Introduction: The Stakes of Not Preventing Profiteering from Crime

Public outrage often flares when stories surface of convicted criminals profiting from their notoriety. Whether it’s a high-profile killer inking a book deal or the sale of movie rights based on real-life tragedy, the idea that criminals could financially benefit from their acts deeply unsettles victims, families, and the wider community. The emergence of the Son of Sam law was a direct response to this problem: how do we prevent offenders from turning a violent past into personal gain, and instead ensure those affected by crime have legal recourse? This article explains the Son of Sam law, its role in the justice system, common misconceptions, and gives practical next steps for those seeking to understand the boundaries between free speech, victims’ rights, and criminal profiteering.

Defining the Son of Sam Law in the U.S. Legal Arena

The Son of Sam law refers to a set of statutes designed to keep criminals from profiting financially from the publicity of their crimes. Named after the infamous serial killer David Berkowitz (“Son of Sam”), who sought to sell his story, these laws exist predominantly at the state level. The legislation arises from a clear need: to prevent book, movie, or interview proceeds from landing directly in offenders’ pockets, redirecting potential profits toward victims or their families.

Why the Son of Sam Law Matters to Victims and Society

For victims, the Son of Sam law represents more than symbolic justice. It actively redirects financial windfalls from criminal publicity into the hands of those most affected, offering a measure of restitution. For the justice system, it helps uphold public confidence, sending a strong message that criminal activity should never become a lucrative enterprise.

How the Son of Sam Law Works: Key Strategies and Implementation Steps

The legal framework behind the Son of Sam law is multifaceted. While the details vary by state, there are several recurring pillars:

1. Identification of Profitable Works

Courts and state victim compensation boards track deals—such as movie rights, publishing contracts, or paid interviews—that stem from a convict’s story. The law usually targets contracts negotiated or proceeds earned as a direct result of a crime.

Decision Point: To qualify, there must be a clear link between crime and profit. For instance, a memoir detailing a criminal act could be reviewed, while unrelated business earnings are not subject to these laws.

2. Escrow and Notification Requirements

Once authorities are notified of such a contract, they can order any profits to be held in escrow for a designated period. This freeze gives victims time to file civil actions, competing claims, or seek damages.

How-To: Victims or their representatives should monitor public records for notices of intent to publish or produce criminal-related material; prompt legal action is often required to intercept proceeds before they are dispersed.

3. Civil Recovery Mechanism

During the escrow window, victims may initiate lawsuits or file claims against the profits. This mechanism prioritizes compensation for victims—sometimes superseding other creditors.

Criteria: Proceeds are awarded based on demonstrable harm or loss from the crime, not simply emotional distress from media exposure.

4. Variations Across States and Free Speech Balancing

Not all Son of Sam laws are identical. Some have been struck down (notably New York’s first iteration in the 1990s) for being too broad and infringing on free speech protections under the First Amendment. Revised statutes now focus more narrowly on works in which criminals directly discuss their offenses.

5. Monitoring and Enforcement Tools

Authorities utilize contract reviews, publisher notifications, and financial tracking to enforce the law. Attention to detail is crucial—failing to notify relevant agencies or victims could allow proceeds to slip through the cracks.

Data & Proof: Measuring the Law’s Reach and Challenges

Key Statistics on the Impact of Son of Sam Laws

• In New York, only about $5,500 was collected under the original Son of Sam law from 1977 to 1990, despite at least 200 contracts being reported (New York State Crime Victims Board, 1991).
• Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1991 ruling (Simon & Schuster v. Crime Victims Board), 41 states either revised or re-examined their Son of Sam statutes for compliance with First Amendment protections (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2022).
• The National Crime Victim Bar Association reports that two-thirds of civil recovery efforts for criminal profits ultimately result in settlements favoring victims (NCVBA, 2020).
• A 2019 survey found that fewer than 20% of eligible earnings under revised Son of Sam laws are actually intercepted and delivered to victims, partly due to lack of notice or enforcement gaps (Justice Policy Institute, 2019).

What the Data Means for Victims, Families, and Advocates

These statistics reveal both successes and persistent gaps. While the Son of Sam law remains an important protection, procedural hurdles and free speech challenges mean many victims still miss out on intended compensation. For advocates, this underscores the need for vigilance, legal support, and policy refinement.

Practical Examples: The Law in Action and Its Limitations

Example A: David Berkowitz (“Son of Sam”) and Book Deals

When David Berkowitz’s story attracted publisher interest, New York’s original Son of Sam law was invoked, requiring profits to be diverted to victim compensation. However, constitutional challenges limited enforcement, prompting revision but also raising awareness and setting a national legislative precedent. This case led to tangible changes in victim notification protocols and civil lawsuit strategies.

Example B: Mobster Memoirs and First Amendment Litigation

The memoirs of Henry Hill, an ex-mobster whose life inspired the film “Goodfellas,” triggered a Son of Sam law claim. However, legal ambiguities over what constituted “profits from crime” and Hill’s indirect storytelling led the courts to side with Hill, citing overreach and threats to free speech. The contrast with the Berkowitz case highlights the importance of precise statutory language and rigorous case-by-case analysis.

Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

Confusing All Earnings with Crime Profits:
A common error is assuming that any income earned by a notorious criminal qualifies under the Son of Sam law. Only profits directly tied to the retelling or depiction of the crime are subject.

Missing Notification Deadlines:
Victims or their advocates may lose compensation opportunities if they don’t respond promptly to public notices or publisher disclosures.

Overbroad Claim Filing:
Attempts to seize all a convict’s assets, not just crime-derived earnings, risk constitutional challenge and dismissal.

Neglecting Federal vs. State Differences:
Some crimes fall under federal jurisdiction, where similar but distinct statutes apply. Understanding local vs. national remedy is essential.

Implementation Checklist for Victims, Advocates, and Lawmakers

• Monitor Public Records and News: Stay alert for announcements of book, movie, or media deals by known offenders.
• Notify Victim Compensation Boards: Early contact ensures that any proceeds are earmarked appropriately.
• Consult with Legal Counsel: Assess the merits and timing of civil action based on contract details and statutory windows.
• Gather Evidence: Assemble documentation linking the creative work to the underlying crime.
• File Claims Promptly: Respect statutory deadlines to ensure claims are not barred.
• Track Escrow Accounts: Follow up with relevant agencies to confirm that funds are secured during litigation.
• Stay Informed on Changes: Laws evolve; periodic review of statutory updates helps maintain eligibility and awareness.

Conclusion: The Path Forward with the Son of Sam Law

The Son of Sam law remains a vital—if imperfect—tool for preventing criminals from profiting off their crimes at the expense of victims’ dignity and justice. Its evolution reflects the ongoing tension between free expression and the rights of those harmed by crime. For victims, advocates, and policymakers alike, the key is vigilant monitoring, swift legal action, and a nuanced understanding of how these statutes work. As you confront questions about criminal profiteering and victims’ rights, use these strategies, examples, and checklists to ensure that the law operates as intended: protecting the vulnerable and denying notoriety as a path to profit.

FAQs

What is the primary purpose of the Son of Sam law?
The Son of Sam law is designed to prevent convicted criminals from profiting financially from publicity about their crimes. Its main purpose is to ensure that such profits, if generated, are available to compensate victims or their families.

How does the Son of Sam law affect book and movie deals?
If a criminal attempts to sell the rights to their story, any resulting profits are subject to the Son of Sam law’s escrow and notification process. Victims have a window to file claims for civil damages using these proceeds.

Can all earnings by a criminal be seized under Son of Sam laws?
No, only profits derived directly from crime-related works—like memoirs or interviews about the offense—are covered. Other income sources are not subject to seizure under these laws.

Are Son of Sam laws the same in every state?
There are important variations between state laws. Some focus narrowly on specific types of works, while others have broader or stricter requirements, often in response to court rulings regarding free speech.

What should victims do if they suspect a criminal is attempting to profit from a crime?
Victims or their advocates should promptly notify the relevant state victim compensation board and seek legal counsel to initiate any potential claims under the Son of Sam law.