Letter: Use and abuse of profiling
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.NICK COHEN, commenting on the Rachel Nickell case ('Gross, wrong, tragic', 18 September), refers to 'the supposed science of psychological profiling' and later asks whether it is scientific.
No, Mr Cohen, it is not and nobody associated with it has ever claimed it to be. Robert Ressler, the former FBI agent who helped to pioneer the technique, has always insisted that it is 'an art, not a science'.
What was at fault in the Nickell case was not psychological profiling but the way the result was handled. If Ms Nickell's murderer is ever caught we will probably find that the profile drawn up was remarkably accurate. Such profiles have been accurate in the past. Mr Cohen's remark that 'there have been successes' is a very uncharacteristic understatement.
A B Scott
West Harrow, Middlesex
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments