'm not quite sure why you say, "You guys are going crazy." I think most of the commenters here are pretty much in agreement that he is a con man and sociopath.
So the comment I was trying to make the other day was that I don't agree that Abagnale is a sociopath. He may have been ruthlessly manipulative as a young man, but he's clearly grown out of it - which is something sociopaths don't do. He's stuck to the same job for decades, and he's refused the President's offer of pardon three times. All sociopaths are narcissists and a narcissist would jump at the chance to receive an official pardon from the US President himself. Imagine the admiration that would bring! But, instead, Abagnale refuses it thrice, saying that he is genuinely sorry for how he behaved and that he doesn't deserve a pardon. Doesn't sound like sociopathy to me.
- Gethin
Gethin --
Thank you for taking th trouble to rewrite the comment.
I'm afraid we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. It's easy to imagine Abagnale refusing to take a Presidential pardon as a sort of pose, to "prove" what an honorable fellow he is. You're right, that's an action which one would normally associate with a principled, decent guy. But once you've proven you're a sociopath, once you've done a certain critical mass of things that only a sociopath would do, that's it: you're a sociopath, no matter noble you try to make yourself appear later on.
I'll offer the example of Bill Clinton, who seems to have devoted his life to good works since his Presidency ended. He may have accomplished a lot of good (depending partly on one's political viewpoint), but he's also given us lots and lots of proof of his sociopathy in the past, and the fact is, character doesn't change. (I put up a long post on his sociopathy back in August 3, 2010.)
Likewise, with Abagnale, whether he did the things he claimed as a youngster or not, either way he's sociopathic. He was either an incredibly slick con man or a pathological liar about having been one. You can't be either of those rings an snot be a sociopath.
As long as we're concerned about veracity, it might be noted that, in the picture posted with the blog, the man between DiCaprio and Hanks isn't Abagnale. It's Steven Spielberg.
Anon --
Ah, thank you, you're right! (How did I not see that?) I'll change that.
what is this the Jerry Springer show ? Is that retard Steve Wilko going to throw people off the stage. Uneducated finger pointing trailer trash calling people sociopaths and narcissists as if the they have a clue. Passing judgement is so unproductive.How disrespectful to this life we are lucky enough to have that you draw conclusions with such tiny amount of facts. So this is what feels like to be a hypocrite.
Mark --
"Passing judgment is so unproductive"?
What exactly is it you just did?
I fell in love with a Covert Narcissist and lived with him for 3 years. He was very manipulative and mentally abusive when his mask slipped revealing his true self. I was unaware and naive to narcissistic abuse. It destroyed my confidence,self worth and sense of security. I've been away from him for a year now and no longer love him, but the damage he did to my mind still has its effects on me thus making me have a hard time trusting any man that finds me attractive bc I'm scared of being in that situation again. Can any of you tell me what is the difference between a Narcissist and a Sociopath?
RNew77 --
Sociopaths are that subs of narcissists who are utterly without conscience, and will say and do absolutely anything to get what they want. They are completely dishonest, disloyal, amoral, impulsive, uninhibited, and, quite often, vicious. If you type "sociopath" into the subject bar of tis blog you can read a lot about them.
Thank you for this discussion! I'm reading the Catch Me If You Can book and this thread has cleared up some of my confusion. Also, the way he regards and writes about women makes me want to take a scalding hot shower.
Anonymous --
Thank you. Yes, no doubt about Abagnale's character. Full disclosure: I can't promise you that my attitude toward women would have always passed muster in this #Metoo age, but I would certainly have never attempted the stunts Abagnale claimed.
Narcissism is a trait we all have. It is merely a question of degree and our own intellect to control or minimise its harmful effects on those we share our lives with. It is the lack of control or the lack of desire to control our bad tendencies that can lead us to be labelled sociopaths. Abagnale states that marriage and fatherhood have changed him - this may be true. But in different circumstances his narcissism could come to the fore again. His lawful life with the FBI and the fame from his previous life are likely to satisfy his narcissism enough that he no longer poses much of a threat. His self-grandiosity is satisfied by his current status as an "expert" and he is able to appear be so which is more important to him than whether he is an expert in reality. He might actually be an expert in reality, but that is not as important to him as what he wants the world to see him as. I am a former UK prison education worker.
Anonymous --
One thing that all the experts on sociopathy agree on is that it never goes away. Sociopaths are forever claiming to be changed men, to have seen the error of their ways, to have turned over a new leaf, etc. But inside, psychologically, they're the same. Look at the Son of Sam. He's now a prison chaplain and claims to spend his life helping people:
https://justnotsaid.blogspot.com/2016/06/son-of-sam-ive-found-my-lifes-calling.html
And here's another post about how he's claimed redemption, but is intact the same person:
https://justnotsaid.blogspot.com/2011/08/redemption-for-son-of-sam.html
You're certainly right about the enardcissism: it is forever a part of the sociopathic personality, and will always find expression somehow. But basic character doesn't change.
Thank you Mr Craig. There is another UK film and book based on a true story about John McVicar. Played by Roger Daltrey of The Who in the film version. The book is more factually autobiographical than Abagnale's. McVicar was a dangerous armed bank robber from around the same era as Abagnale. McVicar obtained a degree in Sociology while in prison and his book contains insights into his own criminal mentality and possible reason's why he did what he did - violent crime - and how education helped him break free from criminality.
My late father, also a prison worker, gets a mention in the book.
Anonymous --
Thank YOU. I have no doubt that people, given the opportunity, can break free from criminality. It's just the sociopathy that never leaves them.
Both you and your father obviously have had far more firsthand experience with criminals than I have. My experience has been more with white collar sociopaths, who tend to obey the letter of the law while evading its spirit; and when they do break the letter, they tend to be quite adept at avoiding consequence for that. There are a lot of them on Wall Street, a lot in Washington DC, and a fair number in Hollywood as well.
You must have things to say about D. Trump and our B. Johnson. But I would keep that to yourself for now, if I were you.
Anonymous --
I'm too stupid to keep my mouth shut. But honestly, I don't think Trump is a sociopath. I've said several times on this blog that I think he's an extremely narcissistic personality, but not a sociopath. Think of it this way: if he were a sociopath, wouldn't be be better at hiding his true nature? Sociopaths lie about the most basic thing: who they are. They pretend to be more noble, more caring, more affectionate, more honest, more loyal than they are. Trump's personalty is more, here I am, warts and all.
I've written plenty of sociopath alerts for politicians from both parties: Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Joe Arpaio, Carly Fiorina, Newt Gingrich, Jesse Jackson, and Wendy Davis. (If you type those names in the subject line of this blog, you'll see the posts.)
I've mocked Trump on several occasions, comparing him to Goldfinger and putting him in a machismo contest vs. el Chapo. But I don't think he's a sociopath. And I don't know much about Boris Johnson's personality, to be honest.
I agree. Trump and Johnson are both extreme narcissists. They both think that their views are so superior that they are above the law - domestic law and international law. Not sociopaths, but extremely dangerous now that they have positions of power. The desire for power and use of it is their only motivation. Obama and Blair are the two best leaders of our countries that I have seen in my lifetime (59 years). Both lawyers and motivated by doing the right thing for the common good.
Anonymous --
You might find this post about what David Cameron thought about Obama interesting:
https://justnotsaid.blogspot.com/2018/01/cameron-didnt-have-bromance-with-obama.html
(it links to a post about what I think of Obama.)
I believe you have it the wrong way round. It is narcissism that never leaves a person's psychological makeup. There is no cure. I might do something impulsive and be labelled, quite rightly, a sociopath for half an hour. I would regret my mistake and never do such a thing again for the rest of my life. I spent a lot of years studying people who had done bad things. Even the violent criminal sociopath, can change his or her ways completely and utterly, but the extreme narcissist will always have that trait within him or her.
Anonymous --
Almost all of the literature on sociopathy states that it's a permanent condition. Sociopaths are forever telling us that they're changed men, that they've learned the error of their ways, that they've turned over a new leaf, etc., but their inner character never changes. A lot of sociopaths claim to feel bad about things they don't feel bad about; but that's just an act.
If you do something bad and feel guilty or embarrassed or ashamed of it, then you're not a sociopath in the first place. (We're all capable of doing bad things, but we're not all capable of those emotions.)
I agree with you about narcissistic personality disorder: it never goes away, either. Character is formed early on.
We appear to be disagreeing merely about terminology and definitions. In my view you have described someone expressing what a judge might call "self-serving remorse". In which case, if their remorse or regret is not genuine then they are likely to continue to be a criminal or threat to others. Someone who lacks empathy could have this trait as an incurable part of their psychological makeup which could always make them a risk to others unless they learn to control, and have a desire to control, the negative affects of this trait. I believe someone displaying sociopathic behaviour can learn to behave in a non-sociopathic way for the rest of their lives, but the root cause - narcissism and/or lack of empathy - will always be with them.
Thank you for a very interesting exchange of ideas.
Anonymous --
Thank you.
Agreed, lack of empathy/sympathy is permanent.
And yes, judges -- and parole boards -- tend to be quite familiar with false shows of contrition.
You do know that Blair knowingly sent troops into battle without proper body armour in an effort to hide that the decision to go to war was made before it was introduced to parliament don't you? I also believe he had David Kelly murdered before he could produce evidence that Blair knew there were no WMDs in Iraq before the war. I can't prove it but it stinks all round. In my view he's a self serving murderous traitor to his country and he ought to be in prison. I'm no psychiatrist but that sounds like sociopathy to me.
Read The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson. It's a hilarious view of the psychopath and the efforts at treatment. Really worth a read.
Cheers John. An interesting take. I was raised by a narcissist and a codependent and have spent many years unpicking the damage. In my view the sociopath, whilst unable to change their basic personality type, can change their behaviour, if circumstances require it, and cease to be harmful to others. The narcissist differs in that their need will always outstrip supply and without intervention they have no capacity to change their behaviour. With extensive therapy they can of course recover though the lack of awareness means that they rarely seek the treatment they need. A narcissistic will likely always be harmful to anyone close to them which makes them infinitely dangerous, particularly as parents or partners. The film does romanticise FWA and paint him as a misunderstood child. It's interesting to dig a little deeper into the darker side of the story.
Anon --
Thank you for that. I did not know those things, but I apparently know less about Blair than I should.
Anon --
Thanks. Don' know if. you're the same "Anonymous" who sent in comments at 6:38 and 6:41, but I'll assume you are.
Yikes, getting raised by a narcissist must be tough. They suck all the air out of a room, and always have to be the center of attention. And if they're not, or if anybody else wants attention, they become angry. I've been around them and they're always wearing, always tiresome, and in the end it's impossible not to despise them.
Agree, narcissists (and sociopaths), unlike neurotics, never see anything wrong with themselves and so never seek psychiatric treatment on their own; usually, if they end up on the couch, it's a court-mandated visit.
You are a liar. Even he acknowledged most of it.
Post a Comment