Excuse the language of that video. The point of it is that those who are not at the top in “power” and profession might just be the best in profiling. “Maya”, in the scene above, is correct about the whereabouts of Usama bin Laden. But she’s just a “mere” analyst. Her indicators were taken as predictors and it all turned out. This time. But…
There’s really a lot of arson going on here in Andrews, NC. I don’t know if this is a single person, unrelated persons with unrelated incidents, or a group of people together. I don’t know him/her/them personally, so the profile of a TRIAD psychopath killer outlined below may or may not be applicable to him/her/them. But the profile is worth noting for future reference regardless, just as an awareness thing, but we’ll nuance that.
Before going through this, note that these are only indicators, NOT predictors, and that there are two parts to the present post: (A) Using indicators as predictors (this will heavily provide on side of the argument); (B) Recognizing indicators post-hoc but the impossibility of using indicators as predictors before the fact (this will heavily provide the other side of the argument). The latter (B) has everything to do with making a critique of DARPA COMPASS, which does precisely that, using indicators as predictors. But let’s start at the beginning so as to be able to establish some reference points.
(A) Using TRIAD indicators as predictors for serial killers
The very many arson events have been, as you can imagine, the talk of this tiny town. People bring it up wherever I go. For instance, during my rounds to the home-bound and nursing homes just yesterday, a good friend who has much wherewithal in the medical / psychiatric / law enforcement fields wanted to explain to me at length – motu proprio – the profile of a killer, the TRIAD, as she called it. She’s knows I’m now with the Andrews Police Department as a Chaplain. Perhaps she wanted me to pass this info along. She went on at length about the three things which, when they go together, point to a psychopath, a future killer, she says: 100%. Again, I’ll dispute that just a bit further below.
- I immediately asked: “All cases? One hundred percent?”
- “Yes. All cases,” she replied with emphasis, “One hundred percent. Those three things together: bed-wetting, torture of animals, arson.”
Millions of kids, mostly boys, mostly as toddlers, wet the bed. This is ubiquitous and means absolutely nothing on its own. It’s when the bed wetting continues into early teens that… no… it still means nothing as far as profiling, but at this later age when it goes with a couple of other things, then there’s a concern. There’s shame that goes along with this. If parents are supportive, she says, that lessens any psychological scars, if any. But if the parents freak out, this can make things worse, leading to night terrors, and there can be some negative and even lasting scars. Be supportive of your kids.
(2) Torturing animals, real torture
I don’t understand this. It happens. I mean look at this picture of Laudie-dog below. How could anyone torture her or any animal? My friend says that for the psychopath in the making, this is all about abstraction from the personal, so that the “other” is no longer “other”, but rather a mere object that is under one’s power. Animals are experiments, she says, in how to go about depersonalizing sentient beings, not only animals, but human beings.
It’s practice for stepping up the game, she said. Stepping things up refers to transferring from animals to human beings. And, in fact, we find out that the stats on people who mistreat animals are doing this to human beings, pretty much 100%, not quite 100% because it might still be in process for some, and that process might take some decades. My comment below is that this is confusing indicators with predictors. But let’s continue…
My friend said that the torture of animals is a way to take out on a scapegoat the “guilt” for the bed wetting. So, in this narrative, there’s a progression. I would add that if that torture is done in front of another person, such as kicking a dog through drywall, terrorizing that other person as much as the dog (note the proportion), with the kicking done so as to accomplish the terror in the other, we’re moving quickly to the next step of the TRIAD.
Here we move to the destruction of that which involves human beings very directly, regardless of whether the house is presently occupied or not, regardless of any “cover” for motivation such as whether or not such dwellings were insured or not. “Cover.” Get it? If uninsured, it hurts human beings more. If just one or two are insured, that make just be deeper “cover” yet. Psychopaths are usually of way-above average intelligence. Note that with arson:
- There’s always a risk that squatters are inside.
- It creates a risk of life and limb to firefighters: authority figures…
- It creates a risk of life and limb to law enforcement: authority figures…
- It hurts people economically, even to bankruptcy.
- It terrorizes people.
Have you noted the progression? But be careful to draw conclusions, as we will see. That might just be an opinion of a narrative of someone trying to make sense of things…
Therefore, is it hopeless for such a person to come around?
My friend speaks from her own experience with profiles of people she has worked with herself, and from her own studies. Don’t ask me how accurate that all is. I don’t know. I don’t have too much experience in that area.
As a priest, I have to ask as to whether I am naive to hold out hope for people who are caught up in this cycle. I don’t know enough about psychopaths to know if they are reachable. As a priest, I would never say someone is hopeless. I can’t do that. I can’t. But, if someone has some advice on all that, let me know. If you don’t want your comment published, just say so, and I’ll totally respect that.
(4) The TRIAD psychopath is bound to become a killer: TRIAD or QUADRAD?
I don’t know if that’s true. I don’t want to give an excuse of “prophesying” like this to a TRIAD psychopath. However, my friend says that if a no-longer-a-child-bed-wetter who tortures animals also destroys things with fire, so that the “TRIAD” is present, you can bet that such a person, a psychopath, super-intelligent, has already been fantasizing murdering a human being, sometimes for decades. So, I’m guessing that when trying to reach such a person, to bring them out of such a cycle, they are looking at you as a mere object, someone who is not hearing you at all, but rather looking at you with the thought that they can torture and kill you just like they did with animals. There’s a wall.
I think of someone who has slashed his girl friend, torturing her, and who poured fuel down her throat, and then lit her on fire. But this is emotional sensationalism. My friend says the TRIAD is a 100% predictor. I don’t know. I think we’re more complicated than that. For instance:
She also said that if you are caught defenseless against such a person, you do have one hope of surviving, that is, she said, if you can somehow get them to use your name, as that personalizes things. That goes against the grain of objectifying someone. It might well at least buy you time. Re-personalizing is perhaps the key to bringing someone out of this cycle, but that would take years of psych work in a maximum security psych institution. But even there, the psychopath might well be much more intelligent than the doctors and shrinks, and fool them into having them think he’s cured, just to get out and kill again. That would almost act like a mandate to kill again. They’ve conquered the best in psych care and so have all power in their mind-game.
She said the TRIAD psychopath’s first killing is an experimental gateway. After the first killing there “has to be” many more, very many more. It’s like the arson thing going on right now. They could be copycat, but really, they are close together, one after the other, almost like a challenge. That’s how it is with serial killers. She said that all the serial killer cases she is familiar with have the TRIAD. But…
(B) Recognizing indicators post-hoc (too late) but the impossibility of using indicators as predictors before the fact.
I spoke at length with a world class psychologist friend of very many years. He says that while you can say that every psychopath killer has this TRIAD happenstance, it is an illogicity to say that those who have TRIAD behavioral history will certainly become serial killers. Indicators not predictors. Thus:
- Self-entitled white boys don’t all become church or shopping mall shooters.
- Not all poor black boys become gang members shooting each other down.
- Not all mosque attending Muslim men become or plot to become terrorists.
- Not all white Puritan women in Salem, Massachusetts were guilty of being witches just because they were accused. Etc.
Those are just analogies, limping at that, as they are based on prejudicial profiling instead of individual behavioral history. But what my other friend was trying to say is that indicators are not the whole story. You might note those indicators, but they are not proof. We are not so absolutely determined by unrepeatable personal histories of whatever behaviors. To say that we are entirely determined by historical indicators actually pushes people into jacking up the stakes. It gives them as excuse. It’s what society has done to them. They’re not culpable. They are the animal that has been tortured and made into an object. They are now simply lashing out. Who can blame them? So, it’s all a mind game. On the one hand, you don’t want a TRIAD offender to kill someone. On the other hand, you don’t want to give him an excuse. And you sure don’t want to say all TRIAD offenders are serial killers waiting for opportunities.
(C) There’s actually a third part ending with such as DARPA COMPASS
I personally know someone who has this TRIAD history on steroids, big time, all three, the bed-wetting, the torture of animals, the arson. That person has shot at me many times. You don’t easily forget bullets whizzing past your head. It took him no time at all after the arson bit. That person became an arms dealer for the Sinaloa cartel. That person told me recently enough that he wants to kill Jews. But when you say to appropriate people – “I’ve always heard, if you see something, say something, so this is what’s going down…” – the invariable response interrupting any reporting has been:
Look, I don’t have any idea about any arsonist(s) here in Andrews. But, like Maya in the video up top of this post, I’m 100% on the intent of this guy I know. All the indicators are there. Ooops! I just crossed the line from indicators to predictors, didn’t I? Yes. That’s because there’s a bit of emotion in it for me. That confuses things right quick for anybody. That’s a no go. But, can someone set me straight on this, say, in the field of criminology? Again, I won’t publish your comment if you tell me not to do that. I gotta wonder if the DARPA COMPASS crowd are subject to emotion. Reading their presentation is like reading a rationalization for assassination based not on any wrongdoing but merely confusing indicators to predictors. The rationalization:
- The geeks behind computer screens indicating possible targets for field officers to decide to kill or not: “We’re not pulling the trigger. That’s the decision of the field officer.”
- The field officer getting target info from the geeks: “We’re not really pulling the trigger. That’s the decision of the geeks at DARPA. How can I question their gaming theory combined with situational awareness. Take the guy out.”
Meanwhile, a guy who shuns terrorism is killed because it’s thought he might think about it, maybe, perhaps. Confusing indicators and predictors. Hmmm….