“a real bottom-feeder thought that one up”*

didn’t see all of the harold shipman doc as it clashed first w.old-skool csi (abt suburban sex parties!) and then shameless BUT as i have a pal who wz shipman’s patient briefly as a teen in hyde i kept filcking back to it

here’s who annoyed me most: forensic psychologist/media-slut/posterboy for smug vanity p4ul br!tt0n

everything i saw him say last night that wasn’t boilerplate common-sense wz Pure Distilled Hindsight: as in “given that we ALREADY KNOW HE WAS A SERIAL KILLER, this is typical behaviour for a serial killer” — he “fits the profile” etc etc

but isn’t isn’t br!tt0n the brains behind the c0l!n st4gg debacle (st4gg wz prime suspect in the r4chel n!ck3ll murder, wz appproached by a wpc pretending to be into wierd violent sex fantasies, to encourage him to confess: he didn’t, wz charged anyway, the judge chucked it out as entrapment plus flagrantly poisoned evidence)? st4gg “fit the profile” (provided we coax him w.promises of hott sex out of his actual fantasies towards profile-style fantasies): now it seems at least possible that the police, eyes turned obsessively towards the tastier suspect, missed the actual killer – who went on to kill again

i realise criminal psychology has to start somewhere and that somewhere is likely to be a bit lame (cf phrenology etc), but profiling as self-presented on TV seems relentlessly after-the-fact (the people who had an inkling were non-psychologist** locals aware that their sense of the humdrum pattern of life-and-death was subtly disturbed): whenever challenged, HS easily talked his way out of difficulty – wd a psychologist’s early insight have done any better?

*h.lecter on quantico profiling’s notions of serial killer types)
**disclaimer: i once asked a supercute forensic psychologist out on a date and was rejected***
***it wasn’t p4ul br!tt0n, who looks like a conceited potato