Alethea Dice
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2012
- Messages
- 2,477
- Reaction score
- 10
<bbm>
Nope.
The Kaufman Commission indicated that the problem in the Morin case was not with the profile prepared by John Douglas .. it was due to LE providing Douglas with input when they already had a suspect in mind (a no-no wrt profiling) AND that investigators took it upon themselves to revamp certain aspects of the profile that was released to the public (those aspects changed to point toward their suspect, making their suspect fit the crime). They took portions of JD's profile that did fit Morin and disregarded other portions that would point away from Morin.
Can't find the original, but here's a version of the
Report of the Kaufman Commission on Proceedings Involving Guy Paul Morin:
The Honourable Fred Kaufman CM QC 31 March 1998
http://netk.net.au/Canada/Morin30.asp
PS: Van Allen was analyzing the document, not doing a full profile on an unknown perp.
What they did was to take out or amend the parts that didn't fit Morin when they released the profile to the public.
The Commissioner found that the information investigators provided
to Douglas may have been contaminated by their pre-conceived views. This
highlights the wisdom of not conducting a profile once a suspect has been
identified. Though features of the profile did parallel Guy Paul Morin, it could
not reasonably be said that it matched or even closely resembled Morin. This
caused no introspection on the part of the investigators. Inspector Shephards
candid comment was that if [the profile] said a female was responsible,
probably we would have looked in the other direction.
A modified profile was released to the public. Characteristics which
corresponded to Morin were released to the press; those which did not were
excluded or amended to conform. The Commissioner found that the use of a
modified profile was problematic. It was intended to spook Morin.
However, by tailoring the profile to fit him, the police helped ensure that he
could never get a fair trial in that region.
http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/morin/morin_esumm.pdf
Recommendation #110 from the Commission:
Limitations upon criminal profiling
Police officers should be trained as to the appropriate use of, and
limitations upon, criminal profiling. Undue reliance upon profiling can
misdirect an investigation. Profiling once a suspect is identified can be
misleading and dangerous, as the investigators summary of relevant
facts may be coloured by their suspicions. A profile may generate ideas
for further investigation and, to that extent, it can be an investigative
tool. But it is no substitute for a full and complete investigation,
untainted by preconceptions or stereotypical thinking.
http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/morin/morin_recom.pdf
An issue arises as to whether the profiling process was corrupted or contaminated during the exchange of information between the Dets and the profiler. Both Fitzpatrick and Shephard understood that the FBI would not prepare a profile if a suspect had been identified.
http://netk.net.au/Canada/Morin30.asp
Same problem in this profile IMO. The suspect had already been identified. How can we know whether those preconceived views affected the profiling.
JMO