On Criminal Profiling

A brief tract on criminal profiling

A Guide for the Amateur Criminal Profiler

 

                Profiling is an art form, first and foremost. Science supports it’s suppositions, but the gathering of and compiling of these suppositions into a coherent whole is very much an art form. Data Data Data is what profiling is built upon. As the eminent FBI profiler John Douglas has reiterated, “to understand the artist, you must understand his work.”

                First, know that every nook and cranny of a crime scene, every bit of data seen and unseen offers “behavioral evidence.” The more unique a crime scene, the more behavioral evidence and the more specialized the profile should be. In cases of basic crimes, like a simple mugging at gun point, profiling is useless precisely because there is very little to no behavioral evidence.

                In analyzing behavioral evidence, always ask the questions pertaining to first principles. What is a thing in itself? What is it’s nature? What psychological or biological drives motivate this thing? Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity! Brevity is the soul of truth!

                A basic knowledge of the hard sciences that make up criminalistics are of course necessary as well. Finger print analysis, toxicology, forensic ondontology, tool and weapon mark analysis, forensic anthropology, autopsies and their protocol, etc. etc. One does not have to be a master of all these fields, just understand that they are valuable sources of data to compile a profile and see inside the mind of the UNSUB (unknown subject).

                The art form comes in the use of forensic psychology and psychiatry, statistics, and inductive/deductive logic. John Douglas was a part of the FBI study on a variety of criminals, which gathered much of what we know statistically about lust murderers and other types of criminal, like product tampering, arson, and kidnapping. A knowledge of these scientifically tested statistics are essential. If a piece of behavioral evidence is very ambiguous and open to a variety of interpretations, go with the most statistically likely, until contravening evidence appears or you are confirmed right.

                A knowledge of psychology and body language (in an interrogation session) is also essential to an accurate profile. There are, of course, many schools of psychology, particularly: Freudian, Adlerian, Jungian (“analytic psychology”), Behaviorist, and Gestalt. I prefer to ground my interpretations, my psychological suppositions based on evidence, in Jungian psychological theory and in biology for three reasons: 1- Jung’s analytic psychology offers the greatest amount of flexibility in it’s application while also proffering a clear, understandable, and rational framework as to the human psyche’s structure. 2- Analytic psychology is the only psychological school that puts a heavy emphasis on symbology and man’s capacity for creating symbols, and symbolism is often an integral part of crime scenes. 3- Jung’s theory of the complexes is in my estimation the best way to understand a crime scene, the complexes interplay with biology.

                I will address Jung and body language in separate tracts here.  

Author's Note

A bit on my interpretation of profiling

Reviews

[KatDarkness]

Very interesting, I look forward to reading more :) criminal Profiling has always interested me, but up until now it has been hard for me to find easy-to-read yet informative, well-written information on the subject. Well-worded and great writing, I really enjoyed reading it :)

[ValBonScallon]

Thanks Kat! I promise to review a few more of your pieces here very soon!

If you pick up any book by John Douglas ("MindHunter" is my favorite) he is very readable and he breaks down profiling's dynamics. Also Robert Ressler. Ressler is senior to Douglas in the FBI's BAU but both men compiled the statistical data I mentioned.