Podcast Summary

Podcast: All Of It (WNYC)
Episode: What Criminal Profiling Tells Us About Ourselves
Air Date: October 28, 2025
Host: David Fuerst (in for Alison Stewart)
Guest: Rachel Corbett, journalist and author of The Monsters We Murder: Obsession and the Rise of Criminal Profiling

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into the cultural allure and reality of criminal profiling, in conversation with Rachel Corbett, whose new book investigates the roots, effectiveness, and broader implications of criminal profiling. Drawing on her own personal connection to a violent crime, Corbett explores both the societal obsession with true crime narratives and the very real limitations and dangers of profiling as practiced in law enforcement and entertainment.

Main Discussion Points & Insights

1. Personal Origins and Motivation

Timestamps: 01:54–04:00

• Rachel Corbett shares the deeply personal story behind her book: her mother’s ex-boyfriend, Scott, committed a murder-suicide.
• She did not learn the full truth until her twenties, spurring a personal investigation and an eventual fascination with criminal profiling.
• Quote:
  "I knew who had committed the crime, of course, but I didn’t really understand who he was...Learning all of this didn't really make me feel like I really understood him any better." (Rachel Corbett, 02:44)

2. The Allure and Limitations of True Crime

Timestamps: 04:00–05:06

• The popularity of true crime, especially among women, is dissected.
• Corbett cautions that profiling stories in media offer the "illusion of understanding" rather than real insight.
• Quote:
  "Profiling content…gives us the illusion of understand[ing] something more than actually educating us about what's going on." (Rachel Corbett, 04:37)

3. What Is Criminal Profiling?

Timestamps: 05:06–06:09

• Distinguishes between fictionalized profiling (à la TV and movies) and real-world practice—primarily, seeking “psychological fingerprints” at crime scenes.
• Broadens the definition to include CIA and wider law enforcement profiling, not just the FBI.

4. Profiling’s Fictional Roots: Holmes and Rippermania

Timestamps: 06:09–07:15, 19:35–21:51

• There’s a direct lineage from Sherlock Holmes to modern profiling—profiling in fiction both inspired and mirrored real investigative methods.

• Story of Arthur Conan Doyle’s attempts to profile Jack the Ripper illustrate the blurred line between fiction and reality.

• Quote:
  “Sherlock Holmes was a model for him [John Douglas, FBI profiler]. He read all the books, and other profilers say that as well.” (Rachel Corbett, 06:31)

• Early case: Dr. Thomas Bond’s speculative profile of Jack the Ripper is discussed as a foundational document in the history of criminal profiling.

5. TV vs Reality: The Efficacy of Profiling

Timestamps: 07:15–08:37

• TV shows inflate both the glamour and efficacy of profiling, suggesting a near-magical ability to catch killers.
• In practice, studies show only about 2.7% of profiles actually result in apprehension.
• A 2002 experiment found chemistry students produced more accurate profiles than seasoned homicide detectives.
• Quote:
  “They make them look like they’re magic…In reality, that's very far from the truth.” (Rachel Corbett, 07:33)
  “Only about 2.7% of criminal profiles actually led to the capture of a suspect.” (Rachel Corbett, 07:55)

6. Profiling as Social Control—and Pseudoscience

Timestamps: 08:37–12:16

• Profiling persists in part because it satisfies a public desire for control and understanding in the face of threatening unknowns.
• Origins in phrenology (the pseudoscience of skull reading for criminal traits) to today’s algorithmic policing—profiling consistently reflects and reinforces social biases.
• Quote:
  “Today we don't use their physical features, but we use things like predictive policing...the people being profiled end up looking a lot similar to the ones 150 years ago.” (Rachel Corbett, 12:16)

7. Notable Profilers and Controversial History

Timestamps: 13:02–15:19

• Corbett discusses Henry Murray—Harvard psychologist who profiled Hitler for the CIA (without clinical credentials for psychology).
• Murray later conducted “humiliation experiments” on undergraduates; one subject was Ted Kaczynski (the Unabomber), who himself was later profiled.
• Raises questions about lasting psychological harm and the unintended consequences of profiling.
• Quote:
  “I do find it difficult to imagine [Murray's experiments] didn't have some effect on [Kaczynski's] mind." (Rachel Corbett, 15:23)

8. Narrativizing Crime and Why We Profile

Timestamps: 16:24–17:57

• Profiling, and by extension true crime storytelling, confers a sense of narrative control—both for investigators and for audiences.
• The desire to “read” clues and foresee unpredictable violence is an attempt to soothe existential anxiety and regain power after traumatic events.
• Quote:
  “This urge to narrativize crime is so powerful in society because it gives us a feeling of control.” (Rachel Corbett, 16:59)

9. Does Profiling Actually Work?

Timestamps: 18:05–18:43, 23:38–24:26

• Corbett finds little evidence that profiling alone cracks cases; at best, it maybe narrows a field (as with the Kaczynski investigation).
• She warns that predictive profiling often simply mirrors existing prejudices rather than revealing real insights or providing public safety.
• Quote:
  “Unfortunately, my research just doesn't bear it out...The truth is, it just doesn't really work.” (Rachel Corbett, 18:05)

10. Contemporary Profiling & Social Harms

Timestamps: 22:02–23:13

• “Intelligence-led policing” and predictive algorithms are discussed, specifically a Florida case in which children were profiled based on family backgrounds and targeted by police—deepening cycles of criminalization and structural disadvantage.

11. Profiling in Society: Who Benefits?

Timestamps: 23:38–24:58

• Corbett emphasizes the need to question WHO is doing the profiling, their motivations, and what institutions gain by creating “dangerous others” and offering themselves as protectors.
• Profiling may distract from larger systemic issues or serve as a tool for scapegoating.
• Quote:
  "When you point the finger at someone as a criminal, is there something you're gaining out of it?…It's a kind of way to scapegoat certain problems." (Rachel Corbett, 23:49)

12. Our Obsession with True Crime: Cultural Reflections

Timestamps: 25:12–25:42

• The endless appetite for true crime reflects a desire to “know the unknowable”—to reduce the existential terror of inexplicable violence, but never truly satisfies.
• Quote:
  "They tap into something for many of us that we want to feel like we understand, something so profoundly incomprehensible...It’s an urge that never gets satisfied." (Rachel Corbett, 25:12)

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On TV depiction vs reality:
  “They make them look like they’re magic…In reality, that's very far from the truth.” — Rachel Corbett (07:33)

• On societal need for control:
  “This urge to narrativize crime is so powerful in society because it gives us a feeling of control.” — Rachel Corbett (16:59)

• On the effectiveness of profiling:
  “Unfortunately, my research just doesn't bear it out...The truth is, it just doesn't really work.” — Rachel Corbett (18:05)

• On profiling’s darker societal uses:
  “When you point the finger at someone as a criminal, is there something you're gaining out of it?…It's a kind of way to scapegoat certain problems.” — Rachel Corbett (23:49)

• On why true crime never loses popularity:
  "They tap into something for many of us that we want to feel like we understand, something so profoundly incomprehensible...It’s an urge that never gets satisfied." — Rachel Corbett (25:12)

Important Timestamps

• 01:54 — Rachel Corbett introduces her personal connection to the subject
• 06:22 — The origins of profiling in Sherlock Holmes and fiction
• 07:33 — Media portrayal vs. real-world effectiveness
• 08:37 — Studies questioning the field’s real accuracy
• 12:16 — Profiling’s historical and current biases
• 14:11 — The Harvard experiments and Ted Kaczynski
• 16:24 — On narrative control and the psychology of profiling
• 18:05 — Questioning whether profiling actually solves crimes
• 22:14 — Profiling and intelligence-led policing on children
• 23:38 — Dangers of who does the profiling and why
• 25:12 — Why the obsession with true crime persists

Takeaways

• Criminal profiling, while compelling in fiction and media, is far less powerful or accurate in reality than popularly presented.
• The public and institutional fascination with profiling reveals deeper anxieties about control, safety, and the need to explain the inexplicable.
• Profiling, historically and currently, can reflect and reinforce social biases, sometimes causing harm or justifying scapegoating.
• There is a critical need to question the motivations of those doing the profiling—whether in law enforcement, academia, or pop culture—and the real societal consequences.

Tone note: The episode maintains a reflective, questioning, and sometimes skeptical tone, challenging popular beliefs and urging deeper thought about how and why we construct narratives about crime and danger.

Guest’s Book:
The Monsters We Murder: Obsession and the Rise of Criminal Profiling by Rachel Corbett
(Speaking event noted at Greenlight Bookstore, Brooklyn, 7:30 PM.)

For further information, audience members are encouraged to read Rachel Corbett’s book and explore the nuanced intersections between culture, criminal profiling, and our collective psyche.