PSY-205-H7711 Forensic Psychology 24EW4 DR

Course Menu Tools mySNHU Shapiro Library Academic Support More

Module Overview
 Listen
 

Criminal Profiling
Criminal profiling uses information about evidence found at crime scenes to produce a description of a
criminal’s characteristics, personality, and possible motivation. Profiling has most often been applied to
serial killers (defined as individuals who kill more than three people in different incidents). FBI profilers
emphasize the signature of a criminal’s behavior because it is viewed as being unchanging. Profilers
examine crime evidence to try to infer why the crime was committed, hoping the discovery of motive
will lead to useful speculation about who committed the crime.

While television and movies make criminal profilers seem like glamorous, powerful characters in any
investigation, that’s far from the reality: studies show that criminal profiling is not very effective. In fact,
serious errors in profiling have sometimes impeded investigations, costing lives in the process.

Two extreme examples of profiling involve the Oklahoma City bomber and the D.C. sniper. In
Oklahoma, the immediate reaction was to pursue middle-eastern suspects when the real mastermind
of the attack was a white Army veteran. In D.C., the conventional wisdom that a sniper would be
Caucasian sent the police on several wild goose chases before the suspects, both African Americans,
were found. At best, profiling is an inexact science. While the movie The Silence of the Lambs is good
cinema, it is not an accurate depiction of profiling.

Dr. Thomas Bond is credited with creating the first criminal profile, that of a serial killer active in
London in 1888. The public called the killer, whose real identity was unknown, Jack the Ripper. By
conducting autopsies on his victims, whom the killer attacked on public streets and mutilated, Dr. Bond
determined that he was very strong, daring, and average looking.

Since Jack the Ripper was never caught, Bond’s profile was never validated.

Police have continued to use profiling. For example, they used it to identify the person who set off a
bomb during the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. Richard Jewell, who fit the description created by profilers,
of a single, white, male with a strong interest in police work, was arrested for the crime in a highly
publicized capture. However, no evidence was ever turned up to suggest Jewell was guilty, and
publicized capture. However, no evidence was ever turned up to suggest Jewell was guilty, and
eventually, the police arrested another man, Eric Rudolph, who was later convicted of the crime.

One study showed profiling led to correct identification less than 3% of the time. Studies comparing
students, psychologists, and detectives find little difference in their ability to develop useful and
accurate profiles. In fact, it is not surprising that profiles are difficult to construct, since the criminals
that psychological profilers attempt to describe share very few characteristics as well as showing
different characteristics in different contexts.

References
Costanzo, M., & Krauss, D. (2012). Forensic and legal psychology: Psychological science applied to law.
New York, NY: Worth.
PSY 206 Module 6 Profiling Lecture

Now criminal profiling is useful, but it can also go terribly wrong. And it's a pretty
imperfect science. And so we have to keep that in mind. Criminal profiling is the process
of developing a profile to narrow down a search for suspects. So for example, criminal
profiling is sometimes useful in looking for serial killers, looking for people who repeat
crimes with a particular pattern, and in that pattern you begin to develop a profile of
the offender.

Two cases of criminal profiles gone terribly wrong would be the Atlanta bombings of
1996, which there was a bombing at the Olympics. Some of you may remember that in
1996. And Richard Jewell was arrested for it because the profile said it was probably a
rent-a-cop kind of guy who worked for a security company who was looking for fame
and so forth.

And so Jewell was arrested. And it was later found out that he didn't do it at all and that
the real bomber was found later on. And by the time they found the bomber, he had
actually done some more damage in the Atlanta area and taken more lives. So in that
case, poor profiling not only got the wrong guy rested, but also did little to protect the
public.

And then in perhaps one of the weirdest kind of cases of a racial profile, the DC sniper
case of, I believe it was in 2002, is another case of really bad profiling. I was traveling to
Washington in 2002 as part of a project at the National Institutes of Health and was
traveling to Washington during the DC sniper attacks. And I can tell you that it was
terrifying. To get on a bus, to get on a train, you're always looking around. I mean, it
terrorized an entire city.

And a number of people were killed by the snipers. The FBI profile was of a single
middle-aged white man who had lost a job probably with the government or was still
working for the government and who had an axe to grind was the DC sniper. Now we
know that the DC snipers were actually two people. One, a middle-aged black man and
the other a 17-year-old black man. And so the profile didn't even get the race of the
person right, let alone their age or their occupation.

And that is a shining example of profiling gone bad. And in fact, the actual snipers
crossed paths with the police several times in DC in 2002. Now when they changed the
profile from a racial profile to a geographic profile and looked for someone who was
endemic to that area and started to get hints about where the person might have lived,
why they were in this particular area, and then got a couple of leads, they were able to
change their profile and to track down the real DC snipers. If you want more information
about that, you can Google DC snipers and you'll come up with a lot of information
about it.
So I want you to read the chapter on profiling. I'm going to give you a discussion in the
discussion group this week that may cause some controversy. There's no clear cut
answer to this discussion. So I want you to keep the discussion respectful and realize
that there are varying opinions based on people's backgrounds and so forth. So do keep
that in mind that there may be some controversy.

And it has to do with an example of a police pull over that may or may not represent
racial profiling. And I would like you to take a look at that and tell us whether you think
it's racial profiling or not, but make sure you give us reasons for your answer. Don't just
guess at it, but really come up with a reason why you think it might be racial profiling or
might not be racial profiling.

There's no right or wrong answer to this scenario. So at the end of the week, I'm not
going to tell you, oh, yeah, this was racial profiling or it wasn't. I want you to decide and
discuss it among yourselves because it will really get you thinking about the nature of
profiling and its pros and cons.
 4/9/24
Chapter 6 - Criminal Profiling/Psychological
Autopsies
the process of drawing inferences about a criminal’s
profiling personality, behavior, motivation, and demographic
characteristics based on crime scenes and other
evidence, pioneered by the FBI behavioral science unit
(BSU)
used most famously in cases involving serial killers
serial murderers who kill 3 or more people in separate
killers events with a cooling off period between murders

to create profile: helps to provide leads and

• analyze crime scenes
• victimology
→ focus investigation, helps rule
people in or out and can
• study police/autopsy reports suggest lines of questioning
the distinctive,personal feature of the crime that
signature presumably reveals the killer's personality, such as
a particular form of torture or sexual activity

methods of abduction, transport, or disposal of victims may change

but the signature usually doesn't, because it is the whole reason why
he does it - it fulfills him emotionally (John Douglas)

profiling is a largely unvalidated technique, requires a series of

inferential leaps from:
key to being
what why who
→ → a good
profiler is
analysis of conclusions inferences judgment
crime and about about
victims John Douglas
motive identity
to profile a killer, you need to get into their mind at the time of the crime
much of the mystique of the profiling process is that it appears to rely on
profiler’s intuition - on movies and TV they appear to be almost psychic

profiler accounts: stories and case

• narrative of the case studies are not
• description of the profile → evidence -
• comparison of killer to profile systematic research
• claim of astonishing accuracy is still needed

Jack the Ripper 1888

three famous profiles
Olympic bomber 1996

Mad bomber 1940s-50s

Dr. Thomas Bond created what might be first ever
Jack the Ripper criminal profile trying to catch Jack the Ripper

responsible for at least 5 murders in London

did two of the autopsies, from which he speculated about certain
characteristics of the killer
• a man of great physical strength
• a man of great coolness and daring
• a quiet, inoffensive looking man, middle aged and respectably dressed
• in the habit of wearing a cloak or overcoat
• solitary, eccentric, likely without a regular job

FBI said to look for single white middle-class male

Olympic bomber who was overly interested in police or LEO work,
police buff or cop wannabe
Began to intensely investigate Richard Jewell, putting his name and
face everywhere, 2 years later FBI admitted it was not him and charged
Eric Rudolph, caught in 2005
 one of the most famous, detailed profiles ever created
Mad Bomber Consolidated Edison company bombed 1940, with note
that said "Con Edison crooks, this is for you"
planted/detonated multiple bombs across NYC
sent letters to NYPD and New York Times
stopped during WWII (1941 - 1951) due to his "patriotic feelings"
when the bombings started again, police contacted psychiatrist Dr.
James Brussel
he looked over the case and the letters and told police to look for
someone 40-50, Catholic, foreign born, single, and living with a sibling
suspect would be current or former employee of Con Ed and would have
progressive paranoia
he even said the suspect would be wearing a double-breasted suit,
buttoned
police finally arrested 54 -year- old George Metesky, single,
unemployed, former Con Ed employee, lived with two older sisters -
when arrested he changed from bathrobe into double breasted suit,
buttoned
most crucial information was that he was a resentful current or former
Con Ed employee - Metesky was upset he was denied disability after
being injured at work
Characteristics of Serial Killers
• most have some form of brain injury impairing rational thought
• most have history of childhood physical, sexual, psychological abuse
• most are white males, average intelligence
• usually seek to dominate victims before killing them
• childhood maladjustment sometimes manifests in animal cruelty
• tend to use more intimate methods than guns to kill
• often drink or do drugs before murders, maybe to desensitize
• tend to select certain types of victims
• often are obsessed with violent porn, killing is sexual to them
• fantasies = rehearsals, often relive crime later for masturbation
• may keep souvenirs from victims or clippings of newspaper coverage
female serial killers
• seek out more powerless victims • more likely to be
• more likely to kill family members motivated by money
 carefully select victims, plan what to do to them
organized show patience, waiting for right opportunity
murderers show self control, cleaning up after murder
use more elaborate rituals (torture, dismemberment)
impulsive, pick victims at random
disorganized may act on sudden rage or hearing voices
murderers use weapons of opportunity and leave at crime scene
may use the dead body for sexual purposes
Myths of Psychopathy
• all psychopaths are violent
• all psychopaths are psychotic
• psychopathy is untreatable

the crime scene

is presumed to
reflect the
murderer’s
behavior and
personality in
much the same
way as
furnishings reveal
the homeowner's
character
John Douglas

organized vs. disorganized

became the easiest
taxonomy to distinguish
between two types of
serial killer personalities
 Ronald Holmes/Stephan Holmes - came up with a
classification system of 4 typologies:

visionary usually psychotic, hear voices or have visions telling

them to kill certain types of people
mission motivated by desire to kill people they think are evil or
oriented unworthy, less likely to be clinically psychotic
hedonistic kill for thrill, take sadistic sexual pleasure in torturing
their victims
power get satisfaction from capturing and controlling victim
oriented before killing them
these typologies offer insight into different motives but statistically
most serial killers do not fit neatly into one category or another
Research on Profiling
early study in England of 184 police detectives who had used profilers
found that it led to identifying a perpetrator in only 2.7% of the cases

experimental study compared accuracy of profiles from 4 groups:

undergraduate college students crimes:
I homicide
clinical psychologists, no experience 1 sex offense
police detectives, no training evidence:
crime-scene photos
police detectives, FBI training victimology
autopsy reports
trained professionals: reports from responding officers/
studied evidence more closely investigating detectives
spent more time writing reports
wrote longer reports
made more specific inferences about offender characteristics
profiles were much more accurate, but only for the sex offense case

only 27% of articles on profiling had research studies

Problems with Profiling
some assumptions in profiling have either not been
unwarranted tested or have been tested and found to be false
assumptions • crime scenes do not support organized vs
disorganized but rather a continuum
• particular crime scene characteristics are not reliably
associated with particular criminal personalities
• referring to profilers' abilities in vague terms should not be mistaken
for clear explanations of how their inference process works
even though people's basic personalities don't really
cross-situational change, their behavior is powerfully determined by
consistency their situation - context matters
many things in murder cases can vary: can be a problem if
• victim characteristics (weak/strong) murders are similar so
• setting (secluded/populated) they are profiled to be the
• killer's emotional state (agitated/calm) same killer and vice versa
crime linkage - the process of determining whether the same person
committed two or more crimes
one study found that 80% of the statements
utility of made by profilers were unsupported
inferences many profiles contain contradictory statements
inaccurate information could cause investigators to spin their wheels
or go down dead ends or develop tunnel vision
tunnel vision - focusing on a certain suspect and only them, looking for
evidence to prove guilt and not looking or ignoring evidence that says
they are innocent
misleading profiles can cause the real criminals to evade capture
to improve profiling:
• enhanced databases with many types of crimes
• systematic research
• development of standardized procedures for training and profiling
geographic profiling - also called criminal spatial mapping or geoprofiling
relies on maps and math - key locations associated with serial crimes
(crime scenes, body dump sites, etc.) plotted on computerized map

computer programs then estimate the general vicinity of the criminals

home/work to predict location of next crime, criminals tend to stay in
geographic comfort zone
helps figure out where to place stakeouts, set traps, and look for
witnesses

anchor point - location from which an offender leaves to launch attacks

buffer zone - area where offender is less likely to commit crimes
distance decay - the probability of an attack decreases as distance from
past crime locations increases
temporal sequencing - the geographical range of a serial offender's
crimes will increase over time, offsets distance decay

behavioral investigative advice (BIA) - offers advice to investigators on

how to use media, what questions might be asked to suspects, whether a
crime might be part of a series, everything is based on research and
focuses on providing useful info to investigators
sometimes police use profiles not to solve crimes but to predict
criminal behavior (like racial profiling) - use of stereotypes or vague
profiles can cause problems at trial

probative evidence - provides info useful in assessing whether a

person committed a crime
• should information about whether a defendant fits a profile be
admissible in court
• should a defendants "fit" with a profile be considered evidence
racial profiling - using race or ethnicity as an indicator of who might be
involved in criminal activity
psychological autopsies
equivocal death - when it is not clear why the death happened, could
be homicide/suicide/accidental, circumstances are open to
interpretation
psychological autopsy
NASH system an effort to dissect and examine the
for death psychological state of a person prior to his
classification or her death
Natural
Accidental must rely on direct sources of evidence like
Suicide records the person left behind, data from
Homicide interviews of friends, families, coworkers etc
the goal is to reconstruct the person's emotional
state, personality, thoughts, and lifestyle
MEs use two basic criteria to distinguish between suicide and accident:
• whether the death could have been self-inflicted
• whether there were clear indications of intention to die
checklist to assist in determining suicide:
1. pathological evidence (autopsy)
2. toxicology evidence
3.witness statements
4.investigatory evidence (police report, crime scene photos)
5. psychological evidence (behavior, lifestyle, personality)
6. state of the body
7. evidence shows the person knew there was high risk they would die
8. reported suicidal thoughts
9. recent, sudden change in affect (emotions)
10.serious depression or mental disorder
11.expressed hopelessness
12. expressed farewell, indicating desire to die
13. experienced stressful events/significant loss (actual or threatened)
14. experienced general instability in immediate family
15. recent interpersonal conflicts
16. history of generally poor physical health
 Mark your calendars! Psychology Week is April 21-27.

APA.org APA Style APA Services Divisions About APA Events Membership Join APA Help Log In Cart(0)

TOPICS PUBLICATIONS & RESEARCH & EDUCATION & NEWS &

DATABASES PRACTICE CAREER ADVOCACY

This page has been archived and is no longer being updated regularly.
COVER STORY

Criminal profiling: the reality behind the

myth
Forensic psychologists are working with law enforcement officials
to integrate psychological science into criminal profiling.
By LEA WINERMAN
Monitor Staff
July/August 2004, Vol 35, No. 7
Print version: page 66
10 min read

Winerman, L. (2004, July/August). Criminal profiling: the reality behind the myth. APA monitor,
35 (1), 66.
(javascript:toggleCitation();)

(javascript:toggleFeedback();)
98

(#)

(javascript: openSocialShare('https://twitter.com/share?url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.apa.org%2fmonitor%2fjulaug04%2fcriminal&via=APA&text=Psychological+sleuths--

Criminal+profiling%3a+the+reality+behind+the+myth'))

(javascript: openSocialShare('https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.apa.org%2fmonitor%2fjulaug04%2fcriminal&title=Psychological+sleuths--

Criminal+profiling%3a+the+reality+behind+the+myth&summary=Forensic+psychologists+are+working+with+law+enforcement+officials+to+integrate+psychological+science+into+criminal+profiling.%0d%0a'))

(javascript:openEmail('English');)

(javascript:printThis();)

For 16 years, "mad bomber" George Metesky eluded New York City police. Metesky planted more than 30 small
bombs around the city between 1940 and 1956, hitting movie theaters, phone booths and other public areas.

In 1956, the frustrated investigators asked psychiatrist James Brussel, New York State's assistant commissioner of
mental hygiene, to study crime scene photos and notes from the bomber. Brussel came up with a detailed description
of the suspect: He would be unmarried, foreign, self-educated, in his 50s, living in Connecticut, paranoid and with a
vendetta against Con Edison--the first bomb had targeted the power company's 67th street headquarters.

While some of Brussel's predictions were simply common sense, others were based on psychological ideas. For
instance, he said that because paranoia tends to peak around age 35, the bomber, 16 years after his first bomb, would
now be in his 50s. The profile proved dead on: It led police right to Metesky, who was arrested in January 1957 and
confessed immediately.

In the following decades, police in New York and elsewhere continued to consult psychologists and psychiatrists to
develop profiles of particularly difficult-to-catch offenders. At the same time, though, much of the criminal profiling
field developed within the law enforcement community--particularly the FBI.

Nowadays profiling rests, sometimes uneasily, somewhere between law enforcement and psychology. As a science, it
is still a relatively new field with few set boundaries or definitions. Its practitioners don't always agree on
methodology or even terminology. The term "profiling" has caught on among the general public, largely due to movies
like "The Silence of the Lambs" and TV shows like "Profiler." But the FBI calls its form of profiling "criminal investigative
analysis"; one prominent forensic psychologist calls his work "investigative psychology"; and another calls his "crime
action profiling."

Despite the different names, all of these tactics share a common goal: to help investigators examine evidence from
crime scenes and victim and witness reports to develop an offender description. The description can include
psychological variables such as personality traits, psychopathologies and behavior patterns, as well as demographic
variables such as age, race or geographic location. Investigators might use profiling to narrow down a field of suspects
or figure out how to interrogate a suspect already in custody.

"In some ways, [profiling] is really still as much an art as a science," says psychologist Harvey Schlossberg, PhD,
former director of psychological services for the New York Police Department. But in recent years, many
psychologists--together with criminologists and law enforcement officials--have begun using psychology's statistical
and research methods to bring more science into the art.

How does profiling work?

Informal criminal profiling has a long history. It was used as early as the 1880s, when two physicians, George Phillips
and Thomas Bond, used crime scene clues to make predictions about British serial murderer Jack the Ripper's
personality.

At the same time, profiling has taken root in the United States, where, until recent decades, profilers relied mostly on
their own intuition and informal studies. Schlossberg, who developed profiles of many criminals, including David
Berkowitz--New York City's "Son of Sam"--describes the approach he used in the late 1960s and 70s: "What I would
do," he says, "is sit down and look through cases where the criminals had been arrested. I listed how old [the
perpetrators] were, whether they were male or female, their level of education. Did they come from broken families?
Did they have school behavioral problems? I listed as many factors as I could come up with, and then I added them up
to see which were the most common."

In 1974, the FBI formed its Behavioral Science Unit to investigate serial rape and homicide cases. From 1976 to 1979,
several FBI agents--most famously John Douglas and Robert Ressler--interviewed 36 serial murderers to develop
theories and categories of different types of offenders.

Most notably, they developed the idea of the "organized/disorganized dichotomy": Organized crimes are
premeditated and carefully planned, so little evidence is found at the scene. Organized criminals, according to the
classification scheme, are antisocial but know right from wrong, are not insane and show no remorse. Disorganized
crimes, in contrast, are not planned, and criminals leave such evidence as fingerprints and blood. Disorganized
criminals may be young, under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or mentally ill.
Over the past quarter-century, the Behavioral Science Unit has further developed the FBI's profiling process--including
refining the organized/disorganized dichotomy into a continuum and developing other classification schemes.

"The basic premise is that behavior reflects personality," explains retired FBI agent Gregg McCrary. In a homicide case,
for example, FBI agents glean insight into personality through questions about the murderer's behavior at four crime
phases:

Antecedent: What fantasy or plan, or both, did the murderer have in place before the act? What triggered the
murderer to act some days and not others?

Method and manner: What type of victim or victims did the murderer select? What was the method and manner
of murder: shooting, stabbing, strangulation or something else?

Body disposal: Did the murder and body disposal take place all at one scene, or multiple scenes?

Postoffense behavior: Is the murderer trying to inject himself into the investigation by reacting to media reports
or contacting investigators?

A rape case is analyzed in much the same way, but with the additional information that comes from a living victim.
Everything about the crime, from the sexual acts the rapist forces on the victim to the order in which they're
performed, offers a clue about the perpetrator, McCrary says.

Psychology's contributions behavior reflects personality

Although the FBI approach has gained public attention, some psychologists have questioned its scientific solidity.
Ressler, Douglas and the other FBI agents were not psychologists, and some psychologists who looked at their work
found methodological flaws.

Former FBI agent McCrary agrees that some of the FBI's early research was rough: "Early on it was just a bunch of us
[FBI agents] basing our work on our investigative experience," he says, "and hopefully being right more than we were
wrong."

McCrary says he believes that they were right more than wrong, though, and emphasizes that FBI methods have
improved since then. In the meantime, psychologists have also been helping to step up profiling's scientific rigor.
Some psychologists have been conducting their own criminal profiling research, and they've developed several new
approaches:

Offender profiling. Much of this work comes from applied psychologist David Canter, PhD, who founded the field
of investigative psychology in the early 1990s and now runs the Centre for Investigative Psychology at the
University of Liverpool.

Investigative psychology, Canter says, includes many areas where psychology can contribute to investigations--
including profiling. The goal of investigative psychology's form of profiling, like all profiling, is to infer characteristics
of a criminal based on his or her behavior during the crime. But, Canter says, the key is that all of those inferences
should come from empirical, peer-reviewed research--not necessarily from investigative experience.

For example, Canter and his colleagues recently analyzed crime scene data from 100 serial homicides to test the FBI's
organized/disorganized model. Their results, which will be published in an upcoming issue of APA's Psychology, Public
Policy and Law, indicate that, in contrast to some earlier findings, almost all serial murderers show some level of
organization.
murderers can be divided into categories based on how they interact with victims: sexual control,
mutilation, execution, plunder
Organized behaviors--like positioning or concealing a victim's body--are the "core variables" that tend to show up
most frequently and co-occur with other variables most often, he found. The differences between murderers, the
researchers say, instead lie in the types of disorganized behaviors they exhibit. The study suggests that serial
murderers can be divided into categories based on the way they interact with their victims: through sexual control,
mutilation, execution or plunder.

Canter says that research like this, which uses the statistical techniques of psychology to group together types of
offender behaviors, is the only way to develop scientifically defensible descriptions and classifications of offenders.

"Our approach," he says, "is to consider all the information that may be apparent at the crime scene and to carry out
theory-based studies to determine the underlying structures of that material."

In another study, he and his colleagues collected crime scene data from 112 rape cases and analyzed the relationship
among different crime scene actions--from what types of sexual acts the rapist demanded to whether he bound the
victim. The researchers found that the types of sexual violation and physical assault did not distinguish rapists from
each other; these were the core variables that occurred in most rape cases. Instead, what distinguished the rapists
into categories were nonphysical interactions--things like whether they stole from or apologized to the victim.

Canter puts little faith in the investigative experience-derived offender descriptions developed by law-enforcement
agents. As he sees it, psychologists need to work from the ground up to gather data and classify offenders in areas as
various as arson, burglary, rape and homicide.

Crime action profiling. Forensic psychologist Richard Kocsis, PhD, and his colleagues have developed models
based on large studies of serial murderers, rapists and arsonists that act as guides to profiling such crimes. The
models, he says, are similar to the structured interviews clinical psychologists use to make clinical diagnoses.
They come out of an Australian government-funded research program that Kocsis ran, in which he developed
profiling methods in collaboration with police and fire agencies.

Now in private practice, Kocsis says crime action profiling models are rooted in knowledge developed by forensic
psychologists, psychiatrists and criminologists. Part of crime action profiling also involves examining the process and
practice of profiling.

"Everybody seems to be preoccupied with developing principles for profiling," Kocsis explains. "However, what seems
to have been overlooked is any systematic examination of how to compose a profile. What type of information do, or
should, profiles contain? What type of case material do you need to construct a profile? How does the presence or
absence of material affect the accuracy of a profile?"

He has studied, for example, whether police officers perceive the same profile to be more accurate and useful when
they believe it was written by a professional profiler rather than a layperson.

Kocsis agrees that the future of profiling lies in more empirically based research. He also believes, though, that just as
some clinicians are better than others, there is also a skill element involved in profiling. Is profiling an art or a science?
"Realistically, I think it is probably a bit of both," he says.

The psychology-law enforcement relationship

Among those in the profiling field, the tension between law enforcement and psychology still exists to some degree.
"The difference is really a matter of the FBI being more oriented towards investigative experience than [academic
psychologists] are," says retired FBI agent McCrary.

"But," he adds, "it's important to remember that we're all working toward the same thing."

In recent years, the FBI has begun to work closely with many forensic psychologists--in fact, it employs them.
Psychologist Stephen Band, PhD, is the chief of the Behavioral Science Unit, and clinical forensic psychologist Anthony
Pinizzotto, PhD, is one of the FBI's chief scientists.

The unit also conducts research with forensic psychologists at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.
One recent collaborative study, for example, looked at the relationship between burglaries and certain types of sexual
offenses--whether specific aspects of a crime scene differed in incidents that began as a burglary and ended in a
sexual offense, as opposed to crimes that began as a sexual offense but included theft. Police looking at the first type
of crime might want to look for convicted burglars in the area, Pinizzotto explains. The study will be published in an
upcoming issue of Sex Offender Law Report, published by the Civic Research Institute.

One of the FBI's collaborators at John Jay College is Gabrielle Salfati, PhD, a graduate of the Centre for Investigative
Psychology. "Whenever we do research, we try to bring in as many varied points of view as possible," Pinizzotto says.
"Gabrielle Salfati's expertise on the statistical aspects of evaluating crime scenes is a great contribution."

More recently, the unit has also begun to collaborate with forensic psychologists at Marymount University in
Arlington, Va.--another indication that law enforcement and psychology will continue to work together.

"I think," says Band, "that there is an incredible value added when applications of professional psychology enter into
the mix of what we do."

Related Articles

Does profiling really work? (/monitor/julaug04/profiling)

The content I just read: IS HELPFUL IS NOT HELPFUL

ADVERTISEMENT
 INTL

Find a Therapist (City or Postcode) Verified by Psychology Today

Arthur Dobrin D.S.W.

Am I Right? Dobrin, A. (2012, June 7). Racial profiling. Psychology Today.
LAW AND CRIME

Racial Profiling
Blacks and Whites experience the world differently.
Posted June 7, 2012

I grew up in Brooklyn, in the 73rd police precinct, which covers parts of Brownsville
and East New York. As a teenager I commuted to Stuyvesant High School in Manhat‐
tan.

These two bits of my childhood—the neighborhood and school—figured in a story

aired recently on WNYC, which reported that kids between 14 and 18 were stopped by
police nearly 8,000 times in a four-block section of Brownsville in 2011. During the
same period, within a three-block radius around Stuyvesant High School police
stopped teens about 20 times last year. In other words, if you are a teenager, it is 400
times more likely you will be stopped in Brownsville than around Stuyvesant.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER ADVERTISEMENT

stops of 14-18 year old kids by police
Brownsville - 8000 stops
Stuyvesant - 20 stops
Does this mean that if I were a teenager today, I would be stopped on a regular basis
by the police in my old neighborhood but probably would not be stopped by a cop
near my high school?

Probably. I am white. Today the 73rd Precinct is close to 100% black and Hispanic. It is
also the highest crime area of the city. But being white would probably give me a free
pass, even in Brownville. I don’t fit the criminal profile by virtue of being white, dressing
white and ‘acting’ white.

By contrast, Stuyvesant High School, one the country’s elite public schools, is 96%
Asian and white and is in a low crime area. So I would also be free of police harass‐
ment there. The profile I fit is as described by a current Stuyvesantian, Benedict Bolton,
who said “We’re a bunch of, to be honest, skinny white kids.”

Complicating the matter, though, is that in Brownsville there is a lot of crime, a lot of
African-Americans and Hispanics. Around Stuyvesant there isn’t much crime and there
aren’t many African-Americans.

Is this a problem? One argument is that there is nothing wrong with this racial disparity
in stops and frisks. Cops stop kids who look like trouble in a crime-riddled community,
defenders say. While it is undoubtedly profiling, it is justifiable profiling, the argument
continues, based in a reality.

Black students see the matter differently. This is from the WNYC report:

Tyari Jenkins, a 14-year-old African-American student at Teachers Preparatory High

Tyari Jenkins, a 14-year-old African-American student at Teachers Preparatory High
School, said he has been stopped and frisked three times." The first time was as a 12-
year-old, when he was barely five feet tall, he said. He had been walking out of his
home to his friend’s house across the street.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER ADVERTISEMENT

23 Freaking Awesome Gadgets

23 Freaking Awesome Gadgets You Didn’t
Know You Needed (Until Today)
Smart Trending Gifts

“ When I looked up, I see the cop. He was like, 'You,' and I was like, 'Me?”' He said,
‘Yeah,’ ” Tyari recalled. “ ‘He said, 'Empty your book bag,' and I was like, 'Okay,' and I
was taking my time. Then he said, 'You need to hurry up.' And he started emptying my
book bag and dropped my stuff on the ground."

The officers asked for an ID. Tyari said he left his at home, so the officers hauled him
back home across the street and asked his mother to identify him. After a few minutes,
they left.

Tyari said he’s never been arrested for anything. Neither have any of the other
Brownsville kids who shared their stories. They are now 14 years old, and all of them
have been stopped by police between two and seven times. http://www.wnyc.org/arti‐
cles/wnyc-news/2012/may/29/city-teenagers-say-s…

Racial profiling isn’t confined to New York and its police department. Racial profiling is

a fact of life for young African-Americans. This spring I taught at an historic black uni‐
a fact of life for young African-Americans. This spring I taught at an historic black uni‐
versity, Claflin, in Orangeburg, South Carolina. I asked my students how many of them
had been stopped by the police. Thirteen of the fifteen had encounters with the police.
These aren’t students with hoodies or pants falling down below their rears; it is hard to
see them as anything but typical young people, all of whom are college students.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER ADVERTISEMENT

Most Claflin students have been stopped by the police multiple times. All stops were
on the highways (by state troopers, mostly white), not on the local streets (where the
sheriff and many deputies are black).

The most recent and graphic story told in class involved a female on her way home
from work. When pulled over by a state trooper and asked for identification, she
reached for the company nametag that hung around her neck. The trooper reached for
his gun and held it against her chest. In this instance, you don’t need to be a black
male to pose a threat; being black is enough.

LAW AND CRIME ESSENTIAL READS

Conviction of School Shoot‐

Privacy Hacks Are Becoming
er’s Mother Sets a Key
Deviously Creative
Precedent

Two times, three times, more times than one could remember: that’s how many times
Two times, three times, more times than one could remember: that’s how many times
the students had been pulled over. While a few stops resulted in traffic tickets, most
did not. One student, a scholarship athlete who aspires to be a chef, said he expects
that he will wind up in prison one day for no reason other than being black.

My student’s prediction isn’t paranoia but only a slightly exaggerated reflection of a

statistical reality. A 2001 report of the Bureau of Justice Statistics shows that 32 per‐
cent of black males born in 2001 can expect to spend time in prison over the course of
their lifetime. (17.2 percent of Hispanics and 5.9 percent of whites born in 2001 are like‐
ly to end up in prison.)

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER ADVERTISEMENT

males born in 2001, % likely to end up in prison:

black - 32%
hispanic - 17.2%
white - 5.9%
23 Freaking Awesome Gadgets
23 Freaking Awesome Gadgets You Didn’t
Know You Needed (Until Today)
Smart Trending Gifts

Equally as unsettling as the statistic is the matter-of-fact way my student forecast his
future. For him it was as inevitable as diabetes—many he knew would contract it and
would ultimately prove life-threatening.

Add to this pessimistic realism the phenomenon of the self-fulfilling prophecy and we
begin to understand the seemingly intractable nature of the discrepancies between
African-Americans the rest of hyphenated America.

The Supreme Court, in Brown v Education, declared that separate could never be

equal. Sadly, today black and white/Asian/Hispanic America still live in separate reali‐
equal. Sadly, today black and white/Asian/Hispanic America still live in separate reali‐
ties. How can the gap be closed? How can the separation become participation?

I have no policy solutions to propose. But I do suggest that the dual realities of the
races be acknowledged. I once had a well-meaning friend say that it was about time
that African-Americans get over it. Slavery ended a century and a half ago; legal segre‐
gation ended a generation ago, he pointed out. How long can innocent whites be held
responsible for the sins of their ancestors?

I think these are the wrong questions. They will get us nowhere. As every ethical sys‐
tem posits, it is necessary first to put yourself in another’s shoes. This is a good way to
begin. We have hardly started.

Brownsville and Stuyvesant, both in NYC, are worlds apart. These two parts of myself
need to be reconciled.

ADVERTISEMENT

23 Freaking Awesome Gadgets

23 Freaking Awesome Gadgets You Didn’t
Know You Needed (Until Today)
Smart Trending Gifts

About the Author

The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20131105022907/http://www.racialprofilinganalysis.neu.…

BACKGROUND AND CURRENT DATA COLLECTION EFFORTS

HISTORY OF RACIAL PROFILING ANALYSIS
The debate over racial profiling has become a central element in a much larger history of
adversarial relationships between the police and communities of color. Already-existing
tensions between police and communities of color became heightened over the past two
decades as allegations of racial profiling by law enforcement agents against people of color
increased in number and frequency. Police departments and communities of color are now
asking how they can address the controversy in order to improve police-community relations
and work to become more effective in law enforcement activities.

A "profile" is a coherent set of facts - known conditions and observable behavior - that indicate
a particular individual may be engaged in criminal activity. The technique of "profiling" is a well-
known and long-standing law enforcement tactic.

The term "profiling" first became associated with a method of interdicting drug traffickers during
the late 1970s. In 1985, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) instituted Operation
Pipeline, an intelligence-based assessment of the method by which drug networks transported
bulk drugs to drug markets, and began training local and state police in applying a drug courier
profile as part of highway drug interdiction techniques. Under Operation Pipeline, police were
trained to apply a profile that included evidence of concealment in the vehicle, indications of
fast, point-to-point driving, as well as the age- and race characteristics of the probable drivers.
In some cases, the profiling technique was distorted, so that officers began targeting black and
Hispanic male drivers by stopping them for technical traffic violations as a pretext for
ascertaining whether the drivers were carrying drugs.

A 1998 U.S. Department of Justice investigation of activities of the New Jersey State Police
raised awareness of the issue and defined racial profiling in the public eye as the practice of
singling out members of racial or ethnic groups for relatively minor traffic or petty criminal
offenses in order to question and/or search them for drugs, guns, or other contraband.
Throughout the investigation, the American news media exploded with coverage of the
problem of racial profiling, with front-page news stories and editorials in both the national and
local press examining its individual and social costs. The allegations became so common that
the community of color derisively labeled the phenomenon "driving while black" or "driving
while brown." The DOJ New Jersey investigation concluded with evidence of pattern and
practice of conduct violations that resulted in a DOJ-NJ State Police Consent Decree.
 Since the New Jersey findings, police departments have begun to analyze their own activities
and communities have begun to demand more police accountability around the issue of race.
In early June 1999, President Bill Clinton spoke at the Strengthening Police-Community
Relations conference in Washington, D.C., and directed federal agencies to begin the process
of collecting data on the race and ethnicity of persons stopped or searched by federal agents.
According to a Gallup Poll released on December 9, 1999, over half of those polled believed
that the police were actively engaged in the practice of racial profiling, and, more significantly,
81 percent said that they disapproved of the practice.
A few short years later, more than 20 states have passed legislation prohibiting racial profiling
and/or mandating data collection on stops and searches, hundreds of individual jurisdictions
have voluntarily begun to collect data, and several jurisdictions are collecting data on racial
profiling as a result of federal or state court settlements or consent decrees. In February 2001,
during an address to a joint session of Congress President George W. Bush said of racial
profiling, "It wrong and we will end it in America." Although questions about the use of racial
profiling have emerged since September 11, 2001, many people around the country continue
to work to end the practice permanently.

ANALYSIS OF RACIAL DISPARITIES IN THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT'S

STOP, QUESTION, AND FRISK PRACTICES

RAND Corporation

In 2006, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) stopped a half-million pedestrians for
suspected criminal involvement. Raw statistics for these encounters suggest large racial
disparities � 89 percent of the stops involved nonwhites. Do these statistics point to racial bias in
police officers� decisions to stop particular pedestrians? Do they indicate that officers are
particularly intrusive when stopping nonwhites? The NYPD asked the RAND Center on Quality
Policing (CQP) to help it understand this issue and identify recommendations for addressing
potential problems. CQP researchers analyzed data on all street encounters between NYPD
officers and pedestrians in 2006. They compared the racial distribution of stops to external
benchmarks, attempts to construct what the racial distribution of the stopped pedestrians would
have been if officers� stop decisions had been racially unbiased. Then they compared each
officer�s stopping patterns with an internal benchmark constructed from stops in similar
circumstances made by other officers. Finally, they examined stop outcomes, assessing whether
stopped white and nonwhite suspects have different rates of frisk, search, use of force, and arrest.
They found small racial differences in these rates and make communication, recordkeeping, and
training recommendations to the NYPD for improving police-pedestrian interactions.

89% of pedestrians stopped by NYPD in 2006 were not white

FLORIDA: JACKSONVILLE POLICE RECEIVE NO RACIAL PROFILING COMPLAINTS IN �08

The Jacksonville Police Department presented its annual Racial Profiling Report which covers
Calendar Year 2008 and showed that JPD received no formal reports of racial profiling. It also
confirmed that local police are conducting traffic stops using legal criteria and not race as their
motivation for enforcement action. Currently, the Texas Racial Profiling Law requires that police
departments collect data pertaining to traffic stops, pedestrian stops, searches conducted and
citations issued.

TEXAS: BELLAIRE MAYOR TO INVESTIGATE RACIAL PROFILING ALLEGATIONS

The mayor of Bellaire responded publicly for the first time to allegations of racial profiling due to
an incident of mistaken identity. Officers will now be required to participate in additional cultural
sensitivity training. The city is also hiring an independent state consultant to analyze traffic stop
data for 2008 and look for incidents of racial profiling. The mayor also promised to release the
results of the district attorney's investigation publicly, once it is completed.

CALIFORNIA: TORRANCE POLICE PROFILING SUIT IS DEFEATED

A woman who claimed she was wrongly arrested by Torrance police because of her race has lost
her federal lawsuit against the city, a former chief and two officers. Sara Plowden, who lived in
Gardena when she filed the civil rights lawsuit in January 2006, claimed she was subjected to a
"driving while black" arrest early on Nov. 23, 2003. She claimed the officers physically accosted
her and that city officials and former Police Chief James Herren allowed "an atmosphere of
lawlessness, abuse and misconduct" to fester in the department.

ARKANSAS: ARIZONA DPS TIGHTENS SEARCH RULES TO AVOID PROFILING

The Arizona Department of Public Safety, in moves intended to prevent and detect racial profiling,
is making internal changes that include requiring Highway Patrol officers to document why they
search vehicles they stop. Other changes announced by Gov. Janet Napolitano's office include
requiring officers to obtain a motorist's consent for a search to get the driver's signature or to use
video or audio to record the driver giving permission verbally.

UTAH: UTAH HIGHWAY PATROL OFFICER ACCUSED OF RACIAL PROFILING

Sherida Felders, a black grandmother, alleges a Utah Highway Patrol officer had no reason to
believe her Jeep Commander contained illegal substances, but called in a drug-sniffing dog after
stopping her for speeding Felders has filed a suit accusing the trooper of conducting an illegal
search of her vehicle for drugs based on racial profiling.
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20130617153358/http://www.racialprofilinganalysis.neu.…

FAQS
General

1. What is racial profiling data collection?

2. Why do jurisdictions begin to collect data?
3. Does data collection help the problem?
4. Does data collection take a lot of time or distract from officers' duties?

Planning and Implementation

1. Who designs the data collection systems?

2. How long do jurisdictions collect data?
3. What role can community groups play in data collection programs?
4. What resources do jurisdictions need to begin collecting data?
5. How can jurisdictions find funding to start a program?
6. Do jurisdictions need to install new technology in order to start collecting data?
7. What kinds of training should departments provide for officers?

Reporting and Analysis

1. What is a benchmark?
2. Who is involved in the data analysis?
3. How should the results and analysis be reported to the public?

General
1. What is racial profiling data collection?

Racial profiling data collection is tracking the race, ethnicity, and gender of those who are
stopped and/or searched by the police. Generally, data collection systems require officers to
record information about some or all of their traffic and/or pedestrian stops and the information
is compiled and analyzed to determine whether the patterns of stops and searches are based
on race.

2. Why do jurisdictions begin to collect data?

There are many reasons why a jurisdiction might choose to collect data. The collection of
statistics and the expansion of information about police practices will allow departments to
more effectively allocate resources, build trust and respect in communities, identify potential
police misconduct, determine the best stop-and-search practices, and send a clear message to
the community and to other police departments that racial profiling is inconsistent with effective
police and equal protection and that the jurisdiction does not practice it.

On a logistical level, jurisdictions might begin to collect data voluntarily, because the issue has
become an important one in the area; based on state legislation or local ordinances that
require data collection; because of a consent decree that resulted from a federal pattern and
practice lawsuit brought by the U.S. Department of Justice; or because of a settlement from a
lawsuit brought by private parties.

3. Does data collection help the problem?

Although data collection may not directly solve the long-standing problem of racially-biased
policing, well-designed and comprehensive data collection efforts can enable jurisdictions to
better understand if they have a problem, determine the best ways to allocate police resources
to address that problem, and increase the effectiveness of the police department. By
increasing the amount of information about police activities, police departments and
communities can discuss the problems focusing more on the overall patterns of police activity
that have been documented in the data and less on individual anecdotes.

4. Does data collection take a lot of time or distract from officers' duties?

If a data collection system is designed well and integrated into other department operations,
data collection should not distract from the regular duties carried out by individual officers.
Departments can try to incorporate the racial profiling data collection into existing data
collection systems (dispatch information, citations, officer logs) to minimize the burden of
additional data collection efforts.
Top

Planning and Implementation

1. Who designs the data collection systems?
Data collection processes are different in each jurisdiction, thus are designed by different
constituencies in each situation. The most successful systems seem to be designed with input
from the police department administrators and individual officers, the research partners who
will be analyzing the data, and community leaders who are concerned about the process.

2. How long do jurisdictions collect data?

It is important that the jurisdictions gather data over a long enough period of time to be sure
that the data presents an accurate picture of stops and searches in the jurisdiction. Many
jurisdictions have implemented a short (three to six-month) pilot program to test the program
and modify its design if there are any problems. After the pilot program, jurisdictions generally
decide or are mandated to collect data for a set period of time, anywhere from one year to five
years, and some have decided to expand that period of time after it expired.

3. What role can community groups play in data collection programs?

Many effective data collection systems have involved community group representatives and
other members of the community on the task forces that oversee the data collection process.
This allows community members to help police departments and researchers shape the
program around the specific needs of the jurisdiction, which can ultimately help police-
community relations and effectiveness.

4. What resources do jurisdictions need to begin collecting data?

The resources necessary to implement data collection systems depend on the needs and
existing resources of the individual jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions are able to incorporate
racial profiling data collection in their exiting data collection systems or through communication
with the dispatcher, and thus require very few resources to start a program. Other jurisdictions
decide to update or overhaul their existing technology to begin racial profiling data collection
and improve other communication and information systems.

5. How can jurisdictions find funding to start a program?

Some state legislation includes "carrot and stick" provisions that offer funds for data collection
technology for jurisdictions who begin to collect data. Various state and federal programs also
have some funding available. In addition, some local, state, and national nonprofit
organizations and foundations provide grant money for jurisdictions who are implementing data
collection systems for specific reasons. Many funding sources require the jurisdiction to apply
for the funds, so the funding is not guaranteed.

6. Do jurisdictions need to install new technology in order to start collecting data?

New technology is not necessarily a part of racial profiling data collection, especially in small
jurisdictions and jurisdictions that are already collecting other information. Jurisdictions around
the country use many different methods to collect data, not all of which involve new technology.
7. What kinds of training should departments provide for officers?

Police departments should consider implementing training at the beginning of the data
collection process and once the process is ongoing. Training can include basic procedures for
filling out data collection forms or using technology, cultural diversity issues, background on
racial profiling and the reasons for collecting in the jurisdiction, professional and effective stops
and searches, and/or constitutional and legal issues involved in racial profiling.

Top

Reporting and Analysis

1. What is a benchmark?

Benchmarks are comparisons against which to measure the data that is collected. Determining
the appropriate benchmark is one of the most vexing problems in data collection systems, as
each of the commonly used benchmarks (for example, residential population data based on
Census reports) presents problems in the context of traffic stops. See the Methods and
Benchmarks section for more information about benchmarks.

2. Who is involved in the data analysis?

Police departments, whether they have internal analysis teams or not, should consider working
with research or academic partners in analyzing the data. Working with an external research
team might make the community and other interested parties more comfortable that the results
from the data collection and analysis are unbiased and objective.

3. How should the results and analysis be reported to the public?

Many jurisdictions produce reports at regular intervals (monthly, quarterly, annually) during the
data collection process and at its conclusion. Each report is generally made available to the
public on the internet and/or in hard copy form. Some jurisdictions will sponsor a community
forum to present the data and results to the community. There is considerable debate about
whether the data should be publicly available throughout the process or whether the public
should have access to the data only after the reports have been completed.

If you have any more questions, email us at [email protected].

Top

ANALYSIS OF RACIAL DISPARITIES IN THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT'S

STOP, QUESTION, AND FRISK PRACTICES

RAND Corporation

In 2006, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) stopped a half-million pedestrians for
suspected criminal involvement. Raw statistics for these encounters suggest large racial
disparities � 89 percent of the stops involved nonwhites. Do these statistics point to racial bias in
police officers� decisions to stop particular pedestrians? Do they indicate that officers are
particularly intrusive when stopping nonwhites? The NYPD asked the RAND Center on Quality
Policing (CQP) to help it understand this issue and identify recommendations for addressing
potential problems. CQP researchers analyzed data on all street encounters between NYPD
officers and pedestrians in 2006. They compared the racial distribution of stops to external
benchmarks, attempts to construct what the racial distribution of the stopped pedestrians would
have been if officers� stop decisions had been racially unbiased. Then they compared each
officer�s stopping patterns with an internal benchmark constructed from stops in similar
circumstances made by other officers. Finally, they examined stop outcomes, assessing whether
stopped white and nonwhite suspects have different rates of frisk, search, use of force, and arrest.
They found small racial differences in these rates and make communication, recordkeeping, and
training recommendations to the NYPD for improving police-pedestrian interactions.
USPP
Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics
Back to Index of Criminal Profiles

Provisional Psychological Profile

of the October 2002 Washington, D.C.-Area Sniper
Aubrey Immelman

October 9, 2002

In the absence of any specific criminal evidence, and based solely on rational consideration of likely
personality configurations consistent with the known behavior patterns of the individual responsible for the
October 2002 shooting spree in the Washington, DC area, it appears most likely that the sniper has a sadistic
personality pattern, possibly modulated by negativistic and paranoid tendencies. Theodore Millon (1996), a
leading authority on personality disorders, has labeled this personality composite the tyrannical sadist.
Though technically not an antisocial personality, the actions of individuals with this personality amalgam are
frequently of an antisocial nature; hence, the syndrome has also been labeled tyrannical psychopathy (Millon
& Davis, 1998, p. 169). The tyrannical sadist syndrome is described below, followed by more specific
descriptions of the sadistic, negativistic, and paranoid personality patterns.

The Tyrannical Sadist

Theodore Millon (1996) describes the tyrannically sadistic syndrome as follows:

Along with the malevolent antisocial [i.e., an antisocial personality with sadistic and paranoid
features], the tyrannical sadist stands among the most frightening and cruel of the personality disorder
subtypes. Both relate to others in an attacking, intimidating, and overwhelming way, frequently
accusatory and abusive, and almost invariably destructive. Some are crudely assaultive and
distressingly “evil,” whereas others are physically restrained, but overwhelm their victims by
unrelenting criticism and bitter tirades. There is a verbally or physically overbearing character to their
assaults, and minor resistances or weaknesses seem to stimulate tyrannical sadists, encouraging attack
rather than deterring and slowing them down. It is the forcefulness, the unrestrained character, and the
indiscriminate anger that is most notable. Descriptively, these sadists appear to relish the act of
menacing and brutalizing others; forcing their victims to cower and submit seems to provide them with
 a special sense of satisfaction. Among those who are not physically brutal, we see verbally cutting and
scathing commentaries that are both accusatory and demeaning. Many intentionally heighten and
dramatize their surly, abusive, inhumane, and unmerciful behaviors. Although these individuals are in
many respects the purest form of the “psychopathic” sadist, they do exhibit some features of other
personality types, most notably the negativistic and/or the paranoid.
What is also especially distinctive is the desire and willingness of these sadists to go out of their way
to be unmerciful and inhumane in their violence. More than any other personality, they derive deep
satisfaction in creating suffering and in seeing its effect on others. Their mean-spirited disposition leads
them to abandon universally held constraints that limit the viciousness of one’s personal actions. In
contrast to the explosive sadist [i.e., a sadistic personality with borderline features], for whom hostility
serves primarily as a discharge of pent-up feelings, tyrannical sadists employ violence as an
intentionally utilized instrument to inspire terror and intimidation. Moreover, they can self-consciously
observe and reflect on the consequences of his violence, and do so with a deep sense of satisfaction.
Many other sadists, by contrast, experience second thoughts and feel a measure of contrition about the
violence they have produced.
Often calculating and cool, tyrannical sadists are selective in their choice of victims, identifying
scapegoats who are not likely to react with counterviolence. These sadists employ violence to secure
cooperation and obeisance from their victims. Quite frequently, they display a disproportionate level of
abusiveness and intimidation to impress not only the victim but also those who observe the sadist’s
unconstrained power. . . .
Much of what drives the tyrannical subtype is their fear that others may recognize their inner
insecurities and low sense of self-esteem. To overcome these deeply felt inner weaknesses, tyrannizing
sadists have learned that they can feel superior by overwhelming others by the force of their physical
power and brutal vindictiveness. “I am superior to you, I can defeat you in all things that matter, I will
triumph over you despite your past achievements and superior talents. In the end, I will be the victor.”
Once unleashed, the power of vindication draws on deep fantasies of cruel and unmitigated revenge.
There are no internal brakes to constrain them until their fury is spent. There is little remorse for the
fury of their violence and the destructive consequences they create. The subjugation or elimination of
others has become the primary goal. (pp. 489–490)

The Sadistic (Dominant) Pattern

The sadistic (dominant, or abusive) personality pattern, as do all personality patterns, occurs on a
continuum ranging from normal to maladaptive. At the well-adjusted pole are strong-willed, commanding,
assertive personalities. Slightly exaggerated features occur in forceful, intimidating, controlling personalities.
In its most deeply ingrained, inflexible form, the sadistic pattern displays itself in domineering, belligerent,
highly aggressive behavior patterns.

Stephen Strack (1997) offers the following description of the normal (forceful; i.e., assertive or controlling)
prototype of the sadistic pattern:

[These individuals] seem driven to prove their worthiness. They are characterized by an assertive,
dominant, and tough-minded personal style. They tend to be strong-willed, ambitious, competitive, and
self-determined. . . . In work settings, these personalities are often driven to excel. They work hard to
achieve their goals, are competitive, and do well where they can take control or work independently. In
supervisory or leadership positions, these persons usually take charge and see to it that a job gets done.
 (From Strack, 1997, p. 490, with minor modifications)

All personality patterns have predictable, reliable, observable psychological indicators. The diagnostic
features of the sadistic pattern with respect to each of the eight fundamental attribute domains assessed in
Millon’s (1996) psychodiagnostic model are summarized below.

Expressive behavior. The core diagnostic feature of the expressive acts of dominant individuals is
assertiveness; they are tough, strong-willed, outspoken, competitive, and unsentimental. More exaggerated
variants of this pattern are characteristically forceful; they are controlling, contentious, and at times
overbearing, their power-oriented tendencies being evident in occasional intransigence, stubbornness, and
coercive behaviors. When they feel strongly about something, these individuals can be quite blunt, brusque,
and impatient, with sudden, abrupt outbursts of an unwarranted or precipitous nature. The most extreme
variants of this pattern are aggressive; they are intimidating, domineering, argumentative, and precipitously
belligerent. They derive pleasure from humiliating others and can be quite malicious. For this reason, people
often shy away from these personalities, sensing them to be cold, callous, and insensitive to the feelings of
others. All variants of this pattern tend to view tender emotions as a sign of weakness, avoid expressions of
warmth and intimacy, and are suspicious of gentility, compassion, and kindness. Many insist on being seen as
faultless; however, they invariably are inflexible and dogmatic, rarely conceding on any issue—even in the
face of evidence negating the validity of their position. They have a low frustration threshold and are
especially sensitive to reproach or deprecation. When pushed on personal matters, they can become furious
and are likely to respond reflexively and often vindictively, especially when feeling humiliated or belittled.
Thus, they are easily provoked to attack, their first inclination being to dominate and demean their
adversaries. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, pp. 483, 487)

Interpersonal conduct. The core diagnostic feature of the interpersonal conduct of dominant individuals is
their commanding presence; they are powerful, authoritative, directive, and persuasive. More exaggerated
variants of this pattern are characteristically intimidating; they tend to be abrasive, contentious, coercive, and
combative, often dictate to others, and are willing and able to humiliate others to evoke compliance. Their
strategy of assertion and dominance has an important instrumental purpose in interpersonal relations, as most
people are intimidated by hostility, sarcasm, criticism, and threats. Thus, these personalities are adept at
having their way by browbeating others into respect and submission. The most extreme variants of this
pattern are belligerent; they reveal satisfaction in intimidating, coercing, and humiliating others. Individuals
with all gradations of this pattern frequently find a successful niche for themselves in roles where hostile and
belligerent behaviors are socially sanctioned or admired, thus providing an outlet for vengeful hostility
cloaked in the guise of social responsibility. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, p. 484; Millon & Everly, 1985,
p. 32)

Cognitive style. The core diagnostic feature of the cognitive style of dominant individuals is its
opinionated nature; they are outspoken, emphatic, and adamant, holding strong beliefs that they vigorously
defend. More exaggerated variants of this pattern tend to be dogmatic; they are inflexible and closed-minded,
lacking objectivity and clinging obstinately to preconceived ideas, beliefs, and values. The most extreme
variants of this pattern are narrow-mindedly bigoted; they are socially intolerant and inherently prejudiced,
especially toward envied or derogated social groups. Some of these individuals have a crude, callous exterior
and seem coarsely unperceptive. This notwithstanding, all variants of this pattern are finely attuned to the
subtle elements of human interaction, keenly aware of the moods and feelings of others, and skilled at using
others’ foibles and sensitivities to manipulate them for their own purposes. The more extreme variants of this
pattern, in particular, are quick to turn another’s perceived weaknesses to their own advantage—often in an
intentionally callous manner—by upsetting the other’s equilibrium in their quest to dominate and control.
(Adapted from Millon, 1996, pp. 484–485)

Mood/temperament. The core diagnostic feature of the characteristic mood and temperament of dominant
individuals is irritability; they have an excitable temper that they may at times find difficult to control. More
exaggerated variants of this pattern tend to be cold and unfriendly; they are disinclined to experience and
express tender feelings, and have a volatile temper that flares readily into contentious argument and physical
belligerence. The most extreme variants of this pattern evince pervasive hostility and anger; they are
fractious, mean-spirited, and malicious, with callous disregard for the rights of others. Their volcanic temper
seems perpetually primed to erupt, sometimes into physical belligerence. More than any other personality
type, people with the extreme variant of this pattern are willing to do harm and persecute others if necessary
to have their way. All variants of the pattern are prone to anger and to a greater or lesser extent deficient in
the capacity to share warm or tender feelings, to experience genuine affection and love for another, or to
empathize with the needs of others. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, p. 486; Millon & Everly, 1985, p. 32)

Self-image. The core diagnostic feature of the self-image of dominant individuals is that they view
themselves as assertive; they perceive themselves as forthright, unsentimental, and bold. More exaggerated
variants of this pattern recognize their fundamentally competitive nature; they are strong-willed, energetic,
and commanding, and may take pride in describing themselves as tough and realistically hardheaded. More
exaggerated variants of this pattern perceive themselves as powerful; they are combative, viewing themselves
as self-reliant, unyielding, and strong—hard-boiled, perhaps, but unflinching, honest, and realistic. They
seem proud to characterize themselves as competitive, vigorous, and militantly hardheaded, which is
consistent of their “dog-eat-dog” view of the world. Though more extreme variants may enhance their sense
of self by overvaluing aspects of themselves that present a pugnacious, domineering, and power-oriented
image, it is rare for these personalities to acknowledge malicious or vindictive motives. Thus, hostile
behavior on their part is typically framed in prosocial terms, which enhances their sense of self. (Adapted
from Millon, 1996, p. 485; Millon & Everly, 1985, p. 32)

Regulatory mechanisms. The core diagnostic feature of the regulatory (i.e., ego-defense) mechanisms of
highly dominant individuals is isolation; they are able to detach themselves emotionally from the impact of
their aggressive acts upon others. These personalities may have learned that there are times when it is best to
restrain and transmute their more aggressive thoughts and feelings. Thus, they may soften and redirect their
hostility, typically by employing the mechanisms of rationalization, sublimation, and projection, all of which
lend themselves in some fashion to finding plausible and socially acceptable excuses for less than admirable
impulses and actions. Thus, blunt directness may be rationalized as signifying frankness and honesty, a lack
of hypocrisy, and a willingness to face issues head on. On the longer term, socially sanctioned resolution (i.e.,
sublimation) of hostile urges is seen in the competitive occupations to which these aggressive personalities
gravitate. Finally, these personalities may preempt the disapproval they anticipate from others by projecting
their hostility onto them, thereby justifying their aggressive actions as mere counteraction to unjust
persecution. Individuals with extreme, malignant variations of this pattern may engage in group scapegoating,
viewing the objects of their violations impersonally as despised symbols of a devalued people, empty of
dignity and deserving degradation. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, pp. 485–486)
 Object representations. The core diagnostic feature of the internalized object representations of highly
dominant individuals is their pernicious nature. Characteristically, there is a marked paucity of tender and
sentimental objects, and an underdevelopment of images that activate feelings of shame or guilt. The inner
templates that guide the perceptions and behaviors of individuals with extreme, malignant variations of this
pattern are composed of aggressive feelings and memories, and images comprising harsh relationships and
malicious attitudes. Consequently, their life experience is recast to reflect the expectancy of hostility and the
need to preempt it. These dynamics undergird a “jungle philosophy” of life where the only perceived recourse
is to act in a bold, critical, assertive, and ruthless manner. Of particular note is the harsh, antihumanistic
disposition of the more extreme variants among these personalities. Some are adept at pointing out the
hypocrisy and ineffectuality of so-called “do-gooders.” Others justify their toughness and cunning by
pointing to the hostile and exploitative behavior of others; to them, the only way to survive in this world is to
dominate and control. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, p. 485)

Morphologic organization. The core diagnostic feature of the morphologic organization of highly
dominant individuals is its eruptiveness; powerful energies are so forceful that they periodically overwhelm
these personalities’ otherwise adequate modulating controls, defense operations, and expressive channels,
resulting in the harsh behavior commonly seen in these personalities. This tendency is exacerbated by the
unrestrained expression of intense and explosive emotions stemming from early life experiences. Moreover,
these personalities dread the thought of being vulnerable, of being deceived, and of being humiliated.
Viewing people as basically ruthless, these personalities are driven to gain power over others, to dominate
them and outmaneuver or outfox them at their own game. Personal feelings are regarded as a sign of
weakness and dismissed as mere maudlin sentimentality. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, p. 486)

The Negativistic (Contentious) Pattern

The negativistic (contentious) personality pattern, as do all personality patterns, occurs on a continuum
ranging from normal to maladaptive. At the well-adjusted pole are cynical, headstrong, resolute personalities.
Exaggerated negativistic features occur in complaining, irksome, oppositional personalities. In its most
deeply ingrained, inflexible form, the negativistic pattern displays itself in caustic, contrary, negativistic
behavior patterns.

Millon (1994) describes the normal (complaining; i.e., resolute or oppositional) prototype of the
negativistic pattern as follows:

[These individuals] often assert that they have been treated unfairly, that little of what they have done
has been appreciated, and that they have been blamed for things that they did not do. Opportunities
seem not to have worked out well for them and they “know” that good things don’t last. Often resentful
of what they see as unfair demands placed on them, they may be disinclined to carry out
responsibilities as well as they could. Ambivalent about their lives and relationships, they may get into
problematic wrangles and disappointments as they vacillate between acceptance one time and
resistance the next. When matters go well, they can be productive and constructively independent-
minded, willing to speak out to remedy troublesome issues. (p. 34)

Strack (1997) provides the following portrait of the normal (sensitive; i.e., resolute or oppositional)
prototype of the negativistic pattern:
 [Negativistic] personalities tend to be unconventional and individualistic in their response to the world.
They march to the beat of a different drummer and are frequently unhappy with the status quo. They
may be quick to challenge rules or authority deemed arbitrary and unjust. They may also harbor
resentment without expressing it directly and may revert to passive-aggressive behavior to make their
feelings known. Many sensitive [i.e., normal-range negativistic] people feel as if they don’t fit in, and
view themselves as lacking in interpersonal skills. In fact, to others they often appear awkward,
nervous, or distracted, and seem angry or dissatisfied with themselves and others. They can be
indecisive and have fluctuating moods and interests. An air of uncertainty and general dissatisfaction
may reflect an underlying dependency and sense of personal inadequacy. With their best side forward,
sensitive [negativistic] persons can be spontaneous, creative, and willing to speak out for what they
believe in. These qualities make them especially suited to jobs that are not rule-bound, that give them a
certain independence from supervision, and that require unusual duties or creative expression. (From
Strack, 1997, pp. 490–491, with minor modifications)

As stated before, all personality patterns have predictable, reliable, observable psychological indicators.
The diagnostic features of the negativistic pattern with respect to each of the eight fundamental attribute
domains assessed in Millon’s (1996) psychodiagnostic model are summarized below.

Expressive behavior. The core diagnostic feature of the expressive acts of contentious individuals is
nonconformity; they are individualistic and independent, tend to be outspoken or unconventional, and are
frequently unhappy with the status quo. Thus, they are quick to challenge rules or authority deemed arbitrary
and unjust. More exaggerated variants of this pattern are resistant; they are stubborn and oppositional, may
act in a procrastinating, irksome, or intentionally inefficient manner, and frequently complain of being
misunderstood or unappreciated. Individuals who display the most pronounced variant of this pattern are
resentful; they are obstinate and negativistic, often revealing gratification in demoralizing and undermining
the pleasures and aspirations of others. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, pp. 549–550; Strack, 1997, pp. 490–
491)

Interpersonal conduct. The core diagnostic feature of the interpersonal conduct of contentious individuals
is their unyielding manner; they are superficially acquiescent but fundamentally determined and resolute,
even willful, in their independence strivings. More exaggerated variants of this pattern are characteristically
obdurate; they are oppositional, recalcitrant, mulish, quarrelsome, or disputatious, often vacillating between
contrite acquiescence and assertive, hostile independence, which may be revealed in a pattern of inconsistent
or unpredictable attitudes and behaviors. Individuals with the most extreme manifestation of this pattern are
truculent; they are contrary, obstructive, or insolent, chronically complaining and overtly resisting
performance demands. At times, they may be defiant, sabotaging performance expectations and displaying
envy and pique towards those more fortunate. Their acts are concurrently or sequentially obstructive and
intolerant of others, and they express predominantly negative, often incompatible, views and attitudes.
(Millon, 1996, pp. 550–551)

Cognitive style. The core diagnostic feature of the cognitive style of contentious individuals is its
freethinking nature; they are inherently critical, skeptical, cynical, and doubting, with a seemingly ingrained
tendency to question authority. Their preference for indirect expression of aggressive intent may be reflected
in a propensity for sarcasm or barbed humor. More exaggerated variants of this pattern are habitually griping;
they display a questioning, querulous, grumbling mindset. Consequently, they tend to approach positive
events with disbelief and future possibilities with pessimism, anger, or trepidation. Individuals who display
the most pronounced variant of this pattern are overtly negativistic; they are disdainful, caustic, and acerbic,
displaying a misanthropic view of life and voicing demoralizing or caustic commentary toward those
experiencing good fortune. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, pp. 551–552)

Mood/temperament. The core diagnostic feature of the characteristic mood and temperament of
contentious individuals is moodiness; they are typically sensitive or discontented. Owing to their
hypersensitivity, their emotional equilibrium is easily upset, resulting in frequent displays of pessimistic,
distraught, or despondent mood. More exaggerated variants of this pattern are more overtly touchy and
irritable; they are testy or petulant, and frequently impatient, nettled, or fretful. They are especially prone to
displays of sullen, obstinate, resentful moodiness. The most extreme variants of this pattern are chronically
disgruntled; they are irate, temperamental, agitated, or peevish, followed in turn by sullen and moody
withdrawal. They tend to be petulant and impatient, unreasonably scorn those in authority, and report being
easily annoyed, frustrated, or disappointed by others. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, pp. 551–552; Millon &
Everly, 1985, p. 33)

Self-image. The core diagnostic feature of the self-perception of contentious individuals is dissatisfaction;
they recognize themselves as being generally discontented or cynical about life. More exaggerated variants of
this pattern feel disillusioned; they view themselves as being misunderstood, luckless, unappreciated, jinxed,
or demeaned by others. They may have an abiding sense of having been wronged or cheated, that little has
worked out well for them. The most extreme variants of this pattern experience a pervasive sense of
discontentment; they recognize themselves as being embittered, disgruntled, and disillusioned with life.
(Adapted from Millon, 1994, p. 33; Millon, 1996, p. 552)

Regulatory mechanisms. The core diagnostic feature of the unconscious regulatory (i.e., ego-defense)
mechanisms of highly contentious individuals is displacement; they discharge anger and other troublesome
emotions either precipitously or by employing unconscious maneuvers to shift them from their instigator to
settings or persons of lesser significance. As a consequence, they vent disapproval or resentment by substitute
or passive means, such as acting inept or perplexed or behaving in a forgetful or indolent manner. (Adapted
from Millon, 1996, pp. 552–553)

Object representations. The core diagnostic feature of the internalized object representations of highly
contentious individuals is vacillation; internalized representations of the past comprise a complex of
countervailing relationships, setting in motion contradictory feelings, conflicting inclinations, and
incompatible memories that are driven by the desire to degrade the achievements and pleasures of others,
without necessarily appearing so. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, p. 552)

Morphologic organization. The core diagnostic feature of the morphological organization of highly
contentious individuals is its divergence; there is a clear division in the pattern of morphologic structures
such that coping and defensive maneuvers are often directed toward incompatible goals, leaving major
conflicts unresolved and full psychic cohesion often impossible because fulfillment of one drive or need
inevitably nullifies or reverses another. (Adapted from Millon, 1996, pp. 553)

The Paranoid (Distrusting) Pattern

 There is no normal variant of the paranoid pattern; according to Millon (1996),

it is hard to conceive [of] normal paranoids. Although a number of these individuals restrain their
markedly distorted beliefs and assumptions from public view, at no point does their fundamental
paranoid inclination manifest itself in an acceptable, no less successful personality style. (p. 705)

John Oldham and Lois Morris (1995), with their notion of a so-called vigilant style, nonetheless attempt to
describe an adaptive version of the paranoid pattern:

Nothing escapes the notice of . . . [people who have a] Vigilant personality style. These individuals
possess an exceptional awareness of their environment. . . . Their sensory antennae, continuously
scanning the people and situations around them, alert them immediately to what is awry, out of place,
dissonant, or dangerous, especially in their dealings with other people. Vigilant types have a special
kind of hearing. They are immediately aware of mixed messages, the hidden motivations, the evasions,
and the subtlest distortions of the truth that elude or delude less gifted observers. With such a focus,
Vigilant individuals naturally assume the roles of social critic, watchdog, ombudsman, and crusader in
their private or our public domain, ready to spring upon the improprieties—especially the abuses of
power—that poison human affairs. (p. 157)

Plausible Occupational History

The Washington DC-area sniper, who is most likely a white male in his thirties, may have recently been
fired from or resigned from his job under contentious circumstances. It is conceivable that, like many sadistic
personalities, the sniper had found a niche for himself in a job that naturally allowed him to make life
difficult for others; that is, an occupation in which vengeful hostility, aggressive intent, and belligerent
behaviors can be channeled into socially sanctioned spheres. Indeed, aggression may be so integral to his
character that his hobbies, pastimes, and recreational activities convey a common theme of violence. Thus, in
addition to a variety of firearms or other weapons, he may have a collection of books and videos about
weapons and war. If employed in a supervisory capacity, he likely was inclined to make a public spectacle of
intimidating, humiliating, and demeaning his subordinates, leaving no doubt as to whom was in charge. In
this regard, he may have enjoyed a modicum of occupational success, though ultimately his threatening and
belligerent manner or abuse of power was bound to backfire, resulting in his eventual dismissal or fall from
grace. Domineering and controlling behaviors that previously enjoyed the imprimatur of social sanction
consequently degenerated into vengeful acts directed against arbitrary victims (Millon, 1996, pp. 499–500;
Millon & Davis, 2000, pp. 512–514).

Theoretical Perspectives on Potential Psychological Motives

From a psychodynamic perspective, the speculations of Erich Fromm (1973) on the malignancy of the
sadistic character offer a glimpse into the possible mindset of the sniper: “The essence of sadism, according
to Fromm, is the passion to have absolute control over another living being, who thereby becomes the
property of the omnipotent controller. Broadening the base of psychoanalysis, Fromm regards the need for
absolute control as an existential reaction to the human situation. By becoming the god of those controlled,
that is, by controlling life and death itself, the sadist escapes impotence through the sensation of power”
(Millon & Davis, 2000, p. 519). Thus, sadism serves as compensation for powerlessness in the face of the
vagaries of life’s rewards.

From an interpersonal perspective, the fundamental goal of sadism “is to intimidate, humiliate, exploit,
manipulate, frustrate, and depersonalize.” Sadists are fascinated as much by the victims’ awareness that they
are at their mercy as by their actual control over their victims. “In its most malignant form, sadism is self-
conscious, planned, and organized” (Millon & Davis, 2000, p. 522).

From a cognitive perspective, sadistic personalities, though repressing their own vulnerability and
inferiority, have sophisticated mental models and a keen understanding of the insecurities and fears of others,
which they skillfully use as ammunition to intimidate and coerce (Millon & Davis, 2000, p. 524).

The biological foundations of the sadistic personality have not been empirically established. It has been
suggested, however, that sadism may be associated with a mesomorphic physique: “Every bully needs some
surplus of height and muscle to maintain a position of dominance that makes social aggression rewarding.”
Others merely victimize those smaller and weaker than themselves (Millon & Davis, 2000, p. 525).

References

Fromm, E. (1973). The anatomy of human destructiveness. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Millon, T. (with Weiss, L. G., Millon, C. M., & Davis, R. D.). (1994). Millon Index of Personality Styles
manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

Millon, T. (with Davis, R. D.). (1996). Disorders of personality: DSM–IV and beyond (2nd ed.). New York:
Wiley.

Millon, T., & Davis, R. D. (2000). Personality disorders in modern life. New York: Wiley.

Millon, T., & Everly, G. S., Jr. (1985). Personality and its disorders: A biosocial learning approach. New
York: Wiley.

Oldham, J. M., & Morris, L. B. (1995). The new personality self-portrait (Rev. ed.). New York: Bantam
Books.

Strack, S. (1997). The PACL: Gauging normal personality styles. In T. Millon (Ed.), The Millon inventories:
Clinical and personality assessment (pp. 477–497). New York: Guilford.

Page maintained by Aubrey Immelman

www.csbsju.edu/Research/Sniper.html

Last updated October 10, 2002

postpartum psychosis notes
Teresa Twomey, understanding postpartum psychosis, 2009
In the mid 1800s, PPP or mania was described as "typified by the struggle
mothers felt between not wanting to harm their infants and an inability to
prevent themselves from doing so." From a legal perspective, the belief
that these women want to kill their children can be translated into malice
and intent and as such can justify a charge of first-degree murder. Thus
this becomes not just a difference of wording, but a description of motive,
of state of mind. It is a negation of the plea of insanity. And it is false. p. 39

when courts treat maternal infanticide as if each case were a unique

and bizarre aberration of motherhood, it does little to encourage the
public or the medical profession to become more educated and aware.
it allows us to place the blame entirely on the woman. p. 45

the legal system relies on the DSM to determine if there is an official dx for
a recognized illness - PPP is not specifically in the DSM
murder is a very specific term - requires evidence or proof of a specific
state of mind, mens rea or evil intent, it is not enough that a person has
committed an act, the moral culpability of the defendant matters

the common patterns of behavior and reactions that mark their

experiences are the very things that make them more unbelievable to
those judging them

A court may bar the mentioning of the term postpartum psychosis because
it is not an official DSM diagnosis p. 48