-- misunderstand its purpose, effectiveness, and classification in the forensic field. From the inquiries in the 'frequently asked questions' area of many psychology associated web pages, it appears that forensics is one of the most misunderstood of psychological disciplines.

Everyone has a different way of explaining things. Three people can look at the same picture taken at a crime scene, but when writing a detailed report of what they are looking at, it would read as if they were looking at three different crime scene pictures. Describing a field of inter

For example, when people associate and form friendships their personalities are a match because they have characteristics that are compatible with our personality, which leads to our interaction.

When Michael Decaire wrote his first article "Forensic Psychology: The Misunderstood Beast" he felt he needed to explain why he wanted to write about this subject matter. Michael wrote "In my four-year undergraduate program, forensics was mentioned only once. And what was mentioned was a useless definition that really did not explain at all the intricacies of the field. The most common definition is: Forensic Psychology is the application of psychological knowledge to the criminal justice system." (Online) To any one not familiar with the field, this would probably break down to common descriptions. Psychological knowledge would be become "stuff psychologists know." They know how to psychoanalyze people. The criminal justice system has to do with lawyers and judges, so the common association would be that a forensic psychologist psychoanalyzes lawyers and judges. Well, this may need to happen in the criminal justice system, although it really has nothing to do with forensic psychology.

If the trainer believes the skills of a forensic psychologist to be an art and not science, then the trainee will be taught to focus on particulars such as visual evidence. For example, the emphasis is placed on the position of the body when found, not so much the other facts, like how and why it ended up in the position it was found. The concern of a scientifically trained forensic psychologist would emphasize the actions that took place before the body was found in the final resting place. How did the killer get in? Why come in that way when there was easier access? What did he do to the victim before the killing? Any signs that they knew each other, like the way the murder was committed, was unnecessarily extreme force used? Why was the persons throat cut in standing position? What was the purpose of dragging the body to a corner and propping it up as if hiding it's face from the killer? What were the thought processes of the killer as he beat the lifeless body and left it in a tangled heap on the floor? These are the considerations taught from profile trainers that believe their job is a science, not an art.

Damon Muller said, "All of these popular portrayals of profiling are somewhat inaccurate, suggesting as they do that profiling is a magical skill, somewhat analogous to a precognitive psychic ability" (Online). When the law has exhausted all other leads they will consult with the 'supposedly real' magical worlds of psychics or astrologers, before consulting a profiler. When the 'magical people' give no leads, then and only then, will investigators call in a profiler. Anyone can say "the child is in a room with white walls and a single bed in it" most likely they will be right. Not because they supposedly 'saw' the room [as does the supposed psychic] but because that is the most typical description of a room a person will be held captive in. Profilers may not be able to close their eyes and 'see' a room of the killer's home, or [supposedly] tell what is happening at a given moment, but they can give a very good idea of what type of personality is being dealt with, as was proven in the case involving Dr. James A. Brussel.

Albert Fish was a family man, an entrepreneur who supported local charities, and he was sadomasochistic. In his spare time he enjoyed inserting needles into his groin, scrotum, and anus. He would douse cotton balls with alcohol, insert them into his anus, and set them on fire. Children were his extreme pleasure. He not only molested children, but he ate some as well. When he was apprehended, Albert was excited about his sentence to death by electrocution, due to his motivating sadomasochistic tendencies.

Other than telling the other body parts what to do, the brain acts as a giant animated filing c

Some topics in this essay:
Gacy Bundy, Dr Brussel's, Forensic Homepage, Forensic Psychology, Albert Fish, Damon Muller, Killer Zodiac's, Ted Bundy, History Channel, Wayne Gacy's, forensic psychology, forensic psychologist, forensic psychologists, crime scene, criminal justice system, real life, mental illness, psychological knowledge, art science, justice system, law enforcement, wearing double-breasted suit, dr james brussel, forensic psychologists count, field forensic psychology,