Reliability of Profiling

[Sleuth1888]

Recently I've come across something that has led me to question the reliability of any modern day profiles of Jack the Ripper.

One profile said that Jack was a "charmer" you used his smooth talking personality to flirt with and lure his victims into his clutches. The profile said he would appear well spoken, calm, friendly and there would be nothing at all out of the ordinary when approaching this type of man.

The other profile said that Jack was a socially inept, shy, introverted guy with a huge chip on his shoulder. This profile also said that because of his complete lack of social skills he would wait for the women to initiate contact and leave it up to them. This was after he had his one or two pints in the pubs to "relax" him.

So which one is it? Two profiles which are worlds apart, poles apart even. This is beyond a joke how can we find this man if we can't even agree on how me might have been as a person?

[Pierre]

Recently I've come across something that has led me to question the reliability of any modern day profiles of Jack the Ripper.

One profile said that Jack was a "charmer" you used his smooth talking personality to flirt with and lure his victims into his clutches. The profile said he would appear well spoken, calm, friendly and there would be nothing at all out of the ordinary when approaching this type of man.

The other profile said that Jack was a socially inept, shy, introverted guy with a huge chip on his shoulder. This profile also said that because of his complete lack of social skills he would wait for the women to initiate contact and leave it up to them. This was after he had his one or two pints in the pubs to "relax" him.

So which one is it? Two profiles which are worlds apart, poles apart even. This is beyond a joke how can we find this man if we can't even agree on how me might have been as a person?

Hi,

there is research showing that profiling models are not reliable. One can not start with the assumptions of profiling to find Jack the Ripper. Instead, one should analyse the historical sources.

Regards, Pierre

[Aldebaran]

What kind of guy do you have to be with a prostitute as long as you have money? Certainly, they don't expect Prince Charming. They must get shy and introverted a lot more than somebody oozing charm. The actual outward personality of the Ripper had no more to do with why he did what he did than his appearance. After all, serial killer Ted Bundy was actually handsome, intelligent, and charming enough. It was no doubt how he grew up that made him what he was--and I mean both Ted and Jack.

[YomRippur]

Recently I've come across something that has led me to question the reliability of any modern day profiles of Jack the Ripper.

One profile said that Jack was a "charmer" you used his smooth talking personality to flirt with and lure his victims into his clutches. The profile said he would appear well spoken, calm, friendly and there would be nothing at all out of the ordinary when approaching this type of man.

The other profile said that Jack was a socially inept, shy, introverted guy with a huge chip on his shoulder. This profile also said that because of his complete lack of social skills he would wait for the women to initiate contact and leave it up to them. This was after he had his one or two pints in the pubs to "relax" him.

So which one is it? Two profiles which are worlds apart, poles apart even. This is beyond a joke how can we find this man if we can't even agree on how me might have been as a person?

Three things:

1. You should only give credence to profiles written by people who are actually good at profiling, such as the FBI (see their profile on JTR here).

2. The two contradictory profiles you mentioned could both be valid, as the appearance JTR projected to his victims might not have been his NORMAL, EVERYDAY appearance. To his victims at the time of the killings, he might not have looked out of ordinary. But privately, he might have had poor hygiene, awkward and asocial behavior, etc., things that would have made him stand out. That is why it is also believed that he lived alone and was a loner, and thus not too many people saw his real self.

3. His "charming" ways might have been overstated, as JTR might not have been always successful in soliciting women. Some women might have been more alert than others, and was able to detect something out of the ordinary from him. Note that JTR killed only prostitutes that were drunk, weak, old, and/or even dying from terminal illnesses, as those women were probably the least alert and discriminating.

[Xoferbean01]

Profiling is a very valuable tool in ascertaining what "type" of suspect you are looking for but without a suspect in mind to begin with it's not that useful.

The source of the profile is important - anything from the FBI BSU is more reliable than say one that your Aunt did.

However, the main thing that can make a profile inconsistent or unreliable is the evidence used to make the profile. If assumptions or speculation are used the profile is likely to go in the wrong direction.

A good example of this is the child murders in West Memphis, Arkansas. Famed profiler John Douglas originally stated that he believed cults or Satanic activity could be involved due to what were perceived to be ritualistic genital mutilations on the victims. This was information he was provided by an unreliable coroner. Years later when the evidence was re-examined a different pathologist came to the conclusion that those mutiliations weren't ritualistic at all and were actually the result of animal activity that took place where the bodies had been dumped and were not part of the crimes at all. With this new information anything about ritualistic mutilations was removed from Douglas' report and he revised his profile to someone who the victims probably knew and it was totally different. He was only working with the information he was provided by the investigation and he had to trust that those investigators knew what they were doing and that their evidence was valid.

With JtR you can find similar inconsistencies on inquest reports. Did the killer have anatomical knowledge? Did he have medical knowledge? Did he show evidence of being butcher? All of these comments have been unsubstantiated and not been viewed as reliable but you can see how if somebody creating a profile took the coroner's word that the killer had medical knowledge then that would drastically reduce the scope of the profile and focus on a smaller number of suspects that could quite easily be incorrect purely because of the initial unreliable piece of evidence that went into creating the profile.

[John Wheat]

Recently I've come across something that has led me to question the reliability of any modern day profiles of Jack the Ripper.

One profile said that Jack was a "charmer" you used his smooth talking personality to flirt with and lure his victims into his clutches. The profile said he would appear well spoken, calm, friendly and there would be nothing at all out of the ordinary when approaching this type of man.

The other profile said that Jack was a socially inept, shy, introverted guy with a huge chip on his shoulder. This profile also said that because of his complete lack of social skills he would wait for the women to initiate contact and leave it up to them. This was after he had his one or two pints in the pubs to "relax" him.

So which one is it? Two profiles which are worlds apart, poles apart even. This is beyond a joke how can we find this man if we can't even agree on how me might have been as a person?

Surely it depends on the profiler?

[Michael W Richards]

The trouble with using profiling methodologies here is that its often done with a flawed, preconceived victims list. Explanations about the deviations from everything to skill set and probable objectives don't seem to be obstacles to these folks. They'll say that based on modern day serial killers research we can see that killers often change weapons, victims, their methodology, and in many of those cases it was because they sought to deviate from previous patterns to confuse any investigation.

What we have here is a group, much larger than 5, that is comprised of murdered street women many of whom had to resort to solicitation for food and shelter. The ages range from mid twenties to almost 60. They are killed in a variety of ways. Some strongly resemble others. Some may have been done in a particular way to confuse the investigations.

There is no profile unless you have a highly probable list to work with.