I realize that I at times have some colorful descriptions of the people and activity that I see on the interwebz, and am surely called a few choice names myself, but the lack of intelligence by some in the true crime community is mind boggling! After giving it much thought lately – people are just outright dumb asses. I honestly believe that the internet is becoming a gathering place for mentally unhinged and socially stunted individuals. The general consensus is “if I read it on the interwebz and it’s on the TV then *grunt* it must be true!”. No one wants to do their research anymore. They are happy to just swallow whatever said talking head spits down their throats and call it a day. The internet is filled with CREDIBLE information if people would just look for it rather than just implicitly drinking the snake oil that is being fed to them by the media. Implied credibility is NOT real. Just because someone is on television, it does not make them an expert on anything other than tooting their horn and collecting a paycheck for their time.
One of my issues with implied credibility and the media is they continue to have these people on their shows who do not have the professional credentials to speak for their implied professions. The uneducated masses believe that just because Nancy Grace says so — by God this is the truth and this person speaks for all!! Is it because they are just too dumb to care? There is someone who appears regularly on some of the news shows who, in my opinion and according to tard logic, because I say so that might make me an expert, has very questionable credentials. In fact, she has NO real credentials other than those that she has “implied” or created by way of “reading lots of books”. I won’t bother to mention her name. I think everyone knows who it is, but apparently her panties are in a twist because someone in her field got a television series and she didn’t. She is throwing an internet temper tantrum and asking people to boycott the show. NEWSFLASH: she nor Nancy Disgrace have enough viewership to be more than a nuisance to that network.
She issued a diatribe about what profiling is and I’m giggling like a schoolgirl at the irony! The basic idea of profiling is very simple. Its aim is to predict characteristics of the undetected offender(s) from characteristics of the offense(s) and the victims (Farrington, 2007). Criminal profiling is the process of using behavioral evidence left at a crime scene to make inferences about the offender, including inferences about personality characteristics and psychopathology. In its most basic form, profiling is simply the “postdiction of behavior; an action has taken place that allows investigators to make inferences about the person responsible” (Davis & Follette, 2002). It just DOES NOT happen like it does on shows like Criminal Minds.
Profiles are also subjective and contain varying amounts of accuracy, if accurate at all. There is a lack of information regarding cases where profiling made a critical contribution to an investigation, and I have found NO PUBLISHED CASES that said “profiler” has solved or assisted on in a professional capacity – other than making INFERENCE on television and dropping her favorite adjective to describe the psychopath du jour. Can someone please point these cases out to me? Am I just overlooking them? WHAT serial killing cases does she have anything more than IMPLIED knowledge? Help me out here.
The FBI studies previous crimes and criminals and utilizes this information for profiling. However, according to the self-proclaimed profiler — who happens to have neither law enforcement nor psychological background — the murdertainment specialist:
That is pure garbage, Nicole. A serial killer is a pathological liar who makes up crap people want to hear. Secondly, that is not how one profiles serial homicides, by guessing stuff about the murderer. Thirdly, allowing a convicted murderer to be a star is disgusting.
The TV profiler in her hissy fit is doing what psychologists would refer to as projecting. This really made me laugh – “makes up crap people want to hear”. LMAO Isn’t that what SHE does? *caw caw PSYCHOPATH!! caw caw SERIAL KILLER* Does said profiler utilize psychological assessments to determine the cognitive core of the alleged offender? (LMAO – pretty sure the answer to that is NOT).
WHY wouldn’t a serial killer be able to provide information about serial crimes? The early FBI profilers spoke to MANY serial murderers in order to glean knowledge about why they killed. Qualitative interviewing and research is essential in understanding the inner workings of the serial killer’s mind, and that entails SPEAKING to serial killers so that we can understand what makes them tick! Criminal psychologists and forensic psychologists interview criminals all the time in the hopes of determining what makes a criminal mind. Please explain to me how the TV personality is able to squawk PSYCHOPATH! and SERIAL KILLER! without EVER having viewed so much as the investigative files in the cases she “profiles” on television? How does one diagnose a personality disorder without EVER speaking to or interviewing the individual or even administering psychological testing? Buehler? Anyone? Anyone?
I did a lot of reading and research while writing this blog post. I have also read a lot of books, journal articles, peer reviews, DSM-IV-TR, etc. in pursuit of my education in psychology and for my thesis. According to TV profiler logic…does this now make me a criminal profiler? *smirk* You can become a profiler, too. Here’s a link to the BRACE cognitive analysis tool where you can profile Hannibal Lecter. Who knows…if you market yourself well enough you can get on TV just like that other one!! caw caw!!!
Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 51, 486-487.
“offender profiling”: Some lessons of modern cognitive science for the law of evidence.
Cardazo Law Review, 24, 193-285.