A Brief look into Criminal Profiling
Forensics has always been one of the subject of my awe and fascination. The field of forensics is vast and a cradle of stories. I will present one such story from the cradle of forensics and the story is about criminal profiling. I am sure if you have read or watched crime and detective stories and shows, then you have come across this term. I do not recall how I got to know about criminal profiling, but it sure did keep me hooked.
Get Anushka Ray’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
We have all heard about the infamous serial killer of London called Jack the Ripper. The first known criminal profiling comes from this particular case. Dr. Thomas Bond was the one who gave an assessment on the killer. He offered insights into the killer’s methods and characteristics, suggesting the Ripper had no medical training despite the extensive mutilations and was likely a solitary individual prone to homicidal mania. One of his statements goes something like this: “A man subject to periodical attacks of homicidal and exotic mania…quite likely to be a quiet, inoffensive-looking man, probably middle-aged…” Unfortunately, we will never know if he was correct or not. But it proved to be one of the foundational steps. Interestingly enough, the first successful case of profiling was during the investigation of the Mad bomber in 1956. The profiling was handled by psychiatrist Dr. James Brussel, and he made detailed accounts about the bomber’s ethnicity, religious background and, astonishingly enough, even his attire. Those accounts were not a hoax rather an accurate judgement. This incident became a milestone in Dr. Brussel’s career, which led to him handling more high-profile cases like the Boston Strangler in 1964.
The Shortfall
Unfortunately, this field has a considerable amount of debate and questions about its legitimacy. The subjects like criminal profiling and behavioral science faced a considerable amount of friction, especially under J. Edgar Hoover’s leadership at the FBI. He felt that cases could only be solved through traditional methods and not by some “sentimental theorizing”. After Hoover’s death, the reign was given to L. Patrick Gray and a door was opened to the reforms that were previously resisted by Hoover. The FBI established BSU at Quantico just 2 years after the death of Hoover. Now, officially it is the era of modern criminal profiling. Profiling became one of the parts of the investigation of cases like Ted Bundy, Green River Killer and so on. The work of agents like John Douglas and Robert Ressler in profiling, helped criminal profiling make a strong impression as an investigative tool.
As usual, the media has glorified the portrayal of criminal profiling and often showcases it as one of the ultimate tools to catch criminals. In reality, this field is still often the topic of debate and has its issue. Most of the controversy comes from its lack of scientific evidence. This stems from the fact that the federal agents that had built this field were of a sociology and criminology background, not a licensed psychologist. One of the popular reports which supports the conjecture of profiling having no validity was the 2011 report in Criminal justice Matters. This report concluded that criminal profiling is more of a myth than a method and this research was done by Psychologist Craig Jackson and his colleagues. The report criticized profiling for relying heavily on speculative psychological traits rather than measurable, testable data.
At the end of the day, even after so much criticism, criminal profiling still holds its place in the method of investigation. The clear lack of scientific evidence was taken into account, but it did not dim its significance. The subject still remains one of the areas of research and debate, but it firmly retains its position.
