September 6, 2025 • 63 mins
Why are serial killers on the decline? What makes a murderer? Are incels becoming a deadly threat? From psychopaths to lone actors, Consultant Forensic Psychologist Dr Nathan Brooks takes Gary Jubelin inside the mind of killers and high risk offenders.
Want to hear more from I Catch Killers? Visit news.com.au.
Watch episodes of I Catch Killers on our YouTube channel here.
Like the show? Get more at icatchkillers.com.au
Advertising enquiries: newspodcastssold@news.com.au
Questions for Gary: icatchkillers@news.com.au
Get in touch with the show by joining our Facebook group, and visiting us on Instagram or Tiktok.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
The public has had a long held fascination with detectives.
Detective sy aside of life. The average person is never
exposed her I spent thirty four years as a cop.
For twenty five of those years I was catching killers.
That's what I did for a living. I was a
homicide detective. I'm no longer just interviewing bad guys. Instead,
I'm taking the public into the world in which I operated.
(00:23):
The guests I talk to each week have amazing stories
from all sides of the law. The interviews are raw
and honest, just like the people I talked to. Some
of the content and language might be confronting. That's because
no one who comes into contact with crime is left unchanged.
Join me now as I take you into this world. Today,
(00:47):
I had a conversation about an area of criminal investigation
I find fascinating. I sat down and spoke with doctor
Nathan Brooks, who is a forensic psychologist. Although based overseas,
we're fortunate enough to say speak with him in person today.
Nathan discussed with a sum of the high profile and
sensitive cases wherein acts of extreme violence, multiple people have
(01:10):
been killed. We looked at these crimes, what caused these
crimes and whether these crimes could have been prevented. I
learned a lot from today's chat and I found it
fascinating delving into the minds of people who cause unimaginable
pain to victims and communities. We talked about serial killers
and the emerging, frightening trend of lone actors responsible for
(01:32):
mass casualties. Nathan gave me a fascinating insight into this world.
Dr Nathan Brooks, Welcome to I Catch Killers.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Gary. Thank you for having me.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Well, I'm excited to have you on the podcast, and
I know our listeners are fascinated by the type of
work that you do, forensic psychology. It fascinates what goes
on in the mind.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Yeah, it's a fascinating career and I've been really fortunate
to find myself now in the police and look at
the applic of that because it's really where forensic psychology
gets to come to.
Speaker 1 (02:04):
The fore Yeah. I think so many people talk like
I have a lot of people come up and say,
how do you become a homicide detective? But just as
many I'd love to work as a psychologist in that field.
Speaker 2 (02:15):
Yeah. I think the FBI shows and some of the
Hollywood shows that we've seen over the years have really
pushed and made people gravitate to wanting to become a
forensic psychologist. The hard thing is it's a long road
to get qualified, and even more challenging is once you
get qualified, there's actually very few jobs around. If you
wanted to get into the police, there's certainly lots of
(02:37):
jobs working in the correctional space, but if you want
to get into police, it's very hard.
Speaker 1 (02:42):
There's not many spots. We were fortunate that you talked
about the FBI and that were fortunate that have Professor
An Bergers on the show, but she the original mind
Hunters working with John Douglas and that profile and offenders,
and I found that chat fascinating.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
It is, I mean, it's remarkable, and I think we
forget now that the work that they pioneered really around
the early eighties nineteen eighties, it has paved the way
for how we bring psychology into investigations now, and it's
easy to forget that. I think time in decades passed
and new people come along, but we forget that. You know,
(03:20):
they set that up. But even if you do look
at the FBI model now, a large part of the
FBI is still around that behavioral analysis unit or team
that they have, and there's four or five different branches
to that now. So that really evolved for the FBI,
and it certainly has changed the landscape a lot.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
Something that I picked up from the conversation I had
with Anne about serial killing, and that was their focus
to start with all serial offenders, but they're also looking
at trying to profile the mass killings where people strike
out and the lone actors. Do you agree that sort
of landscapes changed in a way from serial killing into
(03:59):
these mass killings.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
It certainly has, and the US, as it seems, with
a lot of these really horrific crimes, has really been
the place where we've seen some of those major differences
in a shift. So there was the serial killers throughout
the probably the nineteen seventies through to the nineteen nineties,
which were really challenging over there, and we saw incidents
(04:24):
of that across other countries across the world, but certainly
not in the same severity or the same frequency. And
then from around the nineteen nineties onwards to where we
are today, there's gradually been a reduction in serial crime,
but an increase in what we would say these mass
casualty events, and they are occurring with really high frequency
(04:44):
over in the US and then again across other international countries.
We're seeing that the numbers are also rising at the
same time.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
With serial killing. Do you think part of the practice
of law enforcement agencies and a better understanding of it
has in part the advantages we've got in forensic science
and everything else that comes into play these days. Do
you think that is a reason for the reduction.
Speaker 2 (05:08):
We've certainly seen with the forensic science, DNA, improved technology,
mobile phones, CCTV, it's harder to go and commit crimes
now without leaving some sort of trace or footprint. And
when serial killing was really rife back in that eighties period,
we didn't have some of those advancements, so that made
(05:29):
it very easy for people to go undetected. At the
same time, we've developed much more specialized expertise in policing,
such as the Behavioral Analysis Unit in the FBI, and
most countries now have some form of specialist unit for
major crimes or serial offending. So I think technology and
(05:50):
bringing in specialist experts has really changed the landscape around that.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
The rise of mass casualty type attacks that caused the
chaos that they do in the tragedy that they do.
My concern is how hard it is to anticipate those,
and I know that's a lot of the work work
that you do. Would you agree with that it's harder
to anticipate that type of attack?
Speaker 2 (06:14):
It is tricky, as we'll probably talk about today. A
lot has changed in how police approach that now. So
for a long time, the police in response was always
detect and intervene. So if there's an issue, will intervene,
and generally that's by arresting or charging the person. Now
the model's change to making sure that we can screen
(06:38):
the issue, then try and understand the issue, then put
some form of prevention in place, and then basically review
that and then start again. So we've gotten to the
place where we're much more proactive around that now rather
than reactive, so we're not waiting for incidents to happen.
And when we do identify people that are concerning it's
(07:00):
about trying to understand the nature of that concern and
then put some form of support and prevention process around them.
But of course the limitation of that is we only
know what we know, so we only know about the
people that are coming through to us and we're getting
the information around. If we don't get that though, and
there's someone out there that we're unaware of, then we're
(07:23):
very vulnerable.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
Okay. And the intervention side of it. I spent a
long time in as a homicide detective and my frustration
looking back at the career is that you come in
when it's too late, unless you're working the case with
a serial killer, but invariably it was a murder and
you're coming in at the end. So this intervention identifying
risk factors, I would imagine it'd be very rewarding.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
It's hard. I think you'd have to ask the police
that are doing the real groundwork there because it has
it's required police to nearly take on social worker type roles,
which I think so probably fine, challenging or not necessarily
what they got into the role for and realizing that
exit to get out and talk to people and engage
(08:10):
with them and be supportive and put plans in place
and be available to talk to them if they need to,
ring them, go outter coffee with them, try and help
mold and shape them into a more pro social pathway.
And get in front of them and change the way
that they maybe perceive police. And I think that is
(08:31):
why we're seeing some good results. But again, as I
was mentioning before, it is only who we know that
we get to do that response with.
Speaker 1 (08:39):
Okay, we've jumped straight into it. Let's find out a
little bit about yourself. What got you into this field
of expertise and what studies have you done to become
a forensic psychologist.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
So study for a long time. I think I did
about eleven years all up with the pH d, which
I've never intended to at the beginning.
Speaker 1 (08:57):
Easy task.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
Yeah, And look, initially I probably went in a bit
blind and thought psychology was interesting, and I was very
much keen on sports psychology and the way things aligned.
At the time, sports psychology wasn't available, so the option
was really standard normal psychology where you sit there and
talk to people, or forensic which seemed much more intriguing
(09:19):
and exciting, and I gravitated to that and I liked
the challenge. I was doing triflons at the time, so
I was very probably goal focused and liked to be tested.
And then as I got into forensic psychology, I then
came across psychopaths, and I did my PhD on psychopaths,
and it was fascinating because they were folks that did
(09:42):
everything different to what normal people did. And you know,
we grow up and we learn about people, but we
don't really ever learn about psychopaths unless you've had certain
experiences or challenging upbringing where you might have been targeted
or victimized by them. But psychopaths are the ones that
stay calm and cool under pres They are the ones
that are a few steps ahead. And that was really
(10:04):
intriguing to look at those fellows, and that kept me
really pushing through forensic psychology and then wanting to work
with high risk and high harm offenders that present with
some pretty I think difficult offending behavior and difficult interpersonal styles.
And so for much of my early career I spent
(10:26):
a long time in the treatment space with probably thirty
different offenders a week. I was working with for several
years and then moved into specializing in higher sex offenders,
and then had a brief stint working in academia lecturing
in forensic psychology before jumping into the New Zealand Police.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
Where did you get the access to that many criminals
to work with was that through creative services, So.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
Part of it was through coreative services, but I was
working as a contracting forensic psychologists in a private capacity
for quite a few years, and corrections are always needing
private independent practitioners to assist them, but also to send
them send offenders for treatment in the community. So a
(11:17):
lot of it was there's the treatment aspect, but in
many ways it's actually having conversations with offenders and trying
to build a relationship with them where they haven't actually
had a lot of stability or predictability in their life,
and a lot of the time it's just holding space
for them to actually feel like they could have a
trusting relationship with someone and open up and talk about
(11:40):
the problems in their life because many of them have
never had that opportunity.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
Didn't have the people that they could turn to. No,
the obvious question that I ask if you've done a
PhD in psychopaths, nature and nurture, have you got a
learning like that question gets asked so many times and
different views.
Speaker 2 (11:59):
It's a combination of both. I don't think. I don't
think exclusively it's genetics, but there's certainly a genetic aspect
to that, and then the environment can either really dial
up those traits and make them much more maladaptive or dysfunctional,
or potentially it could keep them somewhat contained. I always
(12:20):
go back to the scenario that you can have potentially
the genetic makeup to be psychopathic, but if you've got
a good upbringing, a good education, you learn pro social
ways to express those tendencies. If you're able to go
and do sport, if you're able to find ways to
community Kate, it could be driving fast car, skydiving, you
(12:45):
can find ways to manage those if you have a
level of self awareness as well. I think people become
very much handicapped though, if they have some of those
tendencies and then they are also dealt with a difficult childhood,
because it really puts that person on really a one
way path to offending or something else.
Speaker 1 (13:04):
It's interesting you answer it that way. I had the
fortune to speak to a neuroscientist from the United States
that did pet scans on the whole range of people
that were considered psychopaths, and they were some of the
country's most notorious psychopaths that had been brought down for
the crimes that they've done. And without going into the
neuroscience because I've got no idea what I'm talking about.
(13:26):
He basically said with a PET scan of their brain
that they had a common feature in there. So he
needed a reference point and did scans on people that
weren't identified as a psychopath. James Fallon was his own. Yes,
PET scanned his own brain and that had the same predisposition,
all the same that features as the psychopaths. And he
(13:47):
reasoned that he grew up in a loving environment, a
nurturing environment where he was cared for and that and
that probably steerred him in those formative years till the
age of three or whatever, steered him in a direction.
And then with the people that had the psychopaths that
had played out in the criminal world, they didn't have
that nurturing around them, they didn't have that family environment.
(14:10):
They said that might make a difference. So I take
on what you're saying that's a combination of both.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Yeah, absolutely, and that his book's really interesting where he
does talk about that. Yeah, he had the brain structure
as he described to be the same as serial killers
looking that he was assessing. But yeah, he certainly I
think he says he pushed push, pushed lots of boundaries,
and he could be quite dominant and overbearing at times.
But yeah, it didn't go into becoming full fledged violence.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
Yeah, it was channeled in a positive way. Or he
could talking to psychopaths. And you said, how some people
that plays out? Is my understanding, it's just a general
talk that you know, some of the headed industries are psychopaths,
successful soldiers, all sorts of different even sportsmen, all sorts
(15:00):
of personalities might have that psychopathic trait, but they stir
it towards another thing. Is that Is that true?
Speaker 2 (15:09):
Yeah, it's interesting, you know, having a level of boldness
and ruthlessness, some of those traits can be quite desirable
for certain occupations, maybe even the police.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
I'm just pulling back on I was thinking that, but
I'm not going to.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
And you do get some psychopathic folks that are skilled
enough to again modify those traits and rather than going
and violently stabbing someone, they might go and ruthlessly cul
people in organizations. So there's some really interesting books. You know.
(15:44):
John Ronson wrote a book and he talked about our
Dunlap who has known aed Texas I think Texas chainsaw
Our or something like that. Who would go into organizations
and he worked for Sunbeam for a while and basically
just he would just go in and cut and fire
hundreds of employees in a very ruthless way. Bernie Madoff,
who was the head of the Nasdaq ran I think
(16:05):
it was a thirteen billion dollar ponzi scheme over a
couple of decades over in New York. He's often considered
the poster boy for corporate psychopaths. So we do see
that Summer are quite capable of channeling those traits without
needing to get their hands dirty in.
Speaker 1 (16:23):
That spec Understand what you're saying, Yeah, it's interesting and
the different way they steer their life. So the work
you do with New Zealand place, what'said involved? What do
you engage with?
Speaker 2 (16:36):
So I'm an operational psychologist in our behavioral science unit
over there, and we have two operational psychologist roles that
serves the country and within that we also run the
VY Class, so the Violent Crime Analysis Linkage system where
we track stranger sex crimes across the country and that's
(16:57):
got three analysts that are staffing that, and then we
also have a sworn senior sergeant that sits over the
top of our unit as well, and so our unit
really is brought into major crime investigations to provide operational support,
particularly when we have very serious crimes just homicide, could
(17:18):
be terrorism offenses, major sexual offenses, all the way through
to arsons and other sorts of offending, and we provide
a range of different services. Sometimes it's very much advice
on the fly as a homicide is evolving or emerging
in the early stages of the investigation. Other times it
will be risk assessments around what do we need to
(17:41):
know about this person and how concerning are they to
the community. We also occasionally will do the classic criminal
profile of a who done at crime, but most of
them are solved very quickly now so there's not the
need for criminal profiles. And then also things like cold
case reviews and a lot of work around interviewing as well.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Yeah, and I know you're familiar with her, doctor Sarah Ule.
I work closely with her in New South Wales Police
and I not use her on all the investigations I
had some there wasn't a need for the role that
she could fulfill, the tricky ones, the ones that it's
not blatantly obvious for what has occurred here, or an
interpretation of a crime scene as you said, or we've
(18:25):
interviewing of what's the bets buttons to push? Is that
Carrotle's stick? Which way to approach that? I found it
so beneficial and I'm surprised, and I've been out of
New South Wales Police for a couple of years. I
don't know what the status is now, but we didn't
properly resource that. Like I think it is a tool
that can be really used in the difficult investigations. I
(18:46):
see that's the role where you guys come in.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
I found that it is really well received and certainly
over in New Zealand it's a major crimes the lead
investigators and also the investigated team, but they often really
are quite receptive of that advice. It's rare that we
get pushed back, and I think that the challenges. Of course,
it's your reputation and what you provide for a product
(19:13):
and service. In some ways, people keep coming back to
you if you provide good service, but if you provide
you know, poor service, or go to sort of far
one way or the other way, or you know, don't
quite tailor it to what the investigation needs. The unit
can become vulnerable in that respect. So it's there's a
(19:33):
constant process there of needing to make sure what you're
doing really holds up and supports investigations.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
And I think it's also important that investigators understand what
you can bring to the investigation. Yes, I saw some
misunderstandings in working with Sarah. Other investigators thought this is
what they can provide to the investigation, but wasn't the
type of thing that she could.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
Yeah, there's the risk that someone thinks that you're going
to come out and say of it or find the
magical clue. And you know, policing is as you know,
it's a combination of different areas of specialty coming together
to get the end product and the end outcome. And
it's really you know, one person or one unit. It's
a cumulative effort. And sometimes I think even if we're
(20:19):
adding one percent towards helping the investigation and you've got
another unit adding one percent, those small one percents come
together and they can be the difference.
Speaker 1 (20:27):
They're the things that make a difference with a case
being solved or not. You invariably get one shot at
it and then if you miss it, and that one
or two percent. But with Sarah, I found that what
I liked working with a forensic psychologist was a different take,
a different perspective. We get a little bit of group
think in policing. We tend to think the same and
it's good to have someone independent, someone outside the circle
(20:51):
that looks at it from a different view. And quite
often with Sarah, have you considered this? And I'd be
looking at it. Go No, I haven't a very good idea, see,
but I found that beneficial. It was a really powerful,
powerful tool to have.
Speaker 2 (21:05):
Yeah, it's good to sometimes have someone that can step
back and bring that different perspective. And often psychologists are
going to look at the person and try and in
some ways deconstruct the puzzle and then rebuild it and
look at what does that then give us for the investigation,
So that might be understanding the functionality of the behavior
(21:26):
all the way through to let's go and approach the
person and try this style of engagement, because that's the
type of individual they are. And if we go in
really hot and in our suits and quite brazen and
kick the door in, that's not going to get their
response and they're not going to engage with this and
then we're going to miss the opportunity to interview with them.
Speaker 1 (21:52):
Serial killing, the type of investigations we're talking about. I
read your book Mass Casually over the weekend and it's
you me up to speed on quite a few things,
and I found a fascinating, fascinating read and putting sort
of might take in it from a homicide detective and
your thoughts and theories. What I found particularly interesting was
(22:12):
the onset of the loan actors in the way that
they're starting to leave their mark. Sadly, because when someone
commits an offense of mass casual these a lot of
lives are destroyed. What's your involvement in that type of work?
Speaker 2 (22:28):
So our unit really is the main unit within New
Zealand that would service persons of concern, whether it be
a sort of a fixation or grievance point of view,
or also a terrorism aspect. So we would provide the
operational consultation on those matters. And that's an ongoing area
(22:50):
as it is in Australia, where there's people that are
often presenting with concerns or concerning behaviors and the task
then is to try and understand the extent of that concern.
I always think it's good to boil it down to
looking at two factors, so their intent and their capability.
So do they have the intent to act violently or
(23:11):
the intent to act on these concerning thoughts or beliefs
or whatever they might be exhibiting, and do they have
the capability to progress with that behavior? So that might
be all the way through to the capability to carry
out an attack, capability to plan, the capability to resource.
So where they sit on the intent and capability scale
(23:33):
is important. And then of course as the intent increases
and the capability increases, then we get quite concerned.
Speaker 1 (23:39):
Right. If I can refer to a couple of things
from the book, that one that I found particularly interesting
was the Toronto vehicle ramming attack where a number of
people A person that's gotten in the.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
Car, Alec Manassian.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
That's the one twenty five year old killing eleven people
and then during fifteen others. Could you just describe what
happened and then we'll break that investigation down.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
Yeah, So he was a twenty five year old. He
was studying I can't remember the exact I think it
was a computer science degree and had just graduated and
was about to start his first first day of professional
work for his career, and he heed a van. He
(24:27):
made the decision to book that a couple of weeks earlier,
picked it up and drove into downtown Toronto and through
a heavy pedestrian area in the city and struck numerous
people so killed eleven, injured fifteen, and initially they thought
it was an Islamic inspired attack. Once they had him
(24:48):
in custody, they then began to look through his various
online accounts and discovered a really interesting post that he'd
made earlier that morning which talked about this in cell rebellion.
And I've spoken with Rob Thomas, who was the lead
interviewer of Manassian, and he mentioned that a lot of
(25:09):
the planning went into preparing for an Islamic state type
of offender. And then as the day progressed, they discovered
that it was actually this in cell ideology that had
been a heavy motivating factor for that, and that really
was I think one of the first public examples that
(25:31):
we got of an in cell and spied attack. It
was sort of known, I guess in the underground space
and in online forums, but it really brought it to
the fore and that then interview of Manassin where he
talks about chad's and stacy.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
Fascinate fascinating breakdown what the in cels are for people
that don't know.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
So in cells are those that are self described as
being involuntarily celibate, so they're unable to find a sexual
or intimate part. And they would say that that it's
forced on them in many ways due to the social
hierarchy and social structure. And this is where it gets
a little distorted in a little extreme, where they attribute
(26:13):
that to basically a set group of men having access
to the majority, so roughly eighty percent of the women.
So these our for males with the chisel jewels and
abs and biceps of the chads, and the blonde barbie
type as you know, as you imagine, is known as
(26:35):
the staceys. And so it's really this hierarchy of chads
and Staceys, and the in cells want to be aut
to date and have sex with the staceys, but because
of the sort of social and evolutionary nature, they're unable to.
So there's also another level, which is the Bicki's that
(26:56):
kind of a step or rank below staceis, and the
in cells don't desire the Beckies, they want the they
want the Staceys. And we also have normies as well
that sit above above in cells and normis are the
ones that are not necessarily attractive and not necessarily succeeding.
(27:16):
They're kind of just floating by in life. And underneath
them are the in cells who are basically deprived of
all the joys and successes in life because they've been
disadvantaged by looks and various other aspects. And as you
step back, it's just it blows your mind, because it's
a bit like you're reading a teenage science fiction magazine
(27:40):
or its game characters in some sort of sci fi
sci fi game. And but we've seen so many of
these ideologies that have even the Sovereign Citizen movement for example,
where there's all these different rules and laws and norms,
and it's very confusing to get your head around.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
Do you think they're on the increase or decrease in Australia.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
It's a hard one to answer whether they are on
the increase. I certainly don't think that the numbers are
reducing at all. We're seeing more and more just fringe
social groups are attracting people, and people are identifying with
others on an online space because they are not having
those face to face conversations now. So I think in
(28:25):
cell culture and those that are struggling with socially and
also on intimate relationships maybe conversing with others in these groups,
I don't think we're necessarily seeing any more violent or
misogynistic views increases or directly from these groups at the present.
I think the numbers are staying pretty stable around about
(28:48):
that five percent, but we may be seeing more people
that are identifying with the underlying themes and messages around that.
Speaker 1 (28:55):
I wonder with the advent of dating apps that seems
to be the norm of people meeting people these days,
and the picture of the profile and all that, a
lot of people be getting rejected without even understanding who
they are or what they are, and I can see
some resentment perhaps building building from that.
Speaker 2 (29:15):
Yeah, I think that that's a piece that probably hasn't
really been answered. And you raise a really good point.
You know, what's the implication of not only face to
face rejection but online rejection as well, and how does
that amplify that. An interesting point is we've got in cells.
There's also fem cells, which are female in cells, and
I think a couple of years ago I saw it.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Can't we put the in cells together with them?
Speaker 2 (29:39):
Well, it's the females that are having a similar challenges
and they're not liking the available males to them, and
they are involuntarily celibate. And yeah, I saw recently, you know,
there was a TikTok I think with twenty six million
likes or hashtags around fem cells. So we're certainly seeing
more and more unusual and maybe fringe sort of groups
(30:02):
popping up.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
Well, see how it plays out because the social norm
has changed, isn't the way that only in the last
a couple of decades. It's changed significantly how people used
to meet and because like the in cell's sitting in
isolation and what you described, you can picture many lonely
people in that situation. But the world is set up
(30:24):
now that they can reach out and that their views
can be validated, so they can get on social media
or what they're before them, and their views can be
magnified by the people that are supporting their ideologies. Is
that a fair or a simplistic assessment of it?
Speaker 2 (30:40):
Well, I think we're finding more and more groups pop
up and various online communities now that people are identifying
with and that's okay because it's not necessarily unhealthy. So
jumping onto an insell forum by itself is not a problem.
But there's been debate around, particularly in Australia or in
New Zealand, you should in cell forums or even identifying
(31:04):
with the in cell ideology be classified as terrorism at
the moment. It's not. What the research tends to say
is it's about five percent of people that are on
in cell forums that are very misogynistic and promoting quite
violent rhetoric towards females. So it is only a small proportion.
Where we get worried though, is there's always someone out
(31:27):
there that may be very vulnerable though to those ideas
and that messaging and then progress to carry out a
violent act.
Speaker 1 (31:35):
Well, I suppose, And we're not saying that that initially
thought as a terrorist attack, but it's not being called
a terrorist attack. But that's very similar to how terrorist
groups bring in the extremists, isn't it, yeh, a shared
ideology that they've got like minded people and then it
starts to escalate from there.
Speaker 2 (31:56):
Yeah, and it doesn't necessarily need to be in ideology,
we're seeing more and more people that are just promoting
just violent, violent intentions, self harm, the idea of trying
to dominate others. The FBI recently talked about the seven six'
four group that are basically a group that are promoting
(32:17):
dominance and control and satanistic. Practices there's a right wing
sort of white, supremacy lean and Neo nazi spect to,
it but a lot of it is about trying to
get absolute dominance and control over, someone so that may
be getting someone to self harm or make engravings on
themselves of someone's, initials all the way through to encouraging
(32:40):
them and trying to basically coerce them into carrying out
a violet. Acts, so, unfortunately we're seeing with the rise
of The internet and certain subcultures that we are getting
more and more pockets of violence emerging with.
Speaker 1 (32:57):
That, okay with The toronto, massacre was there any red
flags or indicators that when we look back and hindsight
it's a wonderful, Thing but is there anything that jumps
out to. You we've identified in cell was the seed
that generated the, Attack but was there any things that
warning signs that you could see looking at.
Speaker 2 (33:17):
It it's really tricky looking back at that one Because Alec,
menassian he was a fellow that had struggled throughout his.
Schooling he had an autistic spectrum, disorder never really was
able to form strong social. Relationships he was bullied throughout
his schooling even though he was quite intellectual and quite academically.
(33:40):
Successful socially he. Struggled but he wasn't talking openly in
person to anyone about his ideological positions or his views
about Female it was largely done from the confines of his.
Room and that is the. Challenge so our responses to lone,
actors it has improved a, lot but it is very
(34:02):
contingent on information. Flows so With, manassian the challenge there
was he basically was, isolated kipt to, himself wasn't sharing
this and planned it in. Secrecy and, again you, know
someone Like Anders bravic over In norway is a very
good example where we do occasionally get what we would
(34:22):
say are Black swan types of, incidents so outlies where
we don't get a lot of leaked information or shared
information with others about and.
Speaker 1 (34:32):
You're talking that the concert At norway is that the So.
Speaker 2 (34:36):
Anders bravic in twenty, eleven carried out that the bombing
at the news at The Norwegian government building and then
got on a boat To Utoya island and went over
there it was a young labor party camp and carried
out the mass shooting there AND i think it was
around around seventy seven people that he killed in.
Speaker 1 (34:57):
Total and he you were saying and then sorry in
the rupted you just to clarify the. Event but he
was very, isolated was.
Speaker 2 (35:05):
He so he spent years preparing and planning for that.
Attack he he used his savings to basically, plan, prepare
purchase various tops of, ingredients, firearms tactical equipment over a
number of, years trained himself in using, weapons groundown fertilizer
(35:30):
pellets for several months to create a bomb that he
set off in The Norwegian government building and used multiple
different sort of aliases, online have packages delivered in certain
locations and in other locations with various bits of. Equipment
so he wasn't an exceptional outlier because he was so
(35:51):
meticulously planned and he viewed it very much as a
cat and mouse game with police where he was intending
to carry out this mass casualty, attack but at the
same time he was preparing like a warrior and trying
to keep any types of warnings to the minimum to
not alert.
Speaker 1 (36:09):
Authorities, okay with the view of not being. Caught isolation
seems to be one of the. Things and isolation is. Hard,
well you can't legislate against, isolation but it seems to
be a common theme in these people that or in an,
event and that could be a breakup of a. RELATIONSHIP
(36:29):
i Had Tim watson mun On The Criminal psychologist talking
about The Hottle street massacre where a person that was
rejected in the army his car broke. Down it was
sort of a build up when you look at it looking,
backwards you, go, okay this was, okay there's breaking point
and all of a sudden the. Damage the damage is
(36:50):
done with a lot of these a lot of these.
Things it is the. Isolation so how do we encourage
people to come forward if someone's acting, strangely if they're,
isolated it's very hard to pick up.
Speaker 2 (37:01):
On, yeah there's a couple. ASPECTS i think fixations are,
important grievances and then the isolation component that you spoke
about as.
Speaker 1 (37:11):
Well fixation grievances and.
Speaker 2 (37:13):
Isolation, yes, yeah and the isolation as tricky as, well
because what we find is that a lot of lone
actors do have social, interactions so they're not isolated in
the traditional sense where they have no conversations with anyone
and they're just sitting at home. Alone many will have
(37:35):
supportive family. Members they may even be in a, relationship
but what's missing is the social, Reciprocity so they don't
get the same things out of social relationships that often
you AND i, Would so they don't get their enjoyment
out of the. Relationship they don't feel that strong sense
(37:58):
of connection or. Longing so there's often something just missing
there that makes them feel isolated and disconnected from, others
rather than the classic sense of this person's just isolated
and not around.
Speaker 1 (38:13):
Others, okay so even in an environment they can internally feel, yes,
yeah we're referring to these people for the mass casualties
as loan. Actors it used to be called lone. Wolf
what was the logic behind the changing of the way
that we identify, This, Yeah SO.
Speaker 2 (38:30):
I think around the nineteen nineties late, nineties THE us
were populating the turn lone wolf and it got a
bit of pushback because it added a level of mysteriousness
to these, fellows and you, know they were someone that
was planning in secrecy and carrying out a, mission and
the sort of mystique ended up in some WAYS i
(38:52):
think fueling them. Encouraging, yeah, Absolutely and that was then
rebranded really probably in the academic space to loan, actors
so those that basically are acting alone or with minimal outside.
Influence and we cavet at that though now BECAUSE i
would say that it's those that are self initiating towards
(39:13):
violence and they're not doing that at the direction of someone,
else but they could very easily be online communicating in
a group and getting ideas or sharing extreme views with.
People so they are self initiating to, violence but they
may not be loan or alone in that classical.
Speaker 1 (39:34):
SENSE i think that there's an importance and it always
worries me AND i now work in the media coming
from law, enforcement if we give too much of a
profile to someone who's committed a horrendous. Crime AND i
think lone wolf could be a pretty Cool i'm a lone.
Wolf the lone actor doesn't sound quite as. Cool and
when you talk about the one, percent that might be
(39:56):
the one. Percent that makes a difference that someone that
doesn't get a fantasy about being seen as a lone.
Speaker 2 (40:02):
Wolf, yeah AND i Think australia And New zealand have
done it pretty. Well certainly over in THE us with
the high rates of school shooting as workplace, incidents there's
just this constant stream of news coverage which really sort
of sensationalizes the action in some.
Speaker 1 (40:19):
Ways with loan actors my, understanding and most of the
play out in the media tend to be. Male is
there a predominance of male loan actors or can? Female
is there female loan actors as?
Speaker 2 (40:31):
Well looks mostly. Males it's quite heavily steered towards. Males
around about ninety to ninety five percent of loan actor
attackers are. MALE a good example of a female probably
here In australia would have Been Momina schomer down In,
victoria WHO i think is the first female charged with
(40:51):
the terrorism In, australia and she stabbed her homestay, host
obviously identifying with The Islamic jehardy ideology and had influences
from several others that were affiliated with Other islamic based,
attacks but she traveled solely To australia to carry out an.
Speaker 1 (41:13):
Attack did she tax and mind in custody as? Well
there was another attack and the sister over yep from
their homeland attacked the police officer of making.
Speaker 2 (41:22):
The year your spot. On so she, RECENTLY i think
it was a Blonde canadian female in custody that she
attacked and afterwards made comments About allah would be happy
with her for, THAT i think with a pair of gardening.
Shares and then, yeah the time that she was, charged
police over there went to speak with her sister and
(41:44):
when they arrived at the, door the sister came out
with a knife and tried to attack the. Officers, no
it was.
Speaker 1 (41:52):
The fact that both sisters continents apart that there's something
that's got into their ideology and going out the.
Speaker 2 (42:01):
Attacks, yeah AND i think that the differences with males
and females in respect to this form of violence probably
is very similar to what we see with a lot
of different forms of. Offending, yeah you, know males are
often the ones doing the more serious, homicides and they
certainly perpetrate homicides at at much higher rates than. Females
(42:23):
and in some, ways you, know males tend to act
out their emotions and females are often internalizing. Those SO
i think we see different ways of coping with emotion
and dealing with. Problems and for, men when they have,
struggles it is acted out and it's, expressed often in harmful,
ways in quite destructive. Ways and we do talk about
(42:46):
there being copycat effects and it can take.
Speaker 1 (42:48):
IT i was going to ask, that like when you
see a series and then shortly after there's another, one
and especially in THE, US i think we're all aware
of that with the school, shootings and do you think
that that the copy can come into?
Speaker 2 (43:01):
PLAY i no doubt that we've seen many attacks that
have been copied over the, years and As Bravic Brenton
tarrant In New zealand have certainly given inspiration and also
tactical knowledge to other perpetrators that have then gone on
to carry out attacks after. That we also probably have
a contagion aspect as, well you, know like the social.
(43:23):
Contagion and for a long time media outlets didn't report
suicides because suicides are known to have a contagion, aspect
where if you've got friends that then others that know
that person that at increased risk of, suicide particularly they've
got mental health. Vulnerabilities we know that if suicides are
(43:44):
in the, media it actually leads to people thinking about
the idea. More AND i think no doubt that it's
a similar thing with mass casualty. Attacks that the more
that we see that people are trying to resolve life
problems in this, way then the more it. Normalize it
normalizes that and that's quite.
Speaker 1 (44:04):
Frightening, yeah, well you saw it with, schools and with
schools if a child has committed, suicide it was always
a concern that other, kids friends and all, that and
it's something that you, know, again if we can will
it back or reduce minimize the risk factors all the.
Better terrorism has distinct from low and actors BECAUSE i
(44:26):
think we've all been caught up in you, know we're
living in times when there are terrorist attacks and have
been some significant, ones and then the loan actor attacks
and sometimes they get a little bit caught. Up it's
all the same, thing, like if it's a mass casually
it must be a terrorist. Attack what's the difference between the.
Speaker 2 (44:43):
Two, yeah it's a really good. Question and in some
ways terrorism is more at a legislative criminal prosecution. Level
we often see that there's many common, threads so there
could be fixations and grievances and. Ideologies, now it's often
the presence of an ideology that leads to something being
(45:06):
classified as, terrorism and we also look at it in
terms of what was the intended outcome and often is
there an intention to create social and political, change and
that's often where the ideology is paired with, that and
that would then become classified as. Terrorism we've seen, though
that many mess casualty attacks are not perpetrated with clear
(45:32):
intentions to create social and political. Change they are instead
a result of grievances or fixations and other, factors sometimes
coupled with aspects of, ideology but they don't necessarily meet
the classification for. Terrorism so it is a bit of
a fine, line AND i think the risk is we
focus too much on terrorism and miss that there's actually
(45:54):
more universal threads amongst all of these. Individuals and sometimes
it's terrors, specific but other times it's just intended to
really be a form of revenge, retribution trying to restore
natural order or response to perceived.
Speaker 1 (46:11):
Injustice, well i'd take on board what you said earlier
on about, grievances how that plays a, part and that's you,
know we've all been slighted in some, way and there's
ways of dealing with your anger and your, grievances but
you can imagine people that haven't got the emotional skills
to handle. That it just becomes a fixation That i've been,
Wronged i'm going to get.
Speaker 2 (46:31):
Revenge, Yeah and we talk about querulous individuals to those
that just constantly make complaints that are unable to be,
pleased that are distrusting and suspicious and. Paranoid and, look
there are people out there like, that but they don't
ever resort to. Violence and that really raises the question
around what is it that is tipping people over the into,
(46:53):
Violence and it's often it is the violent. Identification so
they start in some way trying to see themselves as
someone that's going to make a big statement to bring
an ultimate conclusion to an, event and then we do
pair that with ideology in certain, times then we really
(47:14):
get this quite sort OF i, guess concerning mix or
factors that come. Together and one of the MODELS i
quite like is this idea of the bathtub, model where.
Speaker 1 (47:24):
It was bath tub all the, staircase the staircase you explain.
THAT i found that quite.
Speaker 2 (47:28):
Interesting so the bath tub is the idea that we
have a couple of different water faucets that are pouring
into a bath, tub and that can be different motivating.
Factors so sometimes it's sometimes it's, political sometimes it's personal,
factors sometimes it's social, factors and they gradually pour in
over time and fill up the bath. Tub it might
(47:49):
be that your relationship breaks, down you get fired at,
work you then start looking at concerning media on the,
internet and gradually they all just.
Speaker 1 (48:01):
Or three of. Those, sorry, no you're not looking at.
Me i'm not going to do, Anything so.
Speaker 2 (48:06):
Start filling up the. Bathtub and where it goes wrong
is there's no release style on the, bathtub so it
just fills up over. Time and EXAMPLE i used in
the book of that Was Thomas, mayor who Kills Joe
cox over in THE, uk and he's a guy that
had long term right wing Neo nazi views and they
(48:27):
just simmled away for roughly twenty. Years but then When
brexit came, about that really just fueled things for him
that tipped him over the. Edge and then we look
at something like the, staircase and that looks at really
how things transform for someone over. Time and the idea
is that you walk into the base of the. Staircase
(48:48):
so you walk into the first door because things are
not quite going right or the way that you'll you
want them to in, life and you walk into the
door looking for an, answer looking for a, solution and
you get to the first level or the ground, floor
and then if you don't find any solutions, there you
walk up the next, level and, gradually as you keep
(49:09):
going up the, levels your options narrow and Violence, ultimately
once you get to the fifth, level becomes the only
solution and the last resort answer to your. Problems so
we see that as the person climbs the, staircase not
only do the options and solutions, dwindle but they're thinking
(49:29):
about the situation changes and they come to accept that
the only way through this or the only justifiable response.
Speaker 1 (49:36):
Is violence and breaking it down in the simple concept
of the bath tub and the. Staircase does that help
a lot of the times you might be doing the thread,
assessment is that the type of thing that you're looking
at the build up or, okay how dangerous AND i
really take on. Board one of the aspects that you
say is, capability because that's a big. FACTOR i look
(49:58):
from a homicide investigator point of, view opportunity made even,
capability could have the, opportunity could have the, motive but
if they haven't got the, Capability so that's another fact
that comes into.
Speaker 2 (50:09):
It it is an unfortunately capability though is becoming as
we've seen with say The BOND dii junction. Attack now
it's just a, cheap easy available weapon and someone can
do an enormous amount of. Harm but we don't dismiss
capability because it is still very, important and things like
(50:31):
the Cross church attack highlight something like capability. Factors but
we do need to balance that then with, intent so you,
know how strongly is this or how strong is this person's,
Intent and then if we are concerned about the, intent
well then we know that they could be capable of
doing a low capability. Attack so it is a bit
(50:54):
of a balancing act where we need to look at all.
FACTORS i always, think how died up are the dial
for this? Individual how concerned do we need to? Be
so as you, know the more concerning things that we,
see then, generally as a loose, principle you would be
you'd be saying that you, know there's a lot of
risk or threat that needs to be mitigated here.
Speaker 1 (51:17):
Looking at just pick a, case if you'd be familiar
with The linp cafe With Man, Momus, yes looking back
that and people know we've spoken about on here we
had one of the hostages from the siege that was
in the cafe the whole time and some of the police.
Involved but looking At Man, momus like you look back
(51:40):
and you go red, flag red, flag red. Flag but that's.
Hindsight it's a wonderful. Thing is there anything that you
see in that if you're familiar with it at? All
something About Man momis's background that if you were assessing
him prior to him committing this, offense is what sort
of vindicators would concern?
Speaker 2 (51:58):
You, yeah that's, look that's a really good. Question and
the coronial inquest that looked at The Link cafe siege
had some really good findings and one of them was
the need for a Fixated Threat Assessment, center which came
into place in twenty seventeen In New South wales AND
i Think queensland was the first state to bring that
(52:21):
in Because monus he had the grievance and the fixation
And Michelle, pathay who's done a lot of work in
the F tach space and set up The queensland F
tach and also The VICTORIAN. TACH i saw a presentation
that she did and she talked About monus and we
(52:41):
looked at him through the terrorism. Lens and that's one
of the biggest shortfalls probably of our management or response
To monus was he was a fixated and grievance fueled.
Individual but we were making all our assessments and judgments
on him based on is he a whole risk of
a terrorism? Offense and the worry was that wein we're
(53:06):
missing him as a person and what was actually motivating
and driving? Him and so it was the grievance and
the need for notoriety and significance rather than the presence
of a strong. Ideology so we got caught up in
does he have the ideology and the desire to act
violently for that, ideology rather than is this an individual
(53:29):
that's got the psychological makeup and the psychological factors that
are fueling him towards? Violence AND i think now looking
back at, that we've seen that had you, know the
emergence of f tax and more specialized, police particularly you
know psychologists and. Psychiatrists we've come a long way since.
Speaker 1 (53:50):
Then, yeah looking for the dangers of those fixated. PERSONS
a lot of the work that you're doing now and
break it down into prevention and. Intervention And i've just
got some of the discussion points here policing. STRATEGIES i
suppose you touched in part on that that the way
we were looking at man momus was more from a
(54:10):
terrorist point of view than a fixated person with a
grievance that might play out risk. Assessments that's the work
that you're. In break us down for a risk. Assessment
what IF i was seeing here GOING i am so
angry at The New South Wales police for how my
career came to an, end what sort of assessments would
you be making without getting too? Personal MAYBE i should
(54:32):
have used another, example but, Okay i'm, angry BUT i
think my, Situation i'll just move on and get on
with my. Life another. Chapter so what type of things
would be a warning sign to?
Speaker 2 (54:45):
You and that's part of, it isn't is that rigidity
and the cognitive. Rigidity do you have the ability to
think about other, options other, solutions other ways of coping
or is it tunneling down to you becoming very fixed
and very stuck and very fueled by this? Injustice and
(55:11):
so we do look at we look at factors like.
Fixation how psychologically preoccupied is someone with this issue or this?
Person how aggrieved are they so how strong is that
grievance for some of these folks that they wake up
every day living and breeding. This then you look at the,
(55:33):
intent so you, know do they have an intent to
progress that? Issue and then do they have the capability
to act on? That so that is a simple way
of looking at. It another way is to think about
it from a threat perspective and Read, malloy who's a
forensic psychiatrist over in THE us has done some really
good work and he talks about eight key warning. Behaviors
(55:55):
and so the first one's, pathway so is the evidence
of planning and preparation for some sort of. Act we
then have, fixation so that psychological. Preoccupation then there is,
identification so is the person experiencing a shift in their
identity so that they are now starting to see themselves
(56:15):
more as a as a warrior or someone that's being
driven towards a. Mission so often that commando type of
identity that they're developing novel. Aggression so are they engaging
anything to test their ability to the? Results how we
also have. Leakage so have they made any remarks to
(56:39):
anyone about an intent to carry out an active? Harm
we have a directly communicated threat as? Well have they
made any threats to? Anyone last resort as? Well so last?
Resorts often have they reached their end of?
Speaker 1 (56:55):
Tether is?
Speaker 2 (56:56):
This are they at the position where they think.
Speaker 1 (56:59):
This, loss loss of family and just what else have
they got left in the?
Speaker 2 (57:03):
Eye this is never going to be, resolved AND i
need to do something about. IT i need to make
a final statement and make my. Mark and often that
making your mark is often quite crucial in this in
these sorts of, offenses because unfortunately we see that it's
often people that don't have significance that are wanting, significance
(57:23):
and that the act becomes part of gaining that. Significance,
okay it's, interesting that's.
Speaker 1 (57:29):
FASCINATING i love like the structure you put into such
a because it's such a gray area with so many different.
Layers but you actually need the, structure don't. You, well
as you're breaking down the. Structure it helps me even
the bathtub and the. Staircase, okay if you told me
the science behind it, All i'll probably get, Lost BUT
i understand what you're, saying and you really do need the.
(57:52):
Structure government. Influencers we had the shooting situation down In
tasmania and we restricted guns and made a very strong gun.
Policy is that the type of thing you're talking with government. Influencers.
Speaker 2 (58:08):
Yeah government influences are the fascinating and sometimes concerning at
the same, time and they can be spot on or
really missed the. MARK i think understanding the lone actor
landscape In, australia it's hard to have that conversation Without Port.
Arthur so where we are now and maybe the lack
(58:30):
of significant incidents that we, have AND i say that
cautiously is probably largely a result of the decisions that
were made back in nineteen ninety six around the. Firearms
if we think about even The Link cafe ces or
some of the other even The bondai attack, recently had
(58:51):
those people been able to get high caliber, firearms it may,
yeah very very. Different and the potentially the argument there
for the Christ church terrorist attack may that have happened
In australia if our firearm policy hadn't ever been, changed
because part of the part of that was the accessibility
(59:13):
of firearms at the. Time so governments have a really
important part to. Play my concern is that we try
and restrict our way out of, things and there's a
balance there between.
Speaker 1 (59:26):
You because you could create another potential offend.
Speaker 2 (59:31):
That absolutely the everyday person is doing the right thing
and they are losing a lot of their freedoms because
of restrictive measures that are put in. Place AND i
always think, that you, know people need to have a
level of. Autonomy we can't regulate and control our way
out of, everything AND i think it's good to put
(59:53):
safeguards and parameters in, place but becoming too restrictive and
too intrusive risk thin creating another problem on the flip
side of that with someone then getting aggrieved and FEELING.
Speaker 1 (01:00:08):
I, think and TALKING, covid THE covid, RESTRICTIONS i saw
PEOPLE i knew that the way they were, reacting you
could almost see the, tension the anger build up and
the frustration build up in them in the, restrictions and
you could see how that could play out in the
extreme And i'm not saying my, friends BUT i just
saw how many people are, affected and affected each and
(01:00:30):
every one of. Us you had the isolation and then
the restrictions and loss of, control and people are losing
their livelihood or losing contact with their. Families those type
of RESTRICTIONS i think is just sort of pouring fuel
on the.
Speaker 2 (01:00:45):
Fire, Yeah So i'm always big on empowering and educating,
People and THEN i think governments ideally put the safeguards
and the parameters in, place but people still need that.
Autonomy AND i think rather than restricting and, controlling we
should try and educate and. Teach and there's the, argument,
say with the restrictions for social media that are looking
(01:01:07):
like coming in for, adolescents which which is, positive adolescents
will still go and find other platforms like discord and
all sorts of online groups that they can still access
and still find extreme. Content so what about if we
taught people or children to use social media, safely you,
know something like a social media. License we teach people to,
(01:01:28):
drive you, know we teach them how to do things
in a safe. Manner SO i think there's a role
there where we can empower rather than.
Speaker 1 (01:01:36):
Restrict, well giving that degree of, autonomy it takes a
sting out of any, restrictions doesn't. It you've got a
little bit of. Control, okay you've just got to go
through this, pathway but you can get. THERE i see
what you're. Saying i've never thought of it that, way but,
yeah we shut down the social media for the, kids
they're going to get access to. Things.
Speaker 2 (01:01:55):
Absolutely, yeah and again it's the masses that are probably
doing the right thing that are impact in. IT i
think it's a good conversation to have because there are
always pros and, cons but the ones that seek this
out will still be able to find. It.
Speaker 1 (01:02:10):
Yeah, okay look we might take a break. Here when
we get, BACK i want to talk in detail about
the Christ church massacre and put in or discuss some
of the things we've discussed here and how that played
out in the build up to the. Case i'd also
like to talk about. STALKING i know part of you
the reason you're over here that you're delivering a lecture on.
(01:02:32):
Stalking i've always thought from a policing point of, VIEW
i always had concerns when people were. Stalking it starts, off,
well nothing's really, done but the way that they become
fixated on the person they're. Stalking always concerned, me And
i'm sure there's a lot of other things we've got
to talk. About i'm finding it quite quite. Fascinating so
we'll take a break and we'll be back shortly for part.
(01:02:54):
Two Thanks, Gary cheers.
Speaker 2 (01:03:00):
Two Nine ka
The public has had a long held fascination with detectives.
Detective sy aside of life. The average person is never
exposed her I spent thirty four years as a cop.
For twenty five of those years I was catching killers.
That's what I did for a living. I was a
homicide detective. I'm no longer just interviewing bad guys. Instead,
I'm taking the public into the world in which I operated.
(00:23):
The guests I talk to each week have amazing stories
from all sides of the law. The interviews are raw
and honest, just like the people I talked to. Some
of the content and language might be confronting. That's because
no one who comes into contact with crime is left unchanged.
Join me now as I take you into this world. Today,
(00:47):
I had a conversation about an area of criminal investigation
I find fascinating. I sat down and spoke with doctor
Nathan Brooks, who is a forensic psychologist. Although based overseas,
we're fortunate enough to say speak with him in person today.
Nathan discussed with a sum of the high profile and
sensitive cases wherein acts of extreme violence, multiple people have
(01:10):
been killed. We looked at these crimes, what caused these
crimes and whether these crimes could have been prevented. I
learned a lot from today's chat and I found it
fascinating delving into the minds of people who cause unimaginable
pain to victims and communities. We talked about serial killers
and the emerging, frightening trend of lone actors responsible for
(01:32):
mass casualties. Nathan gave me a fascinating insight into this world.
Dr Nathan Brooks, Welcome to I Catch Killers.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Gary. Thank you for having me.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Well, I'm excited to have you on the podcast, and
I know our listeners are fascinated by the type of
work that you do, forensic psychology. It fascinates what goes
on in the mind.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Yeah, it's a fascinating career and I've been really fortunate
to find myself now in the police and look at
the applic of that because it's really where forensic psychology
gets to come to.
Speaker 1 (02:04):
The fore Yeah. I think so many people talk like
I have a lot of people come up and say,
how do you become a homicide detective? But just as
many I'd love to work as a psychologist in that field.
Speaker 2 (02:15):
Yeah. I think the FBI shows and some of the
Hollywood shows that we've seen over the years have really
pushed and made people gravitate to wanting to become a
forensic psychologist. The hard thing is it's a long road
to get qualified, and even more challenging is once you
get qualified, there's actually very few jobs around. If you
wanted to get into the police, there's certainly lots of
(02:37):
jobs working in the correctional space, but if you want
to get into police, it's very hard.
Speaker 1 (02:42):
There's not many spots. We were fortunate that you talked
about the FBI and that were fortunate that have Professor
An Bergers on the show, but she the original mind
Hunters working with John Douglas and that profile and offenders,
and I found that chat fascinating.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
It is, I mean, it's remarkable, and I think we
forget now that the work that they pioneered really around
the early eighties nineteen eighties, it has paved the way
for how we bring psychology into investigations now, and it's
easy to forget that. I think time in decades passed
and new people come along, but we forget that. You know,
(03:20):
they set that up. But even if you do look
at the FBI model now, a large part of the
FBI is still around that behavioral analysis unit or team
that they have, and there's four or five different branches
to that now. So that really evolved for the FBI,
and it certainly has changed the landscape a lot.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
Something that I picked up from the conversation I had
with Anne about serial killing, and that was their focus
to start with all serial offenders, but they're also looking
at trying to profile the mass killings where people strike
out and the lone actors. Do you agree that sort
of landscapes changed in a way from serial killing into
(03:59):
these mass killings.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
It certainly has, and the US, as it seems, with
a lot of these really horrific crimes, has really been
the place where we've seen some of those major differences
in a shift. So there was the serial killers throughout
the probably the nineteen seventies through to the nineteen nineties,
which were really challenging over there, and we saw incidents
(04:24):
of that across other countries across the world, but certainly
not in the same severity or the same frequency. And
then from around the nineteen nineties onwards to where we
are today, there's gradually been a reduction in serial crime,
but an increase in what we would say these mass
casualty events, and they are occurring with really high frequency
(04:44):
over in the US and then again across other international countries.
We're seeing that the numbers are also rising at the
same time.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
With serial killing. Do you think part of the practice
of law enforcement agencies and a better understanding of it
has in part the advantages we've got in forensic science
and everything else that comes into play these days. Do
you think that is a reason for the reduction.
Speaker 2 (05:08):
We've certainly seen with the forensic science, DNA, improved technology,
mobile phones, CCTV, it's harder to go and commit crimes
now without leaving some sort of trace or footprint. And
when serial killing was really rife back in that eighties period,
we didn't have some of those advancements, so that made
(05:29):
it very easy for people to go undetected. At the
same time, we've developed much more specialized expertise in policing,
such as the Behavioral Analysis Unit in the FBI, and
most countries now have some form of specialist unit for
major crimes or serial offending. So I think technology and
(05:50):
bringing in specialist experts has really changed the landscape around that.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
The rise of mass casualty type attacks that caused the
chaos that they do in the tragedy that they do.
My concern is how hard it is to anticipate those,
and I know that's a lot of the work work
that you do. Would you agree with that it's harder
to anticipate that type of attack?
Speaker 2 (06:14):
It is tricky, as we'll probably talk about today. A
lot has changed in how police approach that now. So
for a long time, the police in response was always
detect and intervene. So if there's an issue, will intervene,
and generally that's by arresting or charging the person. Now
the model's change to making sure that we can screen
(06:38):
the issue, then try and understand the issue, then put
some form of prevention in place, and then basically review
that and then start again. So we've gotten to the
place where we're much more proactive around that now rather
than reactive, so we're not waiting for incidents to happen.
And when we do identify people that are concerning it's
(07:00):
about trying to understand the nature of that concern and
then put some form of support and prevention process around them.
But of course the limitation of that is we only
know what we know, so we only know about the
people that are coming through to us and we're getting
the information around. If we don't get that though, and
there's someone out there that we're unaware of, then we're
(07:23):
very vulnerable.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
Okay. And the intervention side of it. I spent a
long time in as a homicide detective and my frustration
looking back at the career is that you come in
when it's too late, unless you're working the case with
a serial killer, but invariably it was a murder and
you're coming in at the end. So this intervention identifying
risk factors, I would imagine it'd be very rewarding.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
It's hard. I think you'd have to ask the police
that are doing the real groundwork there because it has
it's required police to nearly take on social worker type roles,
which I think so probably fine, challenging or not necessarily
what they got into the role for and realizing that
exit to get out and talk to people and engage
(08:10):
with them and be supportive and put plans in place
and be available to talk to them if they need to,
ring them, go outter coffee with them, try and help
mold and shape them into a more pro social pathway.
And get in front of them and change the way
that they maybe perceive police. And I think that is
(08:31):
why we're seeing some good results. But again, as I
was mentioning before, it is only who we know that
we get to do that response with.
Speaker 1 (08:39):
Okay, we've jumped straight into it. Let's find out a
little bit about yourself. What got you into this field
of expertise and what studies have you done to become
a forensic psychologist.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
So study for a long time. I think I did
about eleven years all up with the pH d, which
I've never intended to at the beginning.
Speaker 1 (08:57):
Easy task.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
Yeah, And look, initially I probably went in a bit
blind and thought psychology was interesting, and I was very
much keen on sports psychology and the way things aligned.
At the time, sports psychology wasn't available, so the option
was really standard normal psychology where you sit there and
talk to people, or forensic which seemed much more intriguing
(09:19):
and exciting, and I gravitated to that and I liked
the challenge. I was doing triflons at the time, so
I was very probably goal focused and liked to be tested.
And then as I got into forensic psychology, I then
came across psychopaths, and I did my PhD on psychopaths,
and it was fascinating because they were folks that did
(09:42):
everything different to what normal people did. And you know,
we grow up and we learn about people, but we
don't really ever learn about psychopaths unless you've had certain
experiences or challenging upbringing where you might have been targeted
or victimized by them. But psychopaths are the ones that
stay calm and cool under pres They are the ones
that are a few steps ahead. And that was really
(10:04):
intriguing to look at those fellows, and that kept me
really pushing through forensic psychology and then wanting to work
with high risk and high harm offenders that present with
some pretty I think difficult offending behavior and difficult interpersonal styles.
And so for much of my early career I spent
(10:26):
a long time in the treatment space with probably thirty
different offenders a week. I was working with for several
years and then moved into specializing in higher sex offenders,
and then had a brief stint working in academia lecturing
in forensic psychology before jumping into the New Zealand Police.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
Where did you get the access to that many criminals
to work with was that through creative services, So.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
Part of it was through coreative services, but I was
working as a contracting forensic psychologists in a private capacity
for quite a few years, and corrections are always needing
private independent practitioners to assist them, but also to send
them send offenders for treatment in the community. So a
(11:17):
lot of it was there's the treatment aspect, but in
many ways it's actually having conversations with offenders and trying
to build a relationship with them where they haven't actually
had a lot of stability or predictability in their life,
and a lot of the time it's just holding space
for them to actually feel like they could have a
trusting relationship with someone and open up and talk about
(11:40):
the problems in their life because many of them have
never had that opportunity.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
Didn't have the people that they could turn to. No,
the obvious question that I ask if you've done a
PhD in psychopaths, nature and nurture, have you got a
learning like that question gets asked so many times and
different views.
Speaker 2 (11:59):
It's a combination of both. I don't think. I don't
think exclusively it's genetics, but there's certainly a genetic aspect
to that, and then the environment can either really dial
up those traits and make them much more maladaptive or dysfunctional,
or potentially it could keep them somewhat contained. I always
(12:20):
go back to the scenario that you can have potentially
the genetic makeup to be psychopathic, but if you've got
a good upbringing, a good education, you learn pro social
ways to express those tendencies. If you're able to go
and do sport, if you're able to find ways to
community Kate, it could be driving fast car, skydiving, you
(12:45):
can find ways to manage those if you have a
level of self awareness as well. I think people become
very much handicapped though, if they have some of those
tendencies and then they are also dealt with a difficult childhood,
because it really puts that person on really a one
way path to offending or something else.
Speaker 1 (13:04):
It's interesting you answer it that way. I had the
fortune to speak to a neuroscientist from the United States
that did pet scans on the whole range of people
that were considered psychopaths, and they were some of the
country's most notorious psychopaths that had been brought down for
the crimes that they've done. And without going into the
neuroscience because I've got no idea what I'm talking about.
(13:26):
He basically said with a PET scan of their brain
that they had a common feature in there. So he
needed a reference point and did scans on people that
weren't identified as a psychopath. James Fallon was his own. Yes,
PET scanned his own brain and that had the same predisposition,
all the same that features as the psychopaths. And he
(13:47):
reasoned that he grew up in a loving environment, a
nurturing environment where he was cared for and that and
that probably steerred him in those formative years till the
age of three or whatever, steered him in a direction.
And then with the people that had the psychopaths that
had played out in the criminal world, they didn't have
that nurturing around them, they didn't have that family environment.
(14:10):
They said that might make a difference. So I take
on what you're saying that's a combination of both.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Yeah, absolutely, and that his book's really interesting where he
does talk about that. Yeah, he had the brain structure
as he described to be the same as serial killers
looking that he was assessing. But yeah, he certainly I
think he says he pushed push, pushed lots of boundaries,
and he could be quite dominant and overbearing at times.
But yeah, it didn't go into becoming full fledged violence.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
Yeah, it was channeled in a positive way. Or he
could talking to psychopaths. And you said, how some people
that plays out? Is my understanding, it's just a general
talk that you know, some of the headed industries are psychopaths,
successful soldiers, all sorts of different even sportsmen, all sorts
(15:00):
of personalities might have that psychopathic trait, but they stir
it towards another thing. Is that Is that true?
Speaker 2 (15:09):
Yeah, it's interesting, you know, having a level of boldness
and ruthlessness, some of those traits can be quite desirable
for certain occupations, maybe even the police.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
I'm just pulling back on I was thinking that, but
I'm not going to.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
And you do get some psychopathic folks that are skilled
enough to again modify those traits and rather than going
and violently stabbing someone, they might go and ruthlessly cul
people in organizations. So there's some really interesting books. You know.
(15:44):
John Ronson wrote a book and he talked about our
Dunlap who has known aed Texas I think Texas chainsaw
Our or something like that. Who would go into organizations
and he worked for Sunbeam for a while and basically
just he would just go in and cut and fire
hundreds of employees in a very ruthless way. Bernie Madoff,
who was the head of the Nasdaq ran I think
(16:05):
it was a thirteen billion dollar ponzi scheme over a
couple of decades over in New York. He's often considered
the poster boy for corporate psychopaths. So we do see
that Summer are quite capable of channeling those traits without
needing to get their hands dirty in.
Speaker 1 (16:23):
That spec Understand what you're saying, Yeah, it's interesting and
the different way they steer their life. So the work
you do with New Zealand place, what'said involved? What do
you engage with?
Speaker 2 (16:36):
So I'm an operational psychologist in our behavioral science unit
over there, and we have two operational psychologist roles that
serves the country and within that we also run the
VY Class, so the Violent Crime Analysis Linkage system where
we track stranger sex crimes across the country and that's
(16:57):
got three analysts that are staffing that, and then we
also have a sworn senior sergeant that sits over the
top of our unit as well, and so our unit
really is brought into major crime investigations to provide operational support,
particularly when we have very serious crimes just homicide, could
(17:18):
be terrorism offenses, major sexual offenses, all the way through
to arsons and other sorts of offending, and we provide
a range of different services. Sometimes it's very much advice
on the fly as a homicide is evolving or emerging
in the early stages of the investigation. Other times it
will be risk assessments around what do we need to
(17:41):
know about this person and how concerning are they to
the community. We also occasionally will do the classic criminal
profile of a who done at crime, but most of
them are solved very quickly now so there's not the
need for criminal profiles. And then also things like cold
case reviews and a lot of work around interviewing as well.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Yeah, and I know you're familiar with her, doctor Sarah Ule.
I work closely with her in New South Wales Police
and I not use her on all the investigations I
had some there wasn't a need for the role that
she could fulfill, the tricky ones, the ones that it's
not blatantly obvious for what has occurred here, or an
interpretation of a crime scene as you said, or we've
(18:25):
interviewing of what's the bets buttons to push? Is that
Carrotle's stick? Which way to approach that? I found it
so beneficial and I'm surprised, and I've been out of
New South Wales Police for a couple of years. I
don't know what the status is now, but we didn't
properly resource that. Like I think it is a tool
that can be really used in the difficult investigations. I
(18:46):
see that's the role where you guys come in.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
I found that it is really well received and certainly
over in New Zealand it's a major crimes the lead
investigators and also the investigated team, but they often really
are quite receptive of that advice. It's rare that we
get pushed back, and I think that the challenges. Of course,
it's your reputation and what you provide for a product
(19:13):
and service. In some ways, people keep coming back to
you if you provide good service, but if you provide
you know, poor service, or go to sort of far
one way or the other way, or you know, don't
quite tailor it to what the investigation needs. The unit
can become vulnerable in that respect. So it's there's a
(19:33):
constant process there of needing to make sure what you're
doing really holds up and supports investigations.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
And I think it's also important that investigators understand what
you can bring to the investigation. Yes, I saw some
misunderstandings in working with Sarah. Other investigators thought this is
what they can provide to the investigation, but wasn't the
type of thing that she could.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
Yeah, there's the risk that someone thinks that you're going
to come out and say of it or find the
magical clue. And you know, policing is as you know,
it's a combination of different areas of specialty coming together
to get the end product and the end outcome. And
it's really you know, one person or one unit. It's
a cumulative effort. And sometimes I think even if we're
(20:19):
adding one percent towards helping the investigation and you've got
another unit adding one percent, those small one percents come
together and they can be the difference.
Speaker 1 (20:27):
They're the things that make a difference with a case
being solved or not. You invariably get one shot at
it and then if you miss it, and that one
or two percent. But with Sarah, I found that what
I liked working with a forensic psychologist was a different take,
a different perspective. We get a little bit of group
think in policing. We tend to think the same and
it's good to have someone independent, someone outside the circle
(20:51):
that looks at it from a different view. And quite
often with Sarah, have you considered this? And I'd be
looking at it. Go No, I haven't a very good idea, see,
but I found that beneficial. It was a really powerful,
powerful tool to have.
Speaker 2 (21:05):
Yeah, it's good to sometimes have someone that can step
back and bring that different perspective. And often psychologists are
going to look at the person and try and in
some ways deconstruct the puzzle and then rebuild it and
look at what does that then give us for the investigation,
So that might be understanding the functionality of the behavior
(21:26):
all the way through to let's go and approach the
person and try this style of engagement, because that's the
type of individual they are. And if we go in
really hot and in our suits and quite brazen and
kick the door in, that's not going to get their
response and they're not going to engage with this and
then we're going to miss the opportunity to interview with them.
Speaker 1 (21:52):
Serial killing, the type of investigations we're talking about. I
read your book Mass Casually over the weekend and it's
you me up to speed on quite a few things,
and I found a fascinating, fascinating read and putting sort
of might take in it from a homicide detective and
your thoughts and theories. What I found particularly interesting was
(22:12):
the onset of the loan actors in the way that
they're starting to leave their mark. Sadly, because when someone
commits an offense of mass casual these a lot of
lives are destroyed. What's your involvement in that type of work?
Speaker 2 (22:28):
So our unit really is the main unit within New
Zealand that would service persons of concern, whether it be
a sort of a fixation or grievance point of view,
or also a terrorism aspect. So we would provide the
operational consultation on those matters. And that's an ongoing area
(22:50):
as it is in Australia, where there's people that are
often presenting with concerns or concerning behaviors and the task
then is to try and understand the extent of that concern.
I always think it's good to boil it down to
looking at two factors, so their intent and their capability.
So do they have the intent to act violently or
(23:11):
the intent to act on these concerning thoughts or beliefs
or whatever they might be exhibiting, and do they have
the capability to progress with that behavior? So that might
be all the way through to the capability to carry
out an attack, capability to plan, the capability to resource.
So where they sit on the intent and capability scale
(23:33):
is important. And then of course as the intent increases
and the capability increases, then we get quite concerned.
Speaker 1 (23:39):
Right. If I can refer to a couple of things
from the book, that one that I found particularly interesting
was the Toronto vehicle ramming attack where a number of
people A person that's gotten in the.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
Car, Alec Manassian.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
That's the one twenty five year old killing eleven people
and then during fifteen others. Could you just describe what
happened and then we'll break that investigation down.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
Yeah, So he was a twenty five year old. He
was studying I can't remember the exact I think it
was a computer science degree and had just graduated and
was about to start his first first day of professional
work for his career, and he heed a van. He
(24:27):
made the decision to book that a couple of weeks earlier,
picked it up and drove into downtown Toronto and through
a heavy pedestrian area in the city and struck numerous
people so killed eleven, injured fifteen, and initially they thought
it was an Islamic inspired attack. Once they had him
(24:48):
in custody, they then began to look through his various
online accounts and discovered a really interesting post that he'd
made earlier that morning which talked about this in cell rebellion.
And I've spoken with Rob Thomas, who was the lead
interviewer of Manassian, and he mentioned that a lot of
(25:09):
the planning went into preparing for an Islamic state type
of offender. And then as the day progressed, they discovered
that it was actually this in cell ideology that had
been a heavy motivating factor for that, and that really
was I think one of the first public examples that
(25:31):
we got of an in cell and spied attack. It
was sort of known, I guess in the underground space
and in online forums, but it really brought it to
the fore and that then interview of Manassin where he
talks about chad's and stacy.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
Fascinate fascinating breakdown what the in cels are for people
that don't know.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
So in cells are those that are self described as
being involuntarily celibate, so they're unable to find a sexual
or intimate part. And they would say that that it's
forced on them in many ways due to the social
hierarchy and social structure. And this is where it gets
a little distorted in a little extreme, where they attribute
(26:13):
that to basically a set group of men having access
to the majority, so roughly eighty percent of the women.
So these our for males with the chisel jewels and
abs and biceps of the chads, and the blonde barbie
type as you know, as you imagine, is known as
(26:35):
the staceys. And so it's really this hierarchy of chads
and Staceys, and the in cells want to be aut
to date and have sex with the staceys, but because
of the sort of social and evolutionary nature, they're unable to.
So there's also another level, which is the Bicki's that
(26:56):
kind of a step or rank below staceis, and the
in cells don't desire the Beckies, they want the they
want the Staceys. And we also have normies as well
that sit above above in cells and normis are the
ones that are not necessarily attractive and not necessarily succeeding.
(27:16):
They're kind of just floating by in life. And underneath
them are the in cells who are basically deprived of
all the joys and successes in life because they've been
disadvantaged by looks and various other aspects. And as you
step back, it's just it blows your mind, because it's
a bit like you're reading a teenage science fiction magazine
(27:40):
or its game characters in some sort of sci fi
sci fi game. And but we've seen so many of
these ideologies that have even the Sovereign Citizen movement for example,
where there's all these different rules and laws and norms,
and it's very confusing to get your head around.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
Do you think they're on the increase or decrease in Australia.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
It's a hard one to answer whether they are on
the increase. I certainly don't think that the numbers are
reducing at all. We're seeing more and more just fringe
social groups are attracting people, and people are identifying with
others on an online space because they are not having
those face to face conversations now. So I think in
(28:25):
cell culture and those that are struggling with socially and
also on intimate relationships maybe conversing with others in these groups,
I don't think we're necessarily seeing any more violent or
misogynistic views increases or directly from these groups at the present.
I think the numbers are staying pretty stable around about
(28:48):
that five percent, but we may be seeing more people
that are identifying with the underlying themes and messages around that.
Speaker 1 (28:55):
I wonder with the advent of dating apps that seems
to be the norm of people meeting people these days,
and the picture of the profile and all that, a
lot of people be getting rejected without even understanding who
they are or what they are, and I can see
some resentment perhaps building building from that.
Speaker 2 (29:15):
Yeah, I think that that's a piece that probably hasn't
really been answered. And you raise a really good point.
You know, what's the implication of not only face to
face rejection but online rejection as well, and how does
that amplify that. An interesting point is we've got in cells.
There's also fem cells, which are female in cells, and
I think a couple of years ago I saw it.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Can't we put the in cells together with them?
Speaker 2 (29:39):
Well, it's the females that are having a similar challenges
and they're not liking the available males to them, and
they are involuntarily celibate. And yeah, I saw recently, you know,
there was a TikTok I think with twenty six million
likes or hashtags around fem cells. So we're certainly seeing
more and more unusual and maybe fringe sort of groups
(30:02):
popping up.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
Well, see how it plays out because the social norm
has changed, isn't the way that only in the last
a couple of decades. It's changed significantly how people used
to meet and because like the in cell's sitting in
isolation and what you described, you can picture many lonely
people in that situation. But the world is set up
(30:24):
now that they can reach out and that their views
can be validated, so they can get on social media
or what they're before them, and their views can be
magnified by the people that are supporting their ideologies. Is
that a fair or a simplistic assessment of it?
Speaker 2 (30:40):
Well, I think we're finding more and more groups pop
up and various online communities now that people are identifying
with and that's okay because it's not necessarily unhealthy. So
jumping onto an insell forum by itself is not a problem.
But there's been debate around, particularly in Australia or in
New Zealand, you should in cell forums or even identifying
(31:04):
with the in cell ideology be classified as terrorism at
the moment. It's not. What the research tends to say
is it's about five percent of people that are on
in cell forums that are very misogynistic and promoting quite
violent rhetoric towards females. So it is only a small proportion.
Where we get worried though, is there's always someone out
(31:27):
there that may be very vulnerable though to those ideas
and that messaging and then progress to carry out a
violent act.
Speaker 1 (31:35):
Well, I suppose, And we're not saying that that initially
thought as a terrorist attack, but it's not being called
a terrorist attack. But that's very similar to how terrorist
groups bring in the extremists, isn't it, yeh, a shared
ideology that they've got like minded people and then it
starts to escalate from there.
Speaker 2 (31:56):
Yeah, and it doesn't necessarily need to be in ideology,
we're seeing more and more people that are just promoting
just violent, violent intentions, self harm, the idea of trying
to dominate others. The FBI recently talked about the seven six'
four group that are basically a group that are promoting
(32:17):
dominance and control and satanistic. Practices there's a right wing
sort of white, supremacy lean and Neo nazi spect to,
it but a lot of it is about trying to
get absolute dominance and control over, someone so that may
be getting someone to self harm or make engravings on
themselves of someone's, initials all the way through to encouraging
(32:40):
them and trying to basically coerce them into carrying out
a violet. Acts, so, unfortunately we're seeing with the rise
of The internet and certain subcultures that we are getting
more and more pockets of violence emerging with.
Speaker 1 (32:57):
That, okay with The toronto, massacre was there any red
flags or indicators that when we look back and hindsight
it's a wonderful, Thing but is there anything that jumps
out to. You we've identified in cell was the seed
that generated the, Attack but was there any things that
warning signs that you could see looking at.
Speaker 2 (33:17):
It it's really tricky looking back at that one Because Alec,
menassian he was a fellow that had struggled throughout his.
Schooling he had an autistic spectrum, disorder never really was
able to form strong social. Relationships he was bullied throughout
his schooling even though he was quite intellectual and quite academically.
(33:40):
Successful socially he. Struggled but he wasn't talking openly in
person to anyone about his ideological positions or his views
about Female it was largely done from the confines of his.
Room and that is the. Challenge so our responses to lone,
actors it has improved a, lot but it is very
(34:02):
contingent on information. Flows so With, manassian the challenge there
was he basically was, isolated kipt to, himself wasn't sharing
this and planned it in. Secrecy and, again you, know
someone Like Anders bravic over In norway is a very
good example where we do occasionally get what we would
(34:22):
say are Black swan types of, incidents so outlies where
we don't get a lot of leaked information or shared
information with others about and.
Speaker 1 (34:32):
You're talking that the concert At norway is that the So.
Speaker 2 (34:36):
Anders bravic in twenty, eleven carried out that the bombing
at the news at The Norwegian government building and then
got on a boat To Utoya island and went over
there it was a young labor party camp and carried
out the mass shooting there AND i think it was
around around seventy seven people that he killed in.
Speaker 1 (34:57):
Total and he you were saying and then sorry in
the rupted you just to clarify the. Event but he
was very, isolated was.
Speaker 2 (35:05):
He so he spent years preparing and planning for that.
Attack he he used his savings to basically, plan, prepare
purchase various tops of, ingredients, firearms tactical equipment over a
number of, years trained himself in using, weapons groundown fertilizer
(35:30):
pellets for several months to create a bomb that he
set off in The Norwegian government building and used multiple
different sort of aliases, online have packages delivered in certain
locations and in other locations with various bits of. Equipment
so he wasn't an exceptional outlier because he was so
(35:51):
meticulously planned and he viewed it very much as a
cat and mouse game with police where he was intending
to carry out this mass casualty, attack but at the
same time he was preparing like a warrior and trying
to keep any types of warnings to the minimum to
not alert.
Speaker 1 (36:09):
Authorities, okay with the view of not being. Caught isolation
seems to be one of the. Things and isolation is. Hard,
well you can't legislate against, isolation but it seems to
be a common theme in these people that or in an,
event and that could be a breakup of a. RELATIONSHIP
(36:29):
i Had Tim watson mun On The Criminal psychologist talking
about The Hottle street massacre where a person that was
rejected in the army his car broke. Down it was
sort of a build up when you look at it looking,
backwards you, go, okay this was, okay there's breaking point
and all of a sudden the. Damage the damage is
(36:50):
done with a lot of these a lot of these.
Things it is the. Isolation so how do we encourage
people to come forward if someone's acting, strangely if they're,
isolated it's very hard to pick up.
Speaker 2 (37:01):
On, yeah there's a couple. ASPECTS i think fixations are,
important grievances and then the isolation component that you spoke
about as.
Speaker 1 (37:11):
Well fixation grievances and.
Speaker 2 (37:13):
Isolation, yes, yeah and the isolation as tricky as, well
because what we find is that a lot of lone
actors do have social, interactions so they're not isolated in
the traditional sense where they have no conversations with anyone
and they're just sitting at home. Alone many will have
(37:35):
supportive family. Members they may even be in a, relationship
but what's missing is the social, Reciprocity so they don't
get the same things out of social relationships that often
you AND i, Would so they don't get their enjoyment
out of the. Relationship they don't feel that strong sense
(37:58):
of connection or. Longing so there's often something just missing
there that makes them feel isolated and disconnected from, others
rather than the classic sense of this person's just isolated
and not around.
Speaker 1 (38:13):
Others, okay so even in an environment they can internally feel, yes,
yeah we're referring to these people for the mass casualties
as loan. Actors it used to be called lone. Wolf
what was the logic behind the changing of the way
that we identify, This, Yeah SO.
Speaker 2 (38:30):
I think around the nineteen nineties late, nineties THE us
were populating the turn lone wolf and it got a
bit of pushback because it added a level of mysteriousness
to these, fellows and you, know they were someone that
was planning in secrecy and carrying out a, mission and
the sort of mystique ended up in some WAYS i
(38:52):
think fueling them. Encouraging, yeah, Absolutely and that was then
rebranded really probably in the academic space to loan, actors
so those that basically are acting alone or with minimal outside.
Influence and we cavet at that though now BECAUSE i
would say that it's those that are self initiating towards
(39:13):
violence and they're not doing that at the direction of someone,
else but they could very easily be online communicating in
a group and getting ideas or sharing extreme views with.
People so they are self initiating to, violence but they
may not be loan or alone in that classical.
Speaker 1 (39:34):
SENSE i think that there's an importance and it always
worries me AND i now work in the media coming
from law, enforcement if we give too much of a
profile to someone who's committed a horrendous. Crime AND i
think lone wolf could be a pretty Cool i'm a lone.
Wolf the lone actor doesn't sound quite as. Cool and
when you talk about the one, percent that might be
(39:56):
the one. Percent that makes a difference that someone that
doesn't get a fantasy about being seen as a lone.
Speaker 2 (40:02):
Wolf, yeah AND i Think australia And New zealand have
done it pretty. Well certainly over in THE us with
the high rates of school shooting as workplace, incidents there's
just this constant stream of news coverage which really sort
of sensationalizes the action in some.
Speaker 1 (40:19):
Ways with loan actors my, understanding and most of the
play out in the media tend to be. Male is
there a predominance of male loan actors or can? Female
is there female loan actors as?
Speaker 2 (40:31):
Well looks mostly. Males it's quite heavily steered towards. Males
around about ninety to ninety five percent of loan actor
attackers are. MALE a good example of a female probably
here In australia would have Been Momina schomer down In,
victoria WHO i think is the first female charged with
(40:51):
the terrorism In, australia and she stabbed her homestay, host
obviously identifying with The Islamic jehardy ideology and had influences
from several others that were affiliated with Other islamic based,
attacks but she traveled solely To australia to carry out an.
Speaker 1 (41:13):
Attack did she tax and mind in custody as? Well
there was another attack and the sister over yep from
their homeland attacked the police officer of making.
Speaker 2 (41:22):
The year your spot. On so she, RECENTLY i think
it was a Blonde canadian female in custody that she
attacked and afterwards made comments About allah would be happy
with her for, THAT i think with a pair of gardening.
Shares and then, yeah the time that she was, charged
police over there went to speak with her sister and
(41:44):
when they arrived at the, door the sister came out
with a knife and tried to attack the. Officers, no
it was.
Speaker 1 (41:52):
The fact that both sisters continents apart that there's something
that's got into their ideology and going out the.
Speaker 2 (42:01):
Attacks, yeah AND i think that the differences with males
and females in respect to this form of violence probably
is very similar to what we see with a lot
of different forms of. Offending, yeah you, know males are
often the ones doing the more serious, homicides and they
certainly perpetrate homicides at at much higher rates than. Females
(42:23):
and in some, ways you, know males tend to act
out their emotions and females are often internalizing. Those SO
i think we see different ways of coping with emotion
and dealing with. Problems and for, men when they have,
struggles it is acted out and it's, expressed often in harmful,
ways in quite destructive. Ways and we do talk about
(42:46):
there being copycat effects and it can take.
Speaker 1 (42:48):
IT i was going to ask, that like when you
see a series and then shortly after there's another, one
and especially in THE, US i think we're all aware
of that with the school, shootings and do you think
that that the copy can come into?
Speaker 2 (43:01):
PLAY i no doubt that we've seen many attacks that
have been copied over the, years and As Bravic Brenton
tarrant In New zealand have certainly given inspiration and also
tactical knowledge to other perpetrators that have then gone on
to carry out attacks after. That we also probably have
a contagion aspect as, well you, know like the social.
(43:23):
Contagion and for a long time media outlets didn't report
suicides because suicides are known to have a contagion, aspect
where if you've got friends that then others that know
that person that at increased risk of, suicide particularly they've
got mental health. Vulnerabilities we know that if suicides are
(43:44):
in the, media it actually leads to people thinking about
the idea. More AND i think no doubt that it's
a similar thing with mass casualty. Attacks that the more
that we see that people are trying to resolve life
problems in this, way then the more it. Normalize it
normalizes that and that's quite.
Speaker 1 (44:04):
Frightening, yeah, well you saw it with, schools and with
schools if a child has committed, suicide it was always
a concern that other, kids friends and all, that and
it's something that you, know, again if we can will
it back or reduce minimize the risk factors all the.
Better terrorism has distinct from low and actors BECAUSE i
(44:26):
think we've all been caught up in you, know we're
living in times when there are terrorist attacks and have
been some significant, ones and then the loan actor attacks
and sometimes they get a little bit caught. Up it's
all the same, thing, like if it's a mass casually
it must be a terrorist. Attack what's the difference between the.
Speaker 2 (44:43):
Two, yeah it's a really good. Question and in some
ways terrorism is more at a legislative criminal prosecution. Level
we often see that there's many common, threads so there
could be fixations and grievances and. Ideologies, now it's often
the presence of an ideology that leads to something being
(45:06):
classified as, terrorism and we also look at it in
terms of what was the intended outcome and often is
there an intention to create social and political, change and
that's often where the ideology is paired with, that and
that would then become classified as. Terrorism we've seen, though
that many mess casualty attacks are not perpetrated with clear
(45:32):
intentions to create social and political. Change they are instead
a result of grievances or fixations and other, factors sometimes
coupled with aspects of, ideology but they don't necessarily meet
the classification for. Terrorism so it is a bit of
a fine, line AND i think the risk is we
focus too much on terrorism and miss that there's actually
(45:54):
more universal threads amongst all of these. Individuals and sometimes
it's terrors, specific but other times it's just intended to
really be a form of revenge, retribution trying to restore
natural order or response to perceived.
Speaker 1 (46:11):
Injustice, well i'd take on board what you said earlier
on about, grievances how that plays a, part and that's you,
know we've all been slighted in some, way and there's
ways of dealing with your anger and your, grievances but
you can imagine people that haven't got the emotional skills
to handle. That it just becomes a fixation That i've been,
Wronged i'm going to get.
Speaker 2 (46:31):
Revenge, Yeah and we talk about querulous individuals to those
that just constantly make complaints that are unable to be,
pleased that are distrusting and suspicious and. Paranoid and, look
there are people out there like, that but they don't
ever resort to. Violence and that really raises the question
around what is it that is tipping people over the into,
(46:53):
Violence and it's often it is the violent. Identification so
they start in some way trying to see themselves as
someone that's going to make a big statement to bring
an ultimate conclusion to an, event and then we do
pair that with ideology in certain, times then we really
(47:14):
get this quite sort OF i, guess concerning mix or
factors that come. Together and one of the MODELS i
quite like is this idea of the bathtub, model where.
Speaker 1 (47:24):
It was bath tub all the, staircase the staircase you explain.
THAT i found that quite.
Speaker 2 (47:28):
Interesting so the bath tub is the idea that we
have a couple of different water faucets that are pouring
into a bath, tub and that can be different motivating.
Factors so sometimes it's sometimes it's, political sometimes it's personal,
factors sometimes it's social, factors and they gradually pour in
over time and fill up the bath. Tub it might
(47:49):
be that your relationship breaks, down you get fired at,
work you then start looking at concerning media on the,
internet and gradually they all just.
Speaker 1 (48:01):
Or three of. Those, sorry, no you're not looking at.
Me i'm not going to do, Anything so.
Speaker 2 (48:06):
Start filling up the. Bathtub and where it goes wrong
is there's no release style on the, bathtub so it
just fills up over. Time and EXAMPLE i used in
the book of that Was Thomas, mayor who Kills Joe
cox over in THE, uk and he's a guy that
had long term right wing Neo nazi views and they
(48:27):
just simmled away for roughly twenty. Years but then When
brexit came, about that really just fueled things for him
that tipped him over the. Edge and then we look
at something like the, staircase and that looks at really
how things transform for someone over. Time and the idea
is that you walk into the base of the. Staircase
(48:48):
so you walk into the first door because things are
not quite going right or the way that you'll you
want them to in, life and you walk into the
door looking for an, answer looking for a, solution and
you get to the first level or the ground, floor
and then if you don't find any solutions, there you
walk up the next, level and, gradually as you keep
(49:09):
going up the, levels your options narrow and Violence, ultimately
once you get to the fifth, level becomes the only
solution and the last resort answer to your. Problems so
we see that as the person climbs the, staircase not
only do the options and solutions, dwindle but they're thinking
(49:29):
about the situation changes and they come to accept that
the only way through this or the only justifiable response.
Speaker 1 (49:36):
Is violence and breaking it down in the simple concept
of the bath tub and the. Staircase does that help
a lot of the times you might be doing the thread,
assessment is that the type of thing that you're looking
at the build up or, okay how dangerous AND i
really take on. Board one of the aspects that you
say is, capability because that's a big. FACTOR i look
(49:58):
from a homicide investigator point of, view opportunity made even,
capability could have the, opportunity could have the, motive but
if they haven't got the, Capability so that's another fact
that comes into.
Speaker 2 (50:09):
It it is an unfortunately capability though is becoming as
we've seen with say The BOND dii junction. Attack now
it's just a, cheap easy available weapon and someone can
do an enormous amount of. Harm but we don't dismiss
capability because it is still very, important and things like
(50:31):
the Cross church attack highlight something like capability. Factors but
we do need to balance that then with, intent so you,
know how strongly is this or how strong is this person's,
Intent and then if we are concerned about the, intent
well then we know that they could be capable of
doing a low capability. Attack so it is a bit
(50:54):
of a balancing act where we need to look at all.
FACTORS i always, think how died up are the dial
for this? Individual how concerned do we need to? Be
so as you, know the more concerning things that we,
see then, generally as a loose, principle you would be
you'd be saying that you, know there's a lot of
risk or threat that needs to be mitigated here.
Speaker 1 (51:17):
Looking at just pick a, case if you'd be familiar
with The linp cafe With Man, Momus, yes looking back
that and people know we've spoken about on here we
had one of the hostages from the siege that was
in the cafe the whole time and some of the police.
Involved but looking At Man, momus like you look back
(51:40):
and you go red, flag red, flag red. Flag but that's.
Hindsight it's a wonderful. Thing is there anything that you
see in that if you're familiar with it at? All
something About Man momis's background that if you were assessing
him prior to him committing this, offense is what sort
of vindicators would concern?
Speaker 2 (51:58):
You, yeah that's, look that's a really good. Question and
the coronial inquest that looked at The Link cafe siege
had some really good findings and one of them was
the need for a Fixated Threat Assessment, center which came
into place in twenty seventeen In New South wales AND
i Think queensland was the first state to bring that
(52:21):
in Because monus he had the grievance and the fixation
And Michelle, pathay who's done a lot of work in
the F tach space and set up The queensland F
tach and also The VICTORIAN. TACH i saw a presentation
that she did and she talked About monus and we
(52:41):
looked at him through the terrorism. Lens and that's one
of the biggest shortfalls probably of our management or response
To monus was he was a fixated and grievance fueled.
Individual but we were making all our assessments and judgments
on him based on is he a whole risk of
a terrorism? Offense and the worry was that wein we're
(53:06):
missing him as a person and what was actually motivating
and driving? Him and so it was the grievance and
the need for notoriety and significance rather than the presence
of a strong. Ideology so we got caught up in
does he have the ideology and the desire to act
violently for that, ideology rather than is this an individual
(53:29):
that's got the psychological makeup and the psychological factors that
are fueling him towards? Violence AND i think now looking
back at, that we've seen that had you, know the
emergence of f tax and more specialized, police particularly you
know psychologists and. Psychiatrists we've come a long way since.
Speaker 1 (53:50):
Then, yeah looking for the dangers of those fixated. PERSONS
a lot of the work that you're doing now and
break it down into prevention and. Intervention And i've just
got some of the discussion points here policing. STRATEGIES i
suppose you touched in part on that that the way
we were looking at man momus was more from a
(54:10):
terrorist point of view than a fixated person with a
grievance that might play out risk. Assessments that's the work
that you're. In break us down for a risk. Assessment
what IF i was seeing here GOING i am so
angry at The New South Wales police for how my
career came to an, end what sort of assessments would
you be making without getting too? Personal MAYBE i should
(54:32):
have used another, example but, Okay i'm, angry BUT i
think my, Situation i'll just move on and get on
with my. Life another. Chapter so what type of things
would be a warning sign to?
Speaker 2 (54:45):
You and that's part of, it isn't is that rigidity
and the cognitive. Rigidity do you have the ability to
think about other, options other, solutions other ways of coping
or is it tunneling down to you becoming very fixed
and very stuck and very fueled by this? Injustice and
(55:11):
so we do look at we look at factors like.
Fixation how psychologically preoccupied is someone with this issue or this?
Person how aggrieved are they so how strong is that
grievance for some of these folks that they wake up
every day living and breeding. This then you look at the,
(55:33):
intent so you, know do they have an intent to
progress that? Issue and then do they have the capability
to act on? That so that is a simple way
of looking at. It another way is to think about
it from a threat perspective and Read, malloy who's a
forensic psychiatrist over in THE us has done some really
good work and he talks about eight key warning. Behaviors
(55:55):
and so the first one's, pathway so is the evidence
of planning and preparation for some sort of. Act we
then have, fixation so that psychological. Preoccupation then there is,
identification so is the person experiencing a shift in their
identity so that they are now starting to see themselves
(56:15):
more as a as a warrior or someone that's being
driven towards a. Mission so often that commando type of
identity that they're developing novel. Aggression so are they engaging
anything to test their ability to the? Results how we
also have. Leakage so have they made any remarks to
(56:39):
anyone about an intent to carry out an active? Harm
we have a directly communicated threat as? Well have they
made any threats to? Anyone last resort as? Well so last?
Resorts often have they reached their end of?
Speaker 1 (56:55):
Tether is?
Speaker 2 (56:56):
This are they at the position where they think.
Speaker 1 (56:59):
This, loss loss of family and just what else have
they got left in the?
Speaker 2 (57:03):
Eye this is never going to be, resolved AND i
need to do something about. IT i need to make
a final statement and make my. Mark and often that
making your mark is often quite crucial in this in
these sorts of, offenses because unfortunately we see that it's
often people that don't have significance that are wanting, significance
(57:23):
and that the act becomes part of gaining that. Significance,
okay it's, interesting that's.
Speaker 1 (57:29):
FASCINATING i love like the structure you put into such
a because it's such a gray area with so many different.
Layers but you actually need the, structure don't. You, well
as you're breaking down the. Structure it helps me even
the bathtub and the. Staircase, okay if you told me
the science behind it, All i'll probably get, Lost BUT
i understand what you're, saying and you really do need the.
(57:52):
Structure government. Influencers we had the shooting situation down In
tasmania and we restricted guns and made a very strong gun.
Policy is that the type of thing you're talking with government. Influencers.
Speaker 2 (58:08):
Yeah government influences are the fascinating and sometimes concerning at
the same, time and they can be spot on or
really missed the. MARK i think understanding the lone actor
landscape In, australia it's hard to have that conversation Without Port.
Arthur so where we are now and maybe the lack
(58:30):
of significant incidents that we, have AND i say that
cautiously is probably largely a result of the decisions that
were made back in nineteen ninety six around the. Firearms
if we think about even The Link cafe ces or
some of the other even The bondai attack, recently had
(58:51):
those people been able to get high caliber, firearms it may,
yeah very very. Different and the potentially the argument there
for the Christ church terrorist attack may that have happened
In australia if our firearm policy hadn't ever been, changed
because part of the part of that was the accessibility
(59:13):
of firearms at the. Time so governments have a really
important part to. Play my concern is that we try
and restrict our way out of, things and there's a
balance there between.
Speaker 1 (59:26):
You because you could create another potential offend.
Speaker 2 (59:31):
That absolutely the everyday person is doing the right thing
and they are losing a lot of their freedoms because
of restrictive measures that are put in. Place AND i
always think, that you, know people need to have a
level of. Autonomy we can't regulate and control our way
out of, everything AND i think it's good to put
(59:53):
safeguards and parameters in, place but becoming too restrictive and
too intrusive risk thin creating another problem on the flip
side of that with someone then getting aggrieved and FEELING.
Speaker 1 (01:00:08):
I, think and TALKING, covid THE covid, RESTRICTIONS i saw
PEOPLE i knew that the way they were, reacting you
could almost see the, tension the anger build up and
the frustration build up in them in the, restrictions and
you could see how that could play out in the
extreme And i'm not saying my, friends BUT i just
saw how many people are, affected and affected each and
(01:00:30):
every one of. Us you had the isolation and then
the restrictions and loss of, control and people are losing
their livelihood or losing contact with their. Families those type
of RESTRICTIONS i think is just sort of pouring fuel
on the.
Speaker 2 (01:00:45):
Fire, Yeah So i'm always big on empowering and educating,
People and THEN i think governments ideally put the safeguards
and the parameters in, place but people still need that.
Autonomy AND i think rather than restricting and, controlling we
should try and educate and. Teach and there's the, argument,
say with the restrictions for social media that are looking
(01:01:07):
like coming in for, adolescents which which is, positive adolescents
will still go and find other platforms like discord and
all sorts of online groups that they can still access
and still find extreme. Content so what about if we
taught people or children to use social media, safely you,
know something like a social media. License we teach people to,
(01:01:28):
drive you, know we teach them how to do things
in a safe. Manner SO i think there's a role
there where we can empower rather than.
Speaker 1 (01:01:36):
Restrict, well giving that degree of, autonomy it takes a
sting out of any, restrictions doesn't. It you've got a
little bit of. Control, okay you've just got to go
through this, pathway but you can get. THERE i see
what you're. Saying i've never thought of it that, way but,
yeah we shut down the social media for the, kids
they're going to get access to. Things.
Speaker 2 (01:01:55):
Absolutely, yeah and again it's the masses that are probably
doing the right thing that are impact in. IT i
think it's a good conversation to have because there are
always pros and, cons but the ones that seek this
out will still be able to find. It.
Speaker 1 (01:02:10):
Yeah, okay look we might take a break. Here when
we get, BACK i want to talk in detail about
the Christ church massacre and put in or discuss some
of the things we've discussed here and how that played
out in the build up to the. Case i'd also
like to talk about. STALKING i know part of you
the reason you're over here that you're delivering a lecture on.
(01:02:32):
Stalking i've always thought from a policing point of, VIEW
i always had concerns when people were. Stalking it starts, off,
well nothing's really, done but the way that they become
fixated on the person they're. Stalking always concerned, me And
i'm sure there's a lot of other things we've got
to talk. About i'm finding it quite quite. Fascinating so
we'll take a break and we'll be back shortly for part.
(01:02:54):
Two Thanks, Gary cheers.
Speaker 2 (01:03:00):
Two Nine ka
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.