 |
Without question, the most well known aspect of what profilers do
in an investigation is put together a composite of the UNSUB -- the
killer, rapist or other "unknown subject" at large.
Since acting as technical consultant to the novel The Silence of the
Lambs and its film adaptation -- and watching both skyrocket in popularity
-- I've seen the public become utterly fascinated with this facet
of profiling. I can understand that fascination; it was part of what
drove me like a madman during my years with the bureau, and since.
Profiling the UNSUB is, in the simplest terms, coming up with a reasonable
composite of the person, or people, who committed one or more crimes.
Profilers are often called in to assist with investigations of serial
offenders. In these instances we have more than just one crime scene
and one set of circumstances to work with. This helps because it gives
us the opportunity to "connect the dots" -- to find patterns
by looking at what the UNSUB left behind.
Connecting the dots
What is left behind might include:
- witnesses who can give us a physical description of the UNSUB.
While witness descriptions often conflict with one another, the
details that are the common denominators in their accounts are
extremely useful.
- a crime scene filled with behavioral and forensic clues, from
the location itself to objects the killer might have taken as
souvenirs to his own hair or blood.
- a living victim, if we're all really fortunate, who can describe
the attacker and how he behaved during the assault.
- more often, unfortunately, a body. You can tell a lot about
the UNSUB from the condition of the victim's body, from the specific
acts of violence perpetrated against the victim to whether he
covered her face (often a sign of shame on the killer's part)
or, sick as it is, defecated on her body (obviously, a sign of
anger and disrespect).
Sometimes one or two facets of what was left behind speak louder than
the rest in detailing who the UNSUB is. I found this to be true when,
in 1980, I was called in to profile the "Trailside Killer"
in San Francisco. Between August 1979 and November 1980, he'd killed
seven people in Mount Tamalpais and Point Reyes parks -- six women
and two men, all attacked from behind and killed blitz-style, either
by a single bullet to the back of the head or multiple stab wounds.
Attacks in the middle of nowhere
There were many elements to the profile I developed of this UNSUB,
including his age, intelligence and employment status. But I was led
to one specific characteristic by the nature of the crime scenes and
the types of attacks.
The murders had all taken place in wooded, secluded locations inaccessible
by car. I wondered why the guy attacked so quickly in such isolated
spots. The fact that he had to rely on such rapid assaults in the
middle of nowhere told me something extremely important: There's something
wrong with him, I remember thinking, something he's awkward about
or ashamed of.
Even as I began considering what it could be, I was imagining the
looks on the faces of the veteran officers I'd be making my presentation
to. But I couldn't let the possibility of scrutiny or even ridicule
hinder me.
Narrowing the field
I thought it through. Maybe he's really unattractive, with terrible
acne scars or a facial deformity. But I had to rule that out; there
were enough people in the parks on the days of the murders that it
was likely someone would've come forward to say they'd seen an unusual-looking
guy walking around.
What about a limp or missing appendage? The above reasoning applied
to those possibilities as well. But the speed and efficiency of the
murders meant the UNSUB probably didn't have a physical impairment.
That left something less obvious but equally emotionally troubling
for the killer, something others wouldn't know about until he opened
his mouth -- like a speech impediment.
My suggestion to the San Francisco police that the "Trailside
Killer" had a speech impediment was met with varying responses,
from interest to incredulity to downright laughter. Someone even asked
if I was a psychic.
A severe stutterer
A profiler's ability to ferret out this type of detail comes after
years of study and experience and the careful application of inductive
and deductive reasoning. This means we start with the specific information
(including what the UNSUB left behind) and combine that with general
trends we've observed in other crimes and use both to reach conclusions
about the UNSUB we're profiling.
All of this, wrapped up neatly, makes for what often feels like a
very intuitive decision, like the one I'd made in this instance. I
knew I could be off base and conceded as much to the police, but I
felt that I was right about the killer having a speech impediment.
Turns out the killer was a severe stutterer who had been traumatized
by the ribbing he'd taken as a child. According to a victim of an
early attack who managed to get away, the killer's stutter disappeared
completely right before and during his attacks
|
|
|
