amaotonovel Chapter 3041 Mercury Notes (27)
Chapter 3041 Mercury Notes (27)
Chapter 3041 Mercury Record (Twenty-Seven)
The conflict between Jenna and her classmates was basically resolved, because after all, this method was proposed by Jenna. If the murderer was really caught as she said and her resume was glorious, no one would dare to trouble her again.
And if Jenna really captured such a brutal serial killer with just a few words in class, no one would be able to say that psychoanalysis is just blind guessing.
After all, it's not a blind guess. A lot of behavioral analysis can only give a rough idea of the murderer's appearance. Gotham is so big that even if we narrow the circle to the end, we can at least find dozens of people.
Even if the super criminal Scarecrow is finally identified, a super criminal who can make a name for himself in Gotham must be very cunning, and it will be a troublesome task to arrest him. It is not known how much effort it will take and how many police officers will be sacrificed.
The simplest and most labor-saving method is undoubtedly to directly analyze the unique mental characteristics of the other party and use these characteristics to directly hook the other party up.
Moreover, Schiller said before that psychoanalysis and behavioral analysis cannot be viewed independently, because people are not just logical or just emotional. The so-called two paths are actually one path, but one is the main one and the other is the auxiliary one.
The success of psychoanalysis does not prove that behavioral analysis is ineffective. On the contrary, Jenna opened with an analysis that tends to be behavioral analysis, which proves that psychoanalysis must also be based on facts, rather than blind guesses.
It’s just that the two methods are based on facts at different time points. Behavioral analysis looks for facts in the past, while psychoanalysis feels facts in the present. If the two can be perfectly combined, an effect similar to predicting the future can be achieved.
The atmosphere in the classroom suddenly became relaxed, but unexpectedly, Schiller was still not completely satisfied, he said.
"Ms. Jenna's performance was very good, but maybe she was too nervous in class and didn't feel it deeply enough. But it doesn't matter. This is just the beginning. I believe she will perform better in the future."
The students were a little surprised. This is not deep enough, what else do you want? Is it really mind reading?
At this time, Schiller began to tell them the difference between past facts and present facts.
One very important point is that there is a lag in analyzing the past. Even if you are analyzing a crime scene from a few hours ago, there is still a certain lag.
For example, if there is a footprint left at the scene and there is a pattern of shoe soles on the footprint, it can be inferred that the murderer's soles also had the same pattern. However, the murderer may have changed his shoes after leaving the crime scene, so this clue becomes an invalid clue.
The so-called super criminal who can fly may also cause such an effect. You can clearly see footprints at the scene, but you can't find them after you go out. That's because the super criminal was standing on the ground when committing the crime, and he flew when escaping. Even if it's only a few minutes' difference, the facts have been changed.
Delayed facts cannot be used as evidence, not even as support for the next link of inference. Once changed, the entire clue may be broken.
Therefore, modern criminal investigation pursues current evidence, that is, things that cannot be changed with time, such as genes, which will not change even after ten years. They are much more reliable than past evidence that may change with time.
So does a person's psychology count as past evidence or present evidence? Actually, both count.
A person's psychology when killing someone may be past evidence. He may be very cruel when killing someone, but after this stage, he feels panic and regret. Therefore, if you look for someone who looks very cruel in character, you may not find him at all.
However, a person's personality is present evidence, just like genes. As the saying goes, it is difficult to change one's nature, but it can change the country. This is exactly the case. As long as we can find the characteristics of his basic character, we will have ironclad evidence like genes. This is the necessity of psychoanalysis.
As long as you want to infer a person's personality, you must conduct psychoanalysis. Even if you infer the person's character through behavior first, it will eventually become pure psychoanalysis, because only by going deep vertically can you find the most solid and least changeable present facts in a person's personality.
The current facts based on personality may even make it easier to identify the murderer than genes, because if you want to compare genes, you have to contact the murderer first, but personality can be externalized and does not require real contact. You only need to observe to make a comparison.
This is also why modern criminal investigation requires field visits and investigations, and the need to conduct multi-faceted investigations on the suspect’s acquaintances, friends, and neighbors. This is a personality comparison.
Some people may say that in the interviews they have seen, the interviewees all said that the murderer was a good person. Is this comparison really accurate?
But in fact, this kind of comparison conducted in modern criminal investigation is not based on the other party's evaluation. It doesn't matter whether he is good or bad. The purpose is to learn some details of the other party's life from these insiders.
In other words, the layman sees the excitement while the expert sees the details. The audience sitting in front of the TV can only tell whether a person is good or bad by hearing it, while the real criminal investigation experts can collect enough evidence to judge the other person's character from all these evaluations.
Are current facts necessarily more important than past facts? In fact, this is not the case, because everything in the present is accumulated from the past. The easiest way to judge a person's personality is to understand his life and educational background, which is also the method used in modern criminal investigation.
After all, there are very few people like Schiller and Jenna who are born with strong empathy. If we expect them to communicate with spirits, then grassroots police officers will have nothing to do. Most people are doing psychoanalysis through behavioral analysis.
And this also involves a question of experience. Between an excellent detective who has been working at the grassroots level for many years and a fledgling empath, the former will inevitably analyze faster and more accurately because he has a huge number of cases for reference in his mind.
Although empaths can feel certain things, there are many barriers between realizing, summarizing and expressing them, so it is not so easy.
What's more, most people with strong empathy have excessive empathy disorder. They can be said to be high-attack and fragile. As they empathize, they tend to empathize themselves.
Mental problems are nothing. 80% of psychopathic fans and serial killer copycats have excessive empathy disorder, which proves that many people choose to join when they can't beat them, not to mention that many people have not received proper education and choose to join directly.
Guiding these empaths is a very troublesome task, because negative emotions can destroy the human spirit far more than positive emotions can repair it. Therefore, empathy is an abyss with no bottom line. It is often full of ups and downs. Being able to jump off a cliff with the murderer is considered an excellent performance. It is impossible to expect these people to save the world.
After Schiller explained the differences and connections between past facts and present facts, most students found their position.
To put it bluntly, compared to empathy, which requires talent, is unstable, and may have strong negative effects, they choose to study behavioral analysis in a down-to-earth manner and complete reasoning through learning and accumulating experience.
Some people even began to sympathize with Jenna. This ability that seemed like mind reading was indeed very cool, but it would also interfere with her learning of behavioral analysis, causing her to always take things for granted and have wild ideas, which made her accumulate experience in this area much slower than others.
However, this ability is not omnipotent and is not very stable. At its peak, it is like mind reading, and at its weak stage, it is just talking in your sleep.
Even Schiller did not dare to say that his empathy was accurate every time. It was only because he was more experienced and could combine various methods for analysis that his accuracy rate appeared to be very high.
The atmosphere in the classroom became lively again because most students realized that the combination of behavioral analysis and psychoanalysis is invincible.
But we are all students, and it is difficult for anyone to be good at both. Most people are better at behavioral analysis. So if we find someone who is good at psychoanalysis to work together, wouldn’t we be invincible in future courses?
Suddenly, some people's eyes started to become hot when they looked at Jenna.
What's wrong with being a monkey? Even if you are a monkey, you have to be the best monkey in the group.
Immediately, a girl flipped over the seat from the back row and sat next to Jenna. She looked at her with shining eyes and said, "You are amazing. You can say such a long list. Are these really all your thoughts? How did you come up with the idea? Can you teach me?"
"Forget it, Christina. You want to learn this with your brain? Don't pay attention to her. Jenna, there are only three people in our group, and we are still short of one. Do you want to join?"
Jenna couldn't continue playing the victim before she was halfway through. She was worried that if she continued to pretend to be weak, these people would want to help her get revenge. If a fight broke out in class, she would definitely be trampled to death by the elephant.
She could only smile shyly, and she had never been so excited about the bell for the end of get out of class.
But the fact is that the one-hour class is only halfway through and it will take at least another half an hour before the get out of class ends. Jenna feels desperate.
Fortunately, Schiller finally started teaching according to the lesson plan, mainly combining some basic content of criminal psychology with this case. His style was his usual rote learning, and most students began to focus on their notes.
Near the end of the get out of class, a student asked Schiller a question, but not about the knowledge in the textbook. He just asked curiously: "Professor, you said Jenner's analysis was not deep enough. Is that true? Then what should a truly in-depth analysis be like?"
The other students also looked at Schiller curiously.
I recently read Shirai Tomoyuki's book again, it's so good