The Madeleine McCann Case and Occam's Razor

This post isn't really a commentary on the Madeleine McCann case but this case does so well represent Occam's Razor in crime analysis that I feel a need to use it as an example. In my blog yesterday, "It Just Doesn't Work that Way in Real Life,"  I discussed how shows like Death in Paradise have very complicated scenarios of how a murder was committed, the perpetrator being practically a genius of planning and misdirection. I pointed out how rarely is this the case in real life; almost always, homicides are usually acts of desperation born of loss of power and control. Crimes of passion (quite mislabeled as passion being the motive), also known as "out-of-character" crimes (which is also a mislabel as the crime is quite within the character of the person committing it) are relatively impulsive, so planning is quite minimal. Serial killers are mostly of the anger-retaliatory type and rarely plan the crime much in advance; usually they are opportunistic and strike when they have a victim that wanders into their territory alone or, while doing their usually trolling of an area, finally get lucky when a target appears with no witnesses in the area. The reason they get away with their crimes is simply the fact that most of the time there are no witnesses and they are strangers to the victim and there is no obvious link for the police to follow. As long as they don't leave DNA that can be matched to a DNA bank, they have a good shot of getting away with their homicides.

Much rarer is someone who plans a homicide: a black widow poisoning her husbands, a man getting rid of his wife so he can have his freedom, a boyfriend eliminating a pregnant girlfriend. Usually the crime is not all that clever, it is just often hard to prove in a court of law that the killer is guilty. Much of the time, the body is well-hidden so that the "no-body, no proof of a crime" rule applies. At other times, the crime is staged as a stranger homicide and it works but not because it is so intricately planned. It simply works because evidence is limited to prove otherwise.

Killers are generally of normal intelligence who commit their crimes without great forethought and they also tend to cover their tracks in a hurried manner. Murderers don't think to the depth of perpetrators on television or in the movies; they just rush to take care of the problem and, in doing so, act in a manner that many others in their shoes have acted before. In real life, crimes are often committed and covered up in similar ways, the way humans act when under pressure and with the limited knowledge most have at the time of the crime and while under stress.

I am repeatedly encouraged in the McCann case to do further research on a number of issues that some believe proves Madeleine McCann died earlier in the week and that on May 3rd, the McCanns and their friends had a preplanned course of action to stage an abduction. They believe there is lots of evidence proving that Madeleine was dead for days by then: incorrect creche records, a manipulated photo, no sightings of Madeleine, odd behaviors, and no neglect of the children. I am not going to argue all of this: I am going to point out Occam's Razor and why have always thought that May 3rd was the key to what happened to Madeleine and when.

If something had happened to Madeleine days before, we simply would have seen her "abduction" staged earlier in the week. In real life, planning to stage an abduction for days and having to manipulate evidence of Madeleine being alive for days when she was not, is simply too bloody difficult to manage. Then, on May 3rd, after all that planning, the whole evening was an ungodly mess full of inconsistencies and errors, which would be odd for a so carefully premeditated scenario.

If the McCanns are guilty, what May 3rd represents is a disaster, as Gerry pointed out, and a quick attempt to over up that disaster. The simplest answer, Occam's Razor, is that May 3rd was a confusion because very little was planned and when it was (interviews with the police), it was still a confused mess because there was little time to think anything through and everyone's brains were a muddle.

The key to this crime is very simple: the Smith sighting. The Smith sighting has always been my Number One reason for doubting the McCanns' innocence in the disappearance of Madeleine. The most consistent behavior of parents of missing children is to want EVERY lead followed, even ridiculous ones. On the evening of May 3rd, the Smith family saw a child who could have been Madeleine being carried off towards the sea, yet the McCanns expressed little interest in this sighting and even tried to suppress it. If the McCanns were innocent and Gerry was not Smithman, and even if they thought Jane was telling the truth, that Tannerman existed and might have been the kidnapper,  it is hard to believe they would not have been gung-ho to follow-up that Smith sighting in every way possible, the way they did with Tannerman.

Applying Occam's Razor, why would they ignore and suppress the Smith sighting? What is the simplest of explanations? Because it was Gerry and he was in the act of covering up a crime that had just occurred. The reason Gonçalo Amaral believed this to be so is because he is a real-world detective and knows that Occam's Razor applies in crime investigation and the fanciful stuff you see on television is concocted by writers who need to come up with a show that is exciting to the viewers.

Detectives and profilers often are driven nuts by family members and citizens who, when a case goes unsolved, start going bonkers with unlikely theories, full of very intricate plots. They figure, if no one has been arrested and convicted, it must be because the crime is so complicated and clever.

In real life, it is often so much simpler; the crime is straightforward but it is hard to prove in court.


Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

April 21, 2015




By Pat Brown

Rating: 

Published: July 27, 2011


What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.

Ten Pieces of Evidence You Should NOT Become a Profiler

At least not yet. Not now. Maybe when you grow up. Actually, maybe never.

I get emails all the time from people - teens and college students, from those in their thirties and forties and from some quite mature in age - who want to become profilers and so they write me for advice. I answer some of them when they impress me enough to make me want to spend my time responding, but a good many emails just cause me to roll my eyes and hit the delete button. If your email, Ms. or Mr. Profiler Wannabee is in the trash bin, here are ten reasons why you might think about another career.


1) Dear Mr. Brown.....

If you can't even bother to find out the sex of the person you are emailing, your laziness or lack of interest in doing the smallest bit of investigation shows me you aren't going to spend enough time doing analysis on a case to do it properly.

2) Hi. I am starting my own agency and would like some advice.

Learn to write an email and don't go into business because you really aren't very good at it.

3) Dear Ms. Brown, can you recommend some books I should read to learn more about profiling?

Yeah, how about mine?

4) I keep picking abusive men to be in a relationship with, so I have a lot of experience with bad men and I think being a criminal profiler would be a great fit for me.

Hmm....no....because you suck at profiling.

5) I think Casey Anthony is innocent and if I were a profiler, I could have helped the police find the real killer of Caylee.

Hmm....no...because you suck at profiling.

6) I am a woman who just retired from my job at age 65 and I am thinking about going back to college (I am a HS grad) to become a profiler. Do you think I have a chance of working in the field?

::sigh::I wish..but, let's be realistic. There are hardly any jobs in profiling in today's world and by the time you get a master's degree, you will be in your seventies....so really? Do you really think you can get hired at that age when you are competing against young men and women, especially young men who have worked in law enforcement and the military? I won't tell you you shouldn't try but I could make really good money placing a bet against your chances of success.

7) Dear Ms. Brown, I find serial killers really pretty cool and I have been told I might be psychopathic myself so I could probably get inside their heads. Would I make a good profiler?

Dear Mr. Psycho, I am not saying you won't find a criminal profiler with a personality disorder, but I would hardly call that a qualification. However, I will keep you in mind if women start dropping dead in your area.

8). Hi. I think profling is kool I wnat to be one what should I do next

Learn how to read and write.

9) Dear Ms. Brown, I want to be a profiler but I can't stand to look at crime scene photos. Can I be one anyway?

No.

10) Ms. Brown, I want a super exciting career like those profilers in Criminal Minds. I want to chase serial killers and stop them from committing their next murder. What do you think I should do?

Find another career. Profiling is nothing like Criminal Minds and if you don't find studying photos and police reports and interviews something fascinating to do eight hours straight every day with just a break for lunch, you need become a street cop or  join the Marines.


If you sent one of the above emails to me, now you know why you have never heard back!


Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

November 25, 2014

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: About The Profiler: My Life Hunting Serial KIllers and Psychopaths

Since my new book, The Profiler: My Life Hunting Serial Killers and Psychopaths (co-written with Bob Andelman) has hit the stands, I have been fielding many questions about my entrance into profiling, my profiling work and the cases in the book. But, today, I am going to respond to some interesting comments made on Amazon.

As I expected would occur when The Profiler came out, I would have some great reviews and some not so great reviews. I am lucky to have people who are wonderful supporters of me and my work, but there are others who simply despise me, for whatever reasons. Since I am very outspoken about my beliefs about profiling, criminals, and crime, I can expect to get a number of detractors. Some people I just rub the wrong way and that is life. Some people rub me the wrong way too but they have folks who think they are great! It takes all kinds of us to make the world go round.

As I read through my Amazon reviews, I saw some legitimate criticisms and some bizarre criticisms and some folks that didn't understand something about me and the book. So, I am going to try to clear at least a few of these things up.


1) Although Pat's Brown's renter was weird, there was obviously not enough to warrant an investigation by the police

Actually, the police reopened the case six years later and brought the renter in, interrogated him, polygraphed him, DNA'd him, and investigated him. He is still the Number One suspect and he lives one mile down the road from me.

2) Pat makes wild guesses, follows her "gut."

I find this criticism amusing because one of the big points I make in the book is that too much profiling HAS been guesswork and gut feelings. I promote the scientific method and for each determination I make, I support my conclusions with physical and behavioral evidence.

3) Pat may have a degree in Criminal Justice, but she is not a psychologist or scientific researcher in human factors. I have to believe in her mind her TV appearances and radio show appearances have qualified her as a premier profiler.

In the book, I address the educational requirements criminal profilers should have. Many people think a criminal profiler should be a psychiatrist or psychologist and others think criminal profilers should be forensic scientists. But, in reality, much of what one learns in graduate level college programs in these fields does not apply to profiling. And, if one studies just one of these fields, then one lacks the needed understanding from the other fields. Criminal profiling draws from psychology, forensics, and investigations and then adds in crime scene reconstruction and profiling methodology. In order to meet these needs, I have developed the first criminal profiling certificate program in the country and I am developing The Pat Brown School of Criminal Profiling.

It IS true that being on television does not make one a profiler; it makes one a commentator. I don't profile on television; I discuss crime and the criminal mind and what might have happened based on what the media is telling us.

4) "Offender profiling is a method of identifying the perpetrator of a crime based on an analysis of the nature of the offense and the manner in which it was committed. Various aspects of the criminal's personality makeup are determined from his or her choices before, during, and after the crime.[1] This information is combined with other relevant details and physical evidence, and then compared with the characteristics of known personality types and mental abnormalities to develop a practical working description of the offender." Pat doesn't profile; she just does detective work.

I understand where this person is coming from. It may well seem that I am just doing what detectives do; that I don't "profile" because I don't do what is known as "offender profiling." And I don't do offender profiling because I do not believe in it. This kind of profiling is very generalized and when profilers look at a series of linked crimes, they often apply a whole slew of characteristics from one subgroup of offenders to that particular offender. I have never found these "profiles" to be of much value; they are based on statistics and somewhat questionable research conclusions and they use for catching criminals has not been proven. I DO describe something about the kind of person who committed a crime, what his motive is, and what behaviors he exhibited in the crime and what I expect him to exhibit outside of the crime scene. but based on the evidence at that specific crime scene or scenes and while there are some general groups offenders fall into, I believe in being more specific about the perpetrator in each crime. I base my description of him on evidence and I do not use confusing academic labels and general characteristics (based on everyone in the supposed group he falls in to).

My style of profiling is deductive profiling requires a thorough crime reconstruction and analysis of all the evidence before one can start addressing the offender's characteristics. And although the offender may fall in some broad category, I will not make any inferences about him based on that offender group alone.

5) Pat Brown is a homemaker who read some books.

Wow! Am I still 34 years old? Cool! Actually, 20 years ago I read the 400 books that helped me understand the field. This was just the beginning of my education, training, and practice of profiling. This comment that makes me the saddest of all that I have read that is negative. It is so hard for women, even in this country and day and age, to move up in certain professions and it is all the more difficult if they are over forty. I am hoping to inspire women and open doors for them. Sometimes women are their own worst enemy when they attack the relatively few women who made some progress in very male professions. We should stick together and cheer each other on, shouldn't we?

6) If Pat Brown can profile, then all these cases should have been prosecuted.

Oh, don't I wish! But when a profiler is brought in years later, most of the time the evidence is gone. This is why the profiler needs to be part of the original investigative team. If the profiler is there when the crime is fresh, an excellent analysis can send the detectives in the correct direction where they can find the evidence and preserve it.

6) Pat Brown is paranoid, narcissistic, psychopathic, and creepy.

Oh, dear, maybe that is why I understand psychopaths so well; it takes one to know one?

The Profiler: My Life Hunting Serial Killers and Psychopaths wasn't written to impress folks or to defend my work. It is meant to bring the truth to people about killers that are living among us, how the system is struggling, how justice is getting waylaid, how profiling really should be done, and how profiling can make a difference in solving cases if only the police would use it when the case is still very young. I hope one day, someone will pick the book up off a dusty used bookstore shelf, read it, and think, "Wow! Can you believe that they once waited for years to bring a profiler in?" I hope one day the country will have a profiler in every major police department and profilers available to help all the smaller police agencies.

If I wake up one day to that world, I will know my efforts have been worth it.


Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Developing Profiling Theories

What if I were to have an opportunity to analyze the case of the missing woman, Christy Cornwell of Blairsville, Georgia? What would I look at as a profiler?

1. I would start with the phone call from the boyfriend. I would read his interview about what she said on that phone and how she said it. I would want to know if her voice always sounded like it was close to the phone or if it were distant (like she dropped the phone). I would want to know what else he heard. Other people talking? Sound of the vehicle? I would want to know why he didn't call 911 before he called Christy's mother.

2. I would want the boyfriend's alibi. Yes, the phone call supposedly came out of Atlanta. I would still want to prove he was there and HE made the phone call or received the phone call from Christy.

3. I would go to the site where she was allegedly abducted. Do I see signs of a struggle? (or do the photos show evidence of this?). Are there absolute signs of this like more than one set of footprints, car tire marks, etc? Or could Kristy have staged the crime and tossed some of her items there to make it look like an abduction.

4. I would want to check the site where the phone was found to see how long it would take to get there and why the phone would end up there. Are there signs of it being tossed? What kind of phone is it? Why did it go dead when the boyfriend said he was talking to Christy? If he heard her scream, "Don't take me", it should still have been in her hand. Why did it end up in the vehicle? Why wasn't it dropped where she was abducted? Why wouldn't the abductors have ripped it from her hand? Do we see other calls on the phone after the boyfriend's call? Is it a flip phone or a slide phone? What can we learn from it?

3. I would want to check the history of Christy, including her own victimology and personality profile, and that of her exes and her boyfriends. I would want to know all her friends and acquaintances and all the people she works with and has worked with (including those criminals she dealt with). I want to know Christy's habits especially her habit of walking at night and the routes she would have been seen on. If this wasn't her regular route, why not?

4. I would want to find any video of the roads she might have gone down after the fact. I would want to know any bus stations and motels near the area. I would want to verify any possible way Christy could have slipped away if it was a staged crime. I also want to know all possible routes for abductors and places they could hole up.

5. I would want to canvass the neighborhood for information and be sure to put out clear information to bring in tips on vehicles, possible suspects, and any strange behaviors observed.

6. The timeline of the crime is VERY important. When was Christy last seen and by whom? We must be sure no assumptions are being made. For example, let's say no one actually had seen her since 4 PM. Christy's boyfriend picks her up, they get in a fight, he kills her. He goes and hides her body, dumps a ripped shirt and one shoe on the road and then goes to his buddy. He gives his buddy the phone and tells him to wait for his call. He drives to Atlanta and then calls his buddy. They talk a few minutes and then he tells him to get in the car and drive two miles down from the dumped clothes and toss the phone. His buddy drives down the road and tells Christy's boyfriend, "Dumping the phone now!" Boyfriend then immediately calls Christy's mom to tell her that Christy has just been "taken." He has the perfect alibi.

Now, I am not saying the above scenario happened, but you can see how each piece of information must be checked and analyzed and connected with each other piece of information. This is how one does a crime reconstruction which leads to a profile. Then, we can eliminate any theory that cannot be true and find which theory is supported by the evidence. For example"

Christy's boyfriend has an alibi for the entire day in Atlanta. He was in an all-day meeting with ten people. BOYFRIEND IS NOT INVOLVED.

Christy's body is found and she has been strangled. CHRISTY DID NOT STAGE THE INCIDENT.

A video is found at a store with Christy being held hostage by some men with guns demanding money from convenience stores. SERIAL KILLERS ARE NOT INVOLVED.

A profile always depends on evidence. If new evidence comes in, the profile can change. Right now, I have so little information on this crime, I haven't a clue to what happened. If I were working with the police, I am sure this would be different. We will have to wait and see what evidence is given to the public next.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Pet Profiler Right on the Money

Somtimes you just need a laugh and this pet profiler is spot on! Of course, I am a cat owner (two Bengels)so this analysis just put me on the floor. I don't know who wrote it and it is all over the net, but just in case you missed it, enjoy!

Pet Diaries

Excerpts from a Dog's Daily Diary:

8:00 am - Dog food! My favorite thing!
9:30 am - A car ride! My favorite thing!
9:40 am - A walk in the park! My favorite thing!
10:30 am - Got rubbed and petted! My favorite thing
12:00 pm - Lunch! My favorite thing!
1:00 pm - Played in the yard! My favorite thing!
3:00 pm - Wagged my tail! My favorite thing!
5:00 pm - Milk bones! My favorite thing!
7:00 pm - Got to play ball! My favorite thing!
8:00 pm - Wow! Watched TV with the people! My favorite thing!
11:00 pm - Sleeping on the bed! My favorite thing!


Excerpts from a Cat's Daily Diary:

Day 683 of my captivity:
My captors continue to taunt me with bizarre little dangling
objects. They dine lavishly on fresh meat, while the other inmates
and I are fed hash or some sort of dry nuggets. Although I
make my contempt for the rations perfectly clear, I nevertheless
must eat something in order to keep up my strength.
The only thing that keeps me going is my dream of escape. In
an attempt to disgust them, I once again vomit on the floor.
Today I decapitated a mouse and dropped its headless body at
their feet. I had hoped this would strike fear into their hearts,
since it clearly demonstrates what I am capable of. However,
they merely made condescending comments about what a "good little
hunter" I am. The audacity!
There was some sort of assembly of their accomplices tonight.
I was placed in solitary confinement for the duration of the event.
However, I could hear the noises and smell the food. I overheard
that my confinement was due to someone's "allergies." I
must learn what this means, and how to use it to my advantage.
Today I was almost successful in an attempt to assassinate one of
my tormentors by weaving around his feet as he was walking. I
must try this again tomorrow -- but at the top of the stairs.
I am convinced that the other prisoners here are flunkies and
snitches. The dog receives special privileges. He is regularly
released and seems to be more than willing to return. He is
obviously a loser.
The bird has got to be an informant. I observe him communicating
with the guards regularly. I am certain that he reports my every
move. My captors have arranged protective custody for him in an
elevated cell, so he is safe ........... for now...


Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Criminal Profiling 101

I began writing this post about my observations of Gerry and Kate McCann for the purpose of our discussion here on the disappearance of little Madeleine. The Spanish television interview of Gerry and Kate McCann was actually the first time I studied anything about the case. Yes, I know, I may be one of five people on the planet that doesn’t know anything about it, but circumstances have kept me from following this or any other case lately. Anyway, I started to go back in time to observe other things about the McCann’s statements and behavior as well as any available facts and crime scene evidence to see if my observations were supported. I did not find much reliable information, let alone fact, that could be used to support anything. After reading several press and media reports and associated discussion, what I did find is that we have the very best discussion going on anywhere here at The Daily Profiler.

Emotions always run high when people discuss the disappearance of a small child, and generally, their comments reflect these emotions and are not based on logical thought or scientific fact. However, I am very impressed with several of the comments made here on our blog. Perhaps because the events and behavior exhibited by many of those involved is unusual (OK-bizarre), and not easily attributed to factors we are familiar with, it has caused many to think a little deeper. Many of our readers have shown some good critical thinking skills in their comments and the questions they raise. So when I saw the extent of unconfirmed information attributed to “unnamed sources close to the investigation” that is being reported as fact by many members of the press it gave me the idea to change the focus of my post from the McCanns to how critical thinking is applied in criminal profiling and investigation. It is also very useful for reading your daily newspaper in general. I kept the first paragraph from the post I started writing about the McCanns to explain some of what criminal profiling is about. Here goes….

It is important to keep the following in mind, but maybe not for the reason you think. I’ll explain in a moment. I want to make it clear that this is not a professional analysis of the McCann case, nor a critical review of any law enforcement officer, agency, technique, or procedure; and I certainly am not attempting to make a clinical diagnosis of any kind. The only person qualified to diagnose diseases and disorders of the body and mind is a clinician or doctor; and plenty of them have no business doing it either. Oops. Bet I just lost a few of you there. Well not so fast Grasshopper. Stay with me please.

You may disagree with my low regard of doctors and so dismiss what I said out of hand. Or maybe you took offense at my statement and think I’m full of crap, this is boring, etc; which it may very well be for those not interested in learning about criminal profiling and investigations. Others may have thought “I didn’t know there are bad doctors” and now you believe it as fact, simply because you read it here.

Guess what? WE ARE ALL WRONG!!! My comment about doctors and the example reactions above is called Bias.

We all carry around our own preconceived ideas and opinions on issues of small and large importance whether we consciously realize it or not. It is difficult to avoid since we are continuously bombarded with information designed to influence our opinion. This information comes from newspapers, radio, television, and personal contact with others. Here are some ways critical thinking is used to evaluate a particular claim or statement:

What is the statement or claim, and who is making it?

Before you accept information as fact, determine if the person has something to gain by making the statement. You must also ask yourself if your own assumptions or preconceptions have created bias or influence how you view someone else’s statements or ideas.

Great credibility is associated with public figures and persons in positions of authority, and while we can learn from them on subjects within their field of expertise, their statements or claims should not prevent you from asking good questions of your own.

Are there other plausible explanations for the statement or claim (or event)?

It is possible to have two or more explanations that explain an event or claim. The Law of Parsimony says we should accept the simpler explanation that requires the least number of assumptions.

When events or behaviors appear to be correlated, it does not prove that one event or behavior caused the other. Further investigation is required to discover if they are related because of a third event or behavior.

An open mind free of preconceptions allows for objective evaluation of facts and evidence. Therefore, bias must be identified and removed from critical thought and scientific analysis to produce reliable results and appropriate conclusions.

Sorry, I am going to get a little technical here because it is necessary to understand a little about scientific inquiry in order to apply it.

Scientific principles are the foundation of all scientific inquiry. Modern forensic and other biological sciences are supported by three thoroughly tested and validated principles based on the knowledge that all living and non-living matter is governed by the same laws of physics and chemistry. These principles are natural casualty (all events can be traced to natural causes within our ability to understand), uniformity in space and time (natural laws do not change with time or distance), and common perception (people view natural events in a similar manner.) Common perception applies only to scientific study because it is limited to objective observations that produce reliable information. Common perception does not apply to subjective value systems that vary among individuals such as religious, moral, or cultural beliefs and personal views, or opinion. The ability to keep an open mind is elemental to the advancement of science. Scientific conclusions are always tentative and subject to modification required by new observations or experiments.

Yes, Deductive Criminal Profiling and Behavior Analysis is a scientific endeavor because it uses the scientific method to draw conclusions based on known facts borne of objective observations, considered thought, accurate communication, skill, and experience. A criminal profile is derived from crime scene analysis, including physical evidence and Victimology, critical thinking, analytical logic, evidence dynamics, and other scientific principles used in forensics. The scientific method is applied to these elements producing logical deductions that lead to well-reasoned conclusions regarding offender characteristics and behavioral evidence. Therefore, arguments that support each offender characteristic are based on the premise that if the underlying facts and evidence are proven to be true, then so must be the logical conclusions arrived at by studying them. Imagine the affect bias, no matter how small, can have on making observations when evaluating evidence and other investigative tasks.

Why is all this important? For starters, when a criminal profiler is part of a criminal investigation, they, like everyone else who discovered, processed, or evaluated evidence in the case can be called to testify in court. Identifying the suspect of a crime is not enough; the methods and evidence used to identify and build a case against a suspected offender must be sufficient to convict him in court.

Removing the influences of bias from our work does not mean we have completely eliminated a particular opinion or preconception from our minds and so we must constantly remain vigilant for bias.

Those in law enforcement and related fields as well as professions such as physicians, etc. who work closely with the general public on an individual basis are taught to maintain an emotional distance from the people they interact with in order to be objective which will allow them to be thorough and accurate in the performance of their duty. Since these types of professionals often meet individuals experiencing trauma, or some other extremely personal or stressful event, great importance is placed on leaving their emotions at the door.

Sorry, but lack of emotion does not equal objectivity- nor does it increase productivity in many cases. Additionally, it is generally believed that separating ones emotions from personal contact with individuals helps maintain mental health by preventing emotional overload and burn out for these types of professionals. In the last 24 years, I have met many investigators who were the “no emotion” type. I can’t think of one who was not an asshole with the personality of a wet dishrag, often with poor interview skills. Remember- canvassing, re-canvassing, interviewing, and re-interviewing are very critical in successful investigations. You get the picture.

Conversely, an effective criminal profiler must possess a range of valuable professional characteristics including an enduring passion for examining facts, seeking answers, and resolving cases combined with the unwavering self-discipline to put aside personal opinions, pride, and career ambition. Notice the word “passion” which infers emotion. Pride and ambition are common sources of bias; yet these qualities are allowed, even admired and encouraged by many law enforcement agencies. Moreover, these influences have proven to be at the least, minor impediments, and at most, disastrous to an investigation or even to public safety. Since we must identify bias to avoid its influence, it should be considered that emotions such as passion and empathy could be useful qualities for those in public service as it can be a powerful motivation to promote dedicated effort. It is entirely possible to perform objective analysis and evaluation of victims, witnesses, and evidence if one remains vigilant of all forms of bias by using critical thinking techniques to purposely avoid bias such as personal opinion and ambition from influencing deductions and conclusions.

Donna Weaver

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Malcolm Gladwell Disses Criminal Profilers

There is an article in the New Yorker this week by Malcolm Gladwell and he pretty much compares criminal profilers to charlatans and con artists. I can’t really get mad at the guy because I understand where he is coming from and why he is so annoyed at the what criminal profilers have claimed they are capable of predicting through crime scene analysis. I, myself, have been baffled at how some conclusions have been reached by a review of the evidence of the crime scene. How does someone surmise the killer has a stutter or drives a sports car by the way a girl is raped and strangled? I figured I was missing some amazing piece of analytical skill or someone was pulling a fast one.

I eventually learned that the profilers who came up with amazing stuff that doesn’t rely on science or logic:

1) got inside information that made them look damned brilliant when the suspect was caught and indeed he matched that piece of the profile
2) guessed and were simply lucky
3) guessed and no suspect was found to prove him wrong,
4) guessed and people forgot the part of the profile he got wrong or ignored it because the rest (read: the easier part) of the profile was right.

This is exactly the kind of criminal profiling concept I have been fighting against for the last decade. Criminal profiling is crime scene analysis with a heavy emphasis on behaviors of the victim and suspect. All conclusions should be based on science and logic and should be clearly explained. No guesses should be made just off the top of the head or from simply gut feelings. The criminal profiling process is but a method of analyzing a crime scene to come up with a reasonable a scenario as possible leading to the best next investigative choices to make. This is all that criminal profiling is; a method of analysis conducted by a criminal profiler to aid the police or by the detective himself to further his investigation.

Criminal profiling should not be a parlor trick nor should it be considered some magic or psychic answer to a perplexing crime. Neither should criminal profiling be tossed as a complete sham as Malcolm Gladwell has basically advocated; this would be a sad loss to law enforcement as criminal profiling skills are terribly needed by investigators on fresh crime cases and by detectives in the cold case squads. Too many crimes go unsolved and killers uncaught because of bad crime scene analysis that throws the investigation completely off track.

Criminal profiling is a very useful tool and I hope that a right perception of the field will encourage its proper use in the field of police investigation

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Profiling for Dummies Case # 1

I thought I would start a series of homicide cases that will make newbie profilers and wannabes feel good about their profiling skills! Here is Case Number One! Ready?

Who Killed Kelly Gorham?

Nursing student Kelly Gorham went missing in Maine. She was engaged for two years to Jason Twardus. They broke up in June. Kelly went missing in early August and her body was found in a shallow grave during a search on the property of Brian Twardus, Jason's daddy.

Now put on your thinking caps! The police have not yet named a suspect in this crime, so you can be the first to figure out who could have committed this murder.

If you get this one right, you can go for the extra credit question!

Who COULD have killed Kelly Gorham? (warning: attorney profiling required for the answer to this one).

Hint: There is only one answer to the first question. There are a dozen answers to the second question depending on the lawyer's ability to tell tales and the estimated gullibility of the jury.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Sexism in Victimology

A man deals drugs in his neighborhood and gets shot and killed in a gang war. The newspaper does not simply say he was the father of three, helped out at the shelter, and had a secret life as a medicine distributor. He is called a drug dealer who got murdered because he was breaking the law and got wasted by his criminal associates. A man breaking into a home gets shot by the home owner. The newspaper does not write that he was a father of three who went to church on Sundays and had a secret life as an unauthorized enterer of homes. He is called a burglar who got shot because he threatened the life of an innocent citizen.

Yet, when a woman is breaking the law, the papers often soften her criminal side and if one dares state what her lawbreaking was about, it is seen as cruel by many. But the law is the same for both males and females and if females break the law and act badly, there is nothing wrong in pointing this out, both for the purposes of honesty and for the purposes of being properly informed so that all of us can react appropriately.

For a profiler, the police and the public, we cannot search for suspects properly or turn in information unless we know the truth and don't water it down. There is possibly a killer out there that we need to get off the streets. It may be a serial killer who targets prostitutes or a ticked off ex-husband who is disgusted with Paige Birgfeld's behaviors. She could have ripped off a john or gotten involved in yet another illegal activity that cost her her life.

As far as blaming the victim, one has to be realistic. Becoming a victim of a murderer can be just bad luck or the victim may have worked overtime to get herself into the murderer's hands and brain. Paige created one very long list of possible killers for the police and public to sort out. She is responsible for who she is and what she did that might have gotten her in trouble or, worse, gotten her killed. Paige likely has already paid the ultimate price for poor decisions and there is a killer out there who needs to pay the price for his.

Let's keep it real and not be sexist when women commit crimes and those crimes do them in. People who live by the sword often die by the sword; the truth may be painful, but it is illuminating.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Yes, Paige Birgfeld, Missing Mom, is a Hooker

Remember the Duke lacrosse team rape accuser? The exotic dancer who worked for an escort service to "pay her college tuition?" I called the woman a hooker when I was doing television interviews and I always got a shocked response. "Oh, no!" the host would exclaim! "She was a dancer!" Yeah, right. If a girl continues to work for an escort service after going out on a couple of "dates," she isn't keeping her job by refusing to provide the services her clients want.

When Virginia Tech killer Cho paid for a "dancer" to come to his hotel room, he was expecting to get sex. Everyone tiptoed around that as well. Do we in this society refuse to believe that prostitution exists in this country?

Paige Birgfeld, single mother of three, disappeared from Grand Junction, Colorado on June 23. Her abandoned car was found on fire across town. Soon after, her family and friends were surprised to find she had been leading a double life: not only did she sell kitchenware, make dishes for sick friends, and sew costumes for her children’s dance group, but she also worked as an escort. Her friends in the play group thought there might be something going on in her life they didn’t know about, but they never pried.

Someone has to say it. All this tiptoeing around the truth is about driving me nuts! Yes, Birgfeld had another line of income. She advertised her services as an “escort” named Carrie on her “Naughtynightlife” website which includes “extra” services that the police believe may have crossed legal boundries. May? Please. This single mother’s only other source of income is occasionally teaching dance to little children and selling Pampered Chef cookware at home parties, yet she lives in a house worth over a million dollars and doesn’t seem to be suffering from money problems.

Her site advertises in-call and out-call erotic massages which she offers in her office or at your home or hotel. She starts the massage dressed in a mini-skirt. She used to advertise her business as one offering acupuncture. She dressed in skimpy clothing and high heels for that procedure as well. All her clients were men and came (pun intended) after hours when the building was locked. The other tenants were suspicious she probably wasn’t doing medical procedures to relieve pain. I can’t imagine what could have tipped them off.

Birgfeld had worked as an exotic dancer before she met her second husband. When his finances went south during their marriage, Birgfeld told her hubby she was going back dancing to make money. Apparently, he found her dancing style a little disturbing when he found underwear in her car that wasn’t hers. This husband stated that he believed she was performing topless massages “at the least,” meaning her clients would getting a hand job while looking at her boobs.

Aw, come on, folks, let’s call a hooker a hooker. Yes, Paige Birgfeld is a hooker, a prostitute, a sex worker by any name you want to call her. She has sex with men for money and has done so for years. She may be a fun lady, a good friend, even a nice mommy (not a good mommy because clearly Birgfeld would not be working as a hooker if she were). There are other ways to make ends meet and I am sure her kids would have preferred she found another career while raising them.

It is important that we recognize Birgfeld is a hooker because it changes the profile of the victim and it lengthens the suspect list considerably. She has two ex-husbands and a boatload of scuzzy males who might have become angry with her. Birgfeld supposedly had been back dating her first husband. Did he not realize she was a pro? Might he not have gotten upset if he found that out? And what kind of guy would he be if he didn’t care? Her second ex-husband was supposedly upset that she was hooking while raising their children. I guess I can understand that emotion and he certainly could have a motive for wanting her out of his children's lives. Then, there are all her johns. One of them might be a serial killer or other kind of sex pervert.

Paige Birgfeld was making poor choices in her life. She put herself and her children’s lives in danger. She was a clearly a liar if her children, her parents, and her friends did not know the truth about her profession. She lied as well to at least one of her ex-husbands. Birgfeld was also lawbreaker which makes her a criminal. If the police found evidence of a violent crime in Birgfeld’s car, then she was likely murdered by one of the pissed off exes or one of her creepy tricks. If there is no sign of foul play, it is possible Birgfeld decided to take off and live a freer life as clearly she had a limited amount of concern for her children's well-being. Either way, the police can’t do their job and the public can’t bring them proper information if we are going to sugar-coat this woman’s life. If she was willing to put her picture up on a website called “Naughtynightlife” and spend time with strange men, why are we having such a problem labeling her a hooker? She is what she is and Mother Teresa she ain’t.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Welcome to the "I Made a Mistake" System

Here in the twin cities a young woman working at a video store let her boyfriend and his friends in after hours to steal some 1000 plus videos. The loss to the store was enough to charge these thieves with a felony. The story wouldn’t have been particularly eye catching if it hadn’t been for a statement made by one of the detectives that the behavior of the girl and her accomplices was “stupid young adult behavior.” Hello? Just stupid behavior? Theft is stupid behavior? I always thought maybe getting carried away with sex as a teenager and getting pregnant was stupid behavior or maybe drinking too much was a stupid behavior. I guess society has really gone downhill so far that juvenile and young adult crime is now considered nothing but a folly of youth.

When I was seven years old, I found a pen on the playground half buried in the dirt under a bush. I took it home and cleaned it off. I found it was a very pretty copper pen and I liked it; so I kept it. I hid it in my keepsake box where I have it to this day. I felt horribly guilty about not taking it into the school office where the rightful owner might recover it. I knew I was wrong for keeping the pen when it was not legitimately mine and I knew I was a thief, I hid the pen and felt ashamed for years. I never stole again.

This story would be laughable today. But, when I was growing up, I knew if I showed the pen to my mother she would have asked where I got it from and then she would tell me it wasn’t mine to keep and she would have marched me up to the school to give it back. Apparently, both my mother and I knew right from wrong and even a little school kid back in those days knew that taking or keeping what was not honestly obtained was criminal or at least highly unethical behavior. Now, it seems, breaking the law is not a criminal act but a stupid one. It is a "mistake,” not an evil act. Even murder is often labeled "just" a bad choice, a moment of stupidity, or an error.

I hate to see what genocide is now considered.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: When Judges have Impaired Judgment

Over in Sheboygan, Wisconsin is another judge (the newpaper did not bother to name him) who needs to find employment in the fast food industry. He gave a couple of brothers bail , David Goetsch, 52, and Thomas Goetsch, 51– they are free on $75,000 cash bonds – who have plead no contest to two counts of felony stalking and three counts of felony threat to injure. These men, who the judge deemed no danger to the community, have spent nearly a year stalking a real estate agent and threatening to kill her. We don’t have to take just her word for it: she has more than fifty handwritten letters as proof. The letters describe her movements and activities, describe her in a crude sexually explicit manner, include pornographic images, and threaten to kill her. The brothers also stalked her sister and sent letters to five of her clients threatening to burn their homes down or kill them if they didn’t get a different real estate agent.

The judge feels these two are not a threat to the community, this woman, her sister, or her clients. I guess his argument would be that they have been threatening her for almost a year and still haven’t killed anyone. Thanks, Judge, I am sure we all feel comforted by that fact. I guess now that the brothers are facing twelve years in prison, they wouldn’t consider adding to their sentences or retaliating against this poor woman for turning them in.

Judges should be so sure of releasing these creeps into the community that they are willing to be charged with aiding and abetting any crime they commit once they are handed their one-more-opportunity-before-jail pass. Unfortunately, our country doesn’t even seem to have any methodology for citizens to get rid of these judges. They seem to stay on the bench no matter how egregious their actions might be. It is time we change this tenure for life problem with our judiciary instead of just shaking our heads about it.


Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Chris Benoit and Bobby Cutts: Did They just Snap?

Once again we have stunned and confused friends and relatives of a killer swearing that he was a great guy. We heard this story when Bobby Cutts was arrested for murdering his girlfriend and unborn baby and we are hearing it again in the case of wrestler Chris Benoit who killed his wife, son, and then himself. There is a sense of disbelief among these folks who cannot match the person they thought they knew as friendly, fun, kind, and sweet to a cold blooded killer who would brutally slay his significant other and an innocent child to boot. They claim there must have been drugs that radically changed brain chemistry or some bizarre circumstance that sent a decent man over the edge.

What most of these truly well-meaning people aren't understanding is the nature of abusive men. Abusive men often take out all their insecurities and feelings of failure inside the home while they keep up their pretense on the outside. In the world, usually the world of men, abusers want to appear manly, one of the guys, a great buddy, etc. They work overtime at being a stellar person in the public eye. Often this is the type of man who will leave his wife alone on the Saturday he promised to spend with her to go help a friend move. He will fix his brother’s car while his wife’s car still has the bad brakes he promised to fix one month ago. He will complain about his wife spending ten dollars and then turn around and give a relative one thousand dollars to pay off a gambling debt. He won’t raise his voice in public but he will beat his wife so badly she won’t leave the house for weeks.

Bobby Cutts murdered (allegedly) Jessie and the baby because he wanted to party with other women and he didn’t want to support another child. Although he made good jokes at work and coached kids’ sports, he was also a liar, a cheat, an abuser, and likely a psychopathic murderer. Chris Benoit, Mr. Good Buddy to the outside world, was also likely a role-playing psychopath who found when he couldn’t control his wife and child the way he wanted, preferred to strangle them and have done with it. He only likely killed himself because he realized he was going to spend the rest of his life in prison (and since he took so long to get around to it I am guessing he wasn’t all that suicidal to start with).

Not all people toward the end of the psychopathic continuum are serial killers or even murderers. They may be successful lawyers, politicians or preachers! They may be con men or abusive husbands or womanizers. Some may be violent and some might not be. Some of those who aren’t quite so far down the continuum to obtain the full psychopathic label may get a lesser designation because they don’t lie, cheat and manipulate quite as much; they may be labeled as borderline personality disorders or narcissists. These men and women might actually be fairly decent citizens (because they get kudos for doing so) and, at times seem quite normal. Still they will have difficulty with remorse and empathy because they cannot understand or care about another person’s needs or rights. There are a lot more of these in the world than there are those at the very end of the spectrum and we deal with them quite often in business and family. We may never even realize that they have that much of a problem because they function so well within society. Often, we think we are the ones with the problem: that we are being unreasonable or too demanding or too critical. They make sure we feel that way.

It is very difficult to recognize exactly how far down the psychopath continuum our friend or mate is lurking. Some human beings slide further down the scale as they lose more power and control in their lives. Perhaps Chris Benoit could be labeled borderline personality disorder, one who is always seeking attention and validation and as long as he got enough of it, he wouldn’t go off the deep end. But when age starts threatening one’s career, the wife is not the babe she used to be that made you feel good as a man (and you now wants some younger one), the wife is not the doting young thing she was when she married you (and now is older, wiser, and more demanding), and your son is an embarrassment (because it is hard to brag over your special needs kid as your creation), then maybe you get angry that everyone is doing you wrong. Maybe Bobby Cutts would have continued as the narcissistic/psychopathic womanizer for years if he had learned the meaning of birth control but, since he kept the babies coming and money problems were increasing, he decided these women and babies were messing up the life he deserved.

As the weeks go on, the truth about the private lives of Cutts and Benoit will come out bit by bit. I can guarantee you we won’t be hearing about domestic bliss. Never have I found a case where, in spite of the fact the man was truly a wonderful husband in all his behaviors and a fine dad as well, he suddenly murders his family. It simply doesn’t happen. A pussycat doesn’t suddenly become a pit bull just because he drank too much one night or took some steroids. The personality and concerning behaviors were always there before the drugs or alcohol came along and, for that matter, may be the exact reason why he uses them to begin with. Nothing comes from nothing anywhere in nature and this includes homicide.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: What Criminal Profiler Pat Brown REALLY thinks about Guns

Just so that I can’t be misquoted or misunderstood or have my words taken out of context, I thought I would put in writing exactly my position on gun ownership. Then, if you disagree with me or think I am an idiot, at least you will be basing your conclusions on what I really believe and not some distorted version of my opinion.

1) American citizens should have the right to protect themselves from criminals. It would be a lovely world if we did not have to worry about being harmed by others. While there are some people who feel their communities are extremely safe and have no desire to own a gun, many other citizens feel the need to protect themselves and their family members. Just as no pioneer would have lived on the plains or in the forests of America without a gun and no one would walk without a rifle through the Serengeti in Africa unless he didn’t mind a lion making dinner of him, some citizens feel they are simply sitting ducks if they are not able to defend themselves.

2) Our country is rife with criminals with guns. Washington DC had the strictest gun laws in the country until recently (nobody living in the District was allowed to own a gun unless he was a police officer) and also had the highest number of guns per capita (mostly owned by criminals). If criminals have guns, it makes no sense to prevent honest citizens from purchasing them.

3) All citizens who have clean criminal records and do not have a mental history should be permitted to purchase a firearm.

4) All citizens who purchase a firearm should be required to register said firearm and pass a gun safety exam. For all those who think that no citizen should have to let the government know he owns a firearm needs to grow a brain and realize that no tiny pocket of armed citizens is going to have any hope against the military might of the United States Armed Forces. It may have worked in the 1800s but those days are long gone. Sorry.

5) All citizens who purchase firearms ought to sign a legal contract (or we need a law to be passed) that the owner of the weapon accepts all responsibility for the proper discharge of that weapon and that the weapon will only be used in a legal manner. This means if a gun lying on a table, stuck in a drawer hidden under the mattress or left about in an unlocked car is used in a crime (like a school massacre) or discharged by another accidentally causing bodily harm or death, the owner will be charged with aiding and abetting the crime or contributing to manslaughter. By signing this form, the owner acknowledges that he is responsible for the firearm at all times meaning the gun is either in a lock box or on his person. Guns stolen from locked containers or vehicles should be reported immediately to the police. The owner is not responsible for the misuse of a weapon no longer in his possession due to theft.

6). Concealed carry should be permitted in all fifty states with federal permits so that a citizen does not run into a legal problem every time his car crosses into another jurisdiction. Concealed carry is better than open carry in that it does not antagonize others or cause fear for those citizens uncomfortable around guns. Furthermore, it is good for criminals not to know which citizens are carrying thereby making the criminal unwilling to take the risk of getting shot by the unexpectedly armed citizen.

6) Gun child safety locks are idiotic. The gun shouldn’t be accessible to the child and the adult needs a gun that works instantly. Since no one can be sure the owner is using the safety lock after the gun is purchased, this feel-good law is a joke.

7) “No Guns Permitted” signs are stupid (except to prevent companies from getting sued in this litigious country). Criminals are happy that no one entering the building will be armed except them.

8) Because of disparity of force, a gun may be the only protection for a female fighting a male even if he has no weapon, or for a male fighting more than one male (or a larger male) even if he has no weapon.

9) Calling 911 is no substitute for a firearm when seconds count.

10) The anti-gun people need to recognize the citizens’ right to protect themselves. The pro-gun people need to recognize the citizen’s responsibility to monitor gun sales and gun security. There should be no objection to providing both citizen safety and gun safety. If we could all get on the same page, then we could finally focus on the major contributor to firearm deaths: criminals.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Are all Gun Owners Dangerous to Women?

Wasn’t it just a few months ago that I got wailed on by the left during the Virginia Tech massacre for suggesting kids should carry guns to school to protect themselves? Sometime during the many interviews I did that week I said something to the effect that if we allowed concealed carry on campuses maybe someone would have taken Cho out. I am a big fan of concealed carry because I know criminals carry concealed weapons all the time and I would like to even the field with some honest citizens carrying a few themselves so criminals don’t think no one will shoot back. I think of how many lives would be saved if only someone in the school or company could defend against mass murderers and keep these killers from mowing down a bunch of sitting ducks who desperately try to hide behind furniture to save their lives.

Now, after doing interviews on the Jessie Davis murder, those from the right are taking one statement out of context and going nuts about it. It seems they think that I believe any man who owns a gun is a danger to women. If I thought that, I guess I would be talking about my own father and my own son. They have guns for personal protection. For that matter, my daughter has guns for personal protection and I also own firearms for personal protection. I am all for gun ownership for personal protection. Clearly, I was not saying a man with a gun is a psychopath.

Nor was I saying a man who might have a collection of guns is a psychopath. I know many of these men as well. They are hunters or lovers of antiques or do a lot of target shooting. What I was talking about during the Paula Zahn Show was the combination of psychopathic behavior and an obsession with weaponry as psychopaths love weapons because it gives them a feeling of power and control. Psychopaths do indeed have a fascination with guns and knives and just because the rest of us might happen to own weapons or even have a number of them as a hobby doesn’t eliminate the fact that psychopaths may also be shopping at the gun store with us.

Women must learn to differentiate between psychologically healthy men and men who are not psychologically healthy if they want to keep from getting into a dangerous life threatening situation. No one trait will be proof that an individual is a psychopath, but add a bunch of traits together and this is a warning. A kind, honorable, honest man with a gun collection is not a psychopath or a danger to anyone but a lying, manipulative, arrogant creep who has a cache of twenty weapons is someone a woman wants to get the hell away from. A man who teaches history at the local junior high school and happens to have a collection of Asian swords is not someone a woman should be frightened of but a man who obsessively watches ninja flicks, brags about how he used to be in the CIA, can’t keep a job, calls women sluts and whores, and owns a huge collection of swords and daggers, now there is a guy a woman wants should avoid like the plague.

Anyone who watched the actual Paula Zahn Show and paid attention to the whole conversation and intent would clearly know I was not labeling gun owners psychopaths. Unfortunately, when words are taken out of context and printed on the Internet, often the meaning of those words get misunderstood. I apologize to any gun owners (who aren’t psychopaths) who thought they were the target of my statements. I respect your constitutional rights to own firearms and would never want to see those taken away. I, like you, want to be sure I can protect myself and my family. I wouldn’t want it any other way.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Bank Robbery for Dummies

For all you folks a little short on money and brains, the once almost impossible crime of bank robbery has been dumbed down for you. No longer are bank robberies the forte of masked, armed gangs of criminals who must plan a big operation and have lots of guts to take the big risk of getting shot or caught and put away for life. Now, pony-tailed young women are getting into the act without bothering to carry weapons and spending months planning the details. They aren’t even worried about doing much jail time. Why? Because these criminals know that because they are getting less than $5000 a pop from the tellers they approach and aren't pointing a gun at them, they likely won’t get all that long of a sentence if they do get caught.

So, while the rest of us have to work hard to get money and even have to show an ID when we ask for one hundred dollars of our own money, these pieces of riff-raff just saunter into the bank and ask for a thousands. No security guards or double locking doors are in place to deter them. The banks have decided to save money on personnel and security equipment because the U.S. government (read: us taxpayers) will foot the loss. Besides, those security measures are unnerving and unsightly for customers. How sad is it that the banks just give away money to criminals without even a blink. The tellers are told just to hand it over rather than make a fuss. Then the criminal justice system shrugs and hardly adds much fear to the commission of the crime for the offenders.

No wonder we are overrun with crime. If we are not willing to take a stand on right and wrong, criminals will think we don’t care if they rob us. Maybe we really don’t.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Let's Eliminate Probation and Parole

I know a bunch of folks are going to write me some angry hate mail on this one but I am willing to take the risk. I think it is time we call a spade a spade and eliminate probation, parole, and phony rehabilitation. Let’s examine what these programs actually are:

Probation: you have committed a crime and you know what the supposed punishment is but we are not actually going to punish you; instead w will give you a warning not to do it again. If you do, maybe we will punish you the next time around. As a parent, I know full well that parents who use this method in child rearing create disrespectful brats. A legal system which uses this method of handling lawbreakers creates unrepentant criminals.

Parole: You have committed a crime and you know what the supposed punishment is but if you act all nicey-nicey in the pokey will give you a get-out-of jail-early card. Then, we will let you slither back into society and recommit crimes unless we get lucky enough to catch you this time around. Parents who let their kids out of their punishments early raise disrespectful brats. A legal system which uses this method of handling lawbreakers creates unrepentant criminals. Yes, I repeat myself.

Phony rehabilitation: Here we either allow the criminal not to be punished or be released from punishment early if he agrees to go into some psychological program. Noting the lesser of two evils, the criminal happily agrees to play a game he figures fools have put together. Parents who let their kids out of punishments by allowing them to wash the dishes or write a “sorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry” note raise disrespectful brats. A legal system which uses this method of handling lawbreakers creates unrepentant criminals.

How about treating a crime as a crime and improving one’s life as two separate issues? Anyone who commits a crime should be willing to do the time and anyone who wants to change he life should be willing to do so without the threat of doing time. We as a society should be clear that these are two different projects. Let me pose a scenario:

I tell my kid if he lies and sneaks out of the house to go to a party he will be grounded for one month. He lies and sneaks out. I find out. I can do one of four things:

1) Tell him I am disappointed and don’t do it again.
2) Punish him for thee days and then tell him I am disappointed and don’t do it again.
3) Punish him for a week and then tell him if he sets the table for the rest of the month he can go hang out with his friends again.
4) Punish him for the month and then tell him that he could use to rebuild our trust in him again, spend time teaching him the worth of trust, and then offer him a chance to do so.

Common sense should tell us that the first three are a mockery of authority and responsibility. The same holds true for criminals. There are only two kinds of criminals: those who will always be unrepentant and those who actually are repentant. The only way to keep the unrepentant from committing crimes is to lock them up or make them fear being locked up. For the repentant ones who recognize they are screw ups and are willing to do their time, let’s give them good programs which they can voluntarily sign up for after they get out. However, since we citizens and judges will never be absolutely sure which group is which until after the fact, all those convicted should do the maximum time we feel as a society they should serve and then offer real opportunities to those who want help upon release. We need to make life imprisonment a reality for those who commit heinous crimes (rape, murder, child molestation, etc.) as these creeps are psychopaths who don’t know the meaning of repentance and reasonable sentences for those criminals who might learn from their time in the pen. The criminal justice system needs to get out of the business of psychoanalyzing and rolling the dice on recidivism. Only then might we see a drop in crime and an increase in public safety.


Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: That nice "Mr. Brooks."

The scariest thing about the new Kevin Costner film isn’t that Demi Moore looks like a wax mannequin, or that there are more plots in this movie than can be found in a veteran’s cemetery, or that a number of well known actors are so desperate for work that they agreed to be in this ridiculous piece of crap. What is really frightening is that I, a criminal profiler, apparently had no clue that serial killers could be such totally wonderful human beings (minus the killing stuff). It seems that Mr. Brooks doesn’t have a psychopathic bone in his body, just a little glitch in his brain chemistry that suddenly makes him need to do a thrill kill, a glitch of biology that he has sadly passed down to his daughter who also interrupts who her fine behavior with a violent hatchet slaying.

Mr. Brooks, as far as I can see, is able to work hard and achieve long term goals, marry and be faithful to an intelligent woman, raise and adore his daughter and be willing to do anything for her (yeah, like kill another person in her college town while she is home to get the police off her trail), enjoy a hobby with a high level of expertise, show depth of emotion, be forthright and honest (except about the killing), and truly feel remorse about being a killer (but oddly never about the victims – wait, that might be an odd bit of psychopathy).

Oh, Mr. Script-hack, please call me next time you write a serial killer movie for a bit of consulting! Serial homicide isn’t in the genes; you don’t inherit it. Psychopaths become that way through early childhood problems coupled with a personality type. And they don’t grow up to be fine members of society without a trace of creepiness. All the serial killers I have met or studied show every psychopathic trait without exception. They are all pathological liars, manipulators, have flat affect and have shallow emotions, lack empathy, have grandiose thinking, are narcissistic, and refuse to accept responsibility for their actions, etc. Few serial killers accomplish much in their lives either, outside of racking up murders.

Actually, we can be thankful that this movie is full of hooey. If serial killers were really like Mr. Brooks, we would have zero warning signs to go on and we wouldn’t be able to trust anyone out there. While people often say after a serial killer is arrested, “He seemed like a nice man,” or “I can’t believe he would do something like this,” the serial killer has always shown psychopathic behaviors that a good many people recognized and preferred not to be around.

I think the most upsetting thing about this movie (besides the fact I tossed $8.50 to see it) is that we are actually supposed to like the serial killer. We feel sorry for Mr. Brooks and hope he feels better soon. Never mind those pesky victims that he so cold-bloodily shot. We didn’t like them nearly as much as we like him. How sad is that…..

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: The Madeleine McCann Letter

Someone has sent a letter to the Dutch press claiming that he knows where little Madeleine McCann is buried. Apparently this fellow had sent a similar letter last year when the police were searching for the missing Belgian sisters, Stacy and Nathalie, which arrived just on the day they were found. Is this a hoax or could this be the abductor of all three girls? Now, there was an arrest made in the case of the murdered Belgian girls, but this letter writer is said to have known where they were buried by the train tracks and so the police are taking the Madeleine letter fairly seriously.

Let’s profile this letter and see what the possibilities are. First of all, the Belgian girls were killed within hours of their abduction and if Madeleine’s body really is where this writer says it is – seven miles from the resort from which she was taken – I think we can eliminate the pedophile ring scenario (a scenario I never really bought). The Belgian girls were raped and killed quickly; there was no transporting of them anywhere and certainly no time to do any selling of them or videotaping of them being tortured and murdered. If Madeleine is found right in the vicinity of the resort, we can eliminate any fancy sex ring kidnapping little kids for profit.

Therefore, in both cases, we would have a pedophile or a pedophile duo grabbing and amusing themselves, not involving themselves in organized crime. The letter writer could, in theory, be a traveling man and have gone to Belgium, found a couple of victims, left the country and sent the letter when he was back at home in Holland. He could have been on the road again, come across another child left unattended (the Belgian girls were left to play in the street at midnight while their parents were drinking it up inside a bar), grabbed her, raped her and killed her, and then gone back home to Holland where he once again writes a letter at leisure to the newspaper he must read all the time. He would be a publicity lover and get a kick out of having the girls found and reading about the discovery over his morning coffee. Of course, there was a man convicted of the sisters’ murder but it is possible he isn’t guilty, just a dupe, and the real killer finds this annoying and wants to set the record straight.

This is one possible scenario. However, there is a problem with it. It is said that the letter writer was right on the money as to where the sisters’ bodies would be found. I beg to differ. The letter writer marked a location that turned out to be one mile away from where the girls were found. This wouldn’t be such a big deal if he was one mile off from where he claimed Madeleine would be found – six miles or seven miles on a lonely road – well, maybe he just didn’t remember exactly how far he drove, but being one mile off of the sisters’ dump site is a different story entirely.

The sisters’ bodies were found within 300 meters of the bar, not over a mile from the bar. I would think a killer well know the difference between “at the end of the block” and “more than a mile down the road.” Furthermore, a killer who leaves the kids at the end of the block probably doesn’t have a car and the one who would leave them more than a mile away would have to have a car to carry them that far.

At this point, unless Madeleine is found exactly where the letter writer claims, the letters were probably the work of an armchair detective who just guessed where he thought they might be. If you add to this toss of the dice to all the possible locations any other tipster gave and all the psychics gave, someone is likely to get lucky and get close to the right spot.

The police, of course, would be remiss not to check this out just to be sure they aren’t ignoring a serial killer’s clues. But, chances are, there are two different pedophiles at work in these crimes. Unattended children are easy targets for pedophiles and just because the MO is similar, it doesn’t mean there is just one guy committing the crimes. Yes, there is a serial killer of children out there, but whether there is one serial killer or two serial killers involved in these crimes remains to be seen.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Who the Hell is Danielle Cramer?

The name Danielle Cramer doesn’t ring a bell does it? This poor fifteen-year-old girl went missing a year ago in Connecticut and was found locked in a specially designed little room underneath a staircase in the home of a business associate of her family, a business associate with a history of “questionable involvement with minors.” Now, I do television commentary on just this sort of case all the time but I couldn’t for the life of me recall ever even hearing about this child. Clearly, she got no national publicity went she went missing, unlike Natalee Holloway, little Madeleine or Ben Ownby.

It wasn’t like there wasn’t a good possibility someone had done something bad to her considering her family had creepy people hanging around in the form of possible sex offenders. Police were concerned that Danielle had met a less than pleasant fate and finally found out that this was true, although thankfully Danielle at least was found alive after a year of searching. So, why, were there no news stories?

First of all, Danielle wasn’t seen being abducted by a friend or a camera. She just vanished. There was no exciting visual to stick in people’s minds, to show over and over on the news, or for someone to excitedly relate the story again as he got his fifteen minutes of fame. She just disappeared without any fanfare.

Secondly, she had vanished before because she was had been a repeat runaway. This was undoubtedly the number one reason there was only a halfhearted effort to find out what happened to her. If the media ran a story every time a teen took off and the police started a full fledged investigation every time some kid decided to go hang somewhere else, there would be no other news and the resources of law enforcement would be heavily strained.

The third reason Danielle didn’t get much press was that her family didn’t work very hard at it. The moms of the missing Natalee and Madeleine clearly made it their life’s work to find their kids. This family either didn’t care that much or lacked the resources to put forth such an effort. I would guess both which brings me to the saddest part of this kind of story,

Some kids just don’t get a break. They are born into less than functional families. This is why Danielle ended up being the kind of kid who is a runaway. She probably had reasons to want to runaway. Either there was abuse in the family – physical, sexual, or emotional – or there was neglect. This is the perfect child to become a victim of predators. They are easy to entice, they often won’t be missed, and the family may do little to search for them. Even if the parents do make an attempt to reach out to the public and police about their missing child, they often won’t be believed or liked well enough for a strong positive response. No one may feel sorry enough for them or their missing child. Sad, but true.

Children at risk are often put at risk by their own families and if the community cannot lend a hand, these children often end up in a bad way. It doesn’t necessarily take a community to raise a child if that child has wonderful parents but it does take a community to save a child if the parents are not up to the job.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown