This case is complex. Before delving into my observations, I want to emphasise that nothing justifies taking a life intentionally, nothing justifies premeditated murder. However, it is crucial to understand how abusive, coercive, and controlling behaviours can push someone into last-resort thinking. This case underscores the importance of educating children and young people about coercive control, its impact, and the relevant laws.

Alex Rodder was undeniably engaging in coercive and controlling behaviour toward Matthew Mason and being paid for sex.

According to his friend, Alex treated it as a game, enjoying the financial exploitation of Matthew to fund his lifestyle.

He identified Matthew’s vulnerabilities and used them for his personal gain. While Matthew played a role in this dynamic, there is no denying that Alex knew exactly what he was doing. He was aware of Matthew’s deep-seated shame regarding his sexuality, shame likely stemming from his background in a religious farming family.

Understanding this, Alex manipulated Matthew’s fear of exposure. Not only exposure of his sexuality but also of the fact Mathew had willingly engaged in sexual activity with a minor.

Alex’s coercive tactics were blatant. When asked by a friend what he would do if Matthew stopped paying him, he responded, "I’ll report it to the Fed and get him on the sex offenders register." This statement illustrates that Alex knew he was engaging in an illegal sexual relationship but was prepared to use it against Matthew.

Coercive control does not emerge from nowhere, it is learned and observed. While exposure to online influencers, peers, and social interactions plays a role, the home environment is also a critical factor. Alex’s parents were divorced, and his father had moved on with a new partner while his mother remained single. Though details about his home life are limited, it is worth questioning what behaviours Alex may have been exposed to that contributed to his manipulative tendencies.

Lack of Parental Oversight

One pressing question is why Alex’s mother did not question the sudden influx of money he was spending.

He was 15, not employed, yet had the means to purchase new clothes frequently. If she had concerns about Matthew and disliked him from the outset, why was Alex left unsupervised in situations where he could be alone with Matthew? If she had such high concerns, why did she leave her 15-year-old son unsupervised in the first place? This raises significant concerns about parental oversight and the recognition of warning signs.

The case makes it clear that Alex’s behaviour played a role in Matthew’s premeditated decision to commit murder. While Matthew was the adult and knew his actions were illegal, Alex was also aware of this and used it as leverage. Both parties were in the wrong, Matthew should have known better, regardless of temptation, as he was the adult, and Alex knowingly manipulated the situation to his advantage.

Matthew’s fear of exposure, rejection by his family, and humiliation among his peers and community led him to believe that murder was his only way out. Instead of reporting the situation to the police and facing legal consequences for his actions, he chose a devastating path, one that resulted in two families losing their sons. Matthew is now in prison, and Alex has lost his life.