Videos Discussing Psychopathy - Jim Clemente, Profiler

[Minas Tirith]

I am watching the Jodi Arias video and find how Jim Clemente arrives to his conclusions quite "fascinating". Don't know if this is the right term, though.

However, he was FBI, and that for twenty years, hm. And he retired in 2009. He looks quite young in the video (hardly 50?). Does someone know why he retired? Just curious ... and cautious...

M.T.

 

[Laura]

I am watching the Jodi Arias video and find how Jim Clemente arrives to his conclusions quite "fascinating". Don't know if this is the right term, though.

However, he was FBI, and that for twenty years, hm. And he retired in 2009. He looks quite young in the video (hardly 50?). Does someone know why he retired? Just curious ... and cautious...

M.T.

If you keep watching, you'll learn his story.

 

[Beau]

Yes, yes, and yes. And what is amazing is to watch them, and then have Clemente point out the stuff YOU MISSED because you were taken in by the drama. There you are (me, in this case), feeling sorry for her, projecting all kinds of excuses, and then he snaps you up short with the most OBVIOUS thing of all: It's all about them, not a shred of real remorse or empathy! It's like we miss the gorilla in the room. We are so busy looking for NORMAL markers, we miss the biggest one of all.

Totally!! I was asking myself why I couldn't see the things that Clemente was seeing. I wasn't able to see very much of her manipulations, then Clemente would break it all down and it seemed so obvious, so clear, but for me he really did snap me out of the projecting and expose the gorilla in the room. It's quite easy to be taken in by the drama.

I agree it's very hard to put into words the experience of dealing with someone like Arias. It's hard to verbalize the whole thing because of how different the experience is from the rest of your life. I sure am glad that there are people like Clemente out there helping others see these people for what they are.

 

[monotonic]

But after catching the killer & even getting a conviction, the profiler could have an outpouring of emotion behind closed doors which is something that wouldn't be thought of by others, that this person would have to be stronger than others, put on their "game face" (probably to portray discipline) & engage in "psychological jousting" with individuals that aren't "hampered" by emotions that grants them access to so much goodwill & faith by virtually all others, meaning that the stimulus - grandiosity, narcissism, boredom & wanting control over everyone in every situation - is constant. If the profiler would let any larger emotional displays arise they might not be able to be as effective. It seems that many of us here have been preparing to learn this difficult & most pressing subject matter for most of our lives. I certainly admire the strength & courage of profilers more now.

There may be an outpouring of emotions like you suggest, but I don't think it's the emotions you're thinking of. I think if one had the right perspective, the emotions felt would be for the victims, rather than the psychopath. Emotional confusion may result if the person doesn't have the knowledge to understand what they see, but otherwise I think the right perspective results in minimal emotional confusion.

I think this has to do with an observation I made of myself. I became emotionally numb because I learned to expect the limited number of emotions I would feel. Once they at least became predictable, it's as if they were automatically tuned out. I think subconsciously I began to recognize them as noise, and the process seems to be fairly automatic - unless you understand the emotions and can consciously process them. At the time I did not, but I still had to at least be able to keep on the good side of those I was reliant on at the time, and I had to control myself somehow.

I think this mechanism can be used positively in the sense that someone like Clemente would learn to consciously reign in their emotions, and watch the other person for emotions that matter. If you KNOW that a psychopath is feigning charity to gain sympathy and lenience while being the same person who killed people, then your perception of them changes completely, and so do your emotions in response. If you are conscious you can consider them as if they are normal and as if they are pathological at the same time, and compare the two perceptions.

The basic idea is this: Without knowledge/understanding, circumstances and our emotions appear noisy and unpredictable. If we gain knowledge which makes these things predictable, we become able to tune in or tune out; we become able to sort by relevance and emotionally ignore what is inconsequential. My experience is that when this happens fully the right way, my emotions align themselves with what I am presently learning. I've only experienced this recently however. It seems difficult to achieve this, but it seems to be a step that opens the doors for deeper understanding. For the longest time I always had the same reactions to certain things, even if they were inappropriate, and I felt schizophrenic because I felt one thing but it was obviously inappropriate for the circumstances. I think this is where emotional detoxing and the Work come in.

 

[Gwenllian]

Re: Re: Michael Jackson Dies

Here is what former FBI agent Jim Clemente has to say about Jackson and the "child abuse case" against him [15:13 - 25:08]:

Notice that he was involved in the case and probably would have testified in court, if he would not have developed/fought cancer at that time.

I did wonder why Jim Clemente said that MJ had fallen in love with these boys and that he loved them. He seemed to back off a little, but maybe this had to do with the interviewer who didn't seem to believe the adult victim (who was once the star witness and who had stated that MJ was innocent), but who recently came forward and changed his testimony.

I've to admit that I have not studied the allegations against Jackson. The only thing I know, is some of the media coverage of it all.
I also have to admit that I believed in his innocence, but only because of a big lack of hard data about it all and a somewhat emotional reaction to his death, fueled by the media.

I didn't know what to think. After an interview with Oprah Winfrey I thought that MJ was innocent, but I kept my doubts. I know you can't judge a book by its cover, but during the last decade (or three) of his life he started looking weirder and weirder and he seemed to be getting crazier by the minute. I couldn't get over the fact how much he had changed, first he was this sweet looking boy and at the end of his life he looked like a caricature with these lifeless eyes and face. OSIT.

 

[Arwenn]

Jim Clemente has a brother Tim, who is also a retired police officer & FBI agent, and they are interviewed here by Allison Weiner on her youtube show called Media Mayhem _http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtI0gjbUeuU

Very interesting to see how much they differ in their viewpoints, particularly on the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman issue. To me, Jim seems to be the more level-headed of the two. I also can't seem to find much information on Jim, like even his age (he seems so young, it seems he retired due to illness following being a First Responder at 9/11). Here is an interesting interview which gives some insight about him, and how he came about being a writer for Criminal Minds. _http://yourindustryinsider.com/2013/08/jim-clemente/

 

[Arwenn]

When I watched the videos about Jodi Arias I just couldn't understand how she could be so calm after such horrible crime. I tried to put myself into her position and I just can't. It starts to hurt so much, my psyche can't endure it. When I observed Jodi's "crying" I tried to imagine what's in her head at that moment that makes her capable of showing such emotion while actually being cold. I know how psychopaths are functioning (based on forum research), but I can't touch it fully, words are hard to find to describe that feeling. It's disturbing to observe them and to see all that coldness.

When you read about them is one thing, but to observe them, like in these videos, makes big difference in experiencing who they really are.

Yes, yes, and yes. And what is amazing is to watch them, and then have Clemente point out the stuff YOU MISSED because you were taken in by the drama. There you are (me, in this case), feeling sorry for her, projecting all kinds of excuses, and then he snaps you up short with the most OBVIOUS thing of all: It's all about them, not a shred of real remorse or empathy! It's like we miss the gorilla in the room. We are so busy looking for NORMAL markers, we miss the biggest one of all.

It's like this Selective Attention test: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGQmdoK_ZfY

Well, if you know about it, then you SEE it. Same with psychopathy, I think.

I just had a look at the selective attention video - I was looking out for the gorilla, so I did see it; BUT I missed the person in black leaving the stage, and the curtain in the background changing colour. This is what Kahneman talks about in his book Thinking, Fast and Slow with System 1 vs System 2; that when you are so engrossed in something, you miss the detail. I guess the more we are made aware of deviant behavioural patterns, the sooner we can spot them, but its easy to get sucked into the drama when they are such good actors.

I remember reading this thread here on forum PMs and predators, where Laura mentions statistics of predators and how hard it is to spot their behaviour:

I don't think always assuming the other is a predator is sane.

When interacting on the internet it is SAFER to assume that the other person is a predator until there are indications otherwise of a significant nature.

Their are only 5% of them.

No, there are only about 5% of psychopaths... and I actually think the number is quite a bit higher based on observation and experience. The other 95% of humanity can probably be divided into 45% Organic Portals - predators by nature, though not evil predators and 50% potentially souled humans of which at least 45% behave predatorially because that is their conditioning.

In other words, the odds of just about anyone you encounter behaving predatorially are rather high. If you don't realize this, you have drunk the psychopath Kool Aid.

Do I have to assume that you are a psychopath? sorry I won't, until you have demonstrated deviant traits during our discutions. If I were to meet you, I would somehow put you to some kind of tests (we've read a couple of books on psychopathy)...

You are thinking in a naive way. No, you don't have to assume that anyone is a psychopath, but you should assume that anyone may be a predator of some sort. And remember this if you never remember anything else: usually, good psychopaths do NOT demonstrate or exhibit "deviant traits." Not only that, but a really good Organic Portal can remain "hidden" for years even under close observation. Some types only can be detected by their effect on others, never by their behavior.

 

[hiker]

Re: Re: Michael Jackson Dies

These days I am deciding whether or not I will see another Woody Allen film. Once, a former girlfriend, told me that she could never see a film of a pedophile. What I thought was good. but I forgot, a probable "he is funny, so is a good guy" program and kept watching his movies (the whole stories of the psychoanalyzed neurotic that tries to adapt to the life in NY, it seemed funny). I really needed to read about the suffering of Dylan Farrow to realize the dimension of evil. Doubt that now I can see another movie of him without thinking that he is a disgusting pedophile.

I watched Blue Jasmine when it came out last year. I hadn’t seen a Woody Allen movie in a while before that.

I had quite an uneasy feeling watching the movie. It was technically well made, but at least in my experience there was something ”pathological” about the feel of the movie, how the the characters behaved and interacted. Afterwards I thought back to the other movies of his that I had seen earlier, and while they might have been well made, there was some underlying element that was ”bothersome” (in lack of a better word) in many of them, to my recollection. I decided that this was the last Allen movie that I willingly watched. There are much more beneficial ”Positive Dissociation” movies and tv-series out there.

Hearing of the pedophilia allegations now, I’m thinking probably it was Woody Allen’s pathological worldview ”filtering” to the movies through his screenplays and directing.

Come to think of it, in Manhattan, Allen’s main character has an affair with a much younger (high school) girl. The actress was 16 years at the time of shooting, Allen was 42. Indicating evidence in plain sight.

Mariel Hemingway Admits Woody Allen Was Her First Kiss At 16

_http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/23/mariel-hemingway-woody-allen-first-kiss_n_3142561.html

Regarding the topic: Rolf Harris, another entertainment industry personality was also accused of pedophilia. I didn't seem to find a mention about him on the forum (sorry if I missed it).

Entertainer Rolf Harris could be jailed for 10 years if he is found guilty of the child sex offences he was charged with today.
Harris – whose millions of fans include the Queen – will appear in court next month to face the allegations.

_http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rolf-harris-child-sex-charges-2237420

Pedophilia really seems to be widespread among the showbiz people (and likely throughout the elites).

 

[Laura]

Re: Re: Michael Jackson Dies

Here's Jim Clemente on the topic of Woody Allen:

http://<iframe width="560" height="...1Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I tell ya, that woman doing these interviews is totally annoying.

 

[Laura]

Re: Re: Michael Jackson Dies

Another video of Dr. Berlin of Johns Hopkins and Jim Clemente on the Sandusky case. The remarks Clemente makes about sex offenders apply across the board:

http://<iframe width="420" height="...mg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[H-KQGE]

Re: Re: Michael Jackson Dies

Here's Jim Clemente on the topic of Woody Allen:

http://<iframe width="560" height="...1Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I tell ya, that woman doing these interviews is totally annoying.

Great stuff from Mr Clemente. Pointing out about alleged victims claims being corroborating when talking about multi-sensory information, the richness of detail, is something that everyone can learn to be aware of. What's the deal with the host? She keeps talking about "the problem I have with..." in every video. I hear more from her than him! PLEASE, LET THE EXPERT SPEAK MORE.

 

[Laura]

Re: Re: Michael Jackson Dies

What's the deal with the host? She keeps talking about "the problem I have with..." in every video. I hear more from her than him! PLEASE, LET THE EXPERT SPEAK MORE.

Yeah, like I said, she is such a put-off. She can't even talk coherently. It's painful to listen to her.

 

[H-KQGE]

Re: Re: Michael Jackson Dies

Another video of Dr. Berlin of Johns Hopkins and Jim Clemente on the Sandusky case. The remarks Clemente makes about sex offenders apply across the board:

http://<iframe width="420" height="...mg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The comments on his ex-boss was pretty damning. He must've been confused as to why he could mess up the investigation so bad. He looked like he couldn't believe it. And I agree, the remarks about sex offenders does apply across the board. The public has to learn to start thinking about the unpleasant concepts of "the nice guy", the "pillar of the community" type offenders (including acquaintances) as possibilities first, & then the probabilities of same. Maybe that'll be an easier avenue into the concept of psychopaths in families & in power. Perhaps then, reactions such as those found in this video will be a thing of the past.

http://www.sott.net/article/273601-Marianne-Williamson-and-the-Elephant-in-the-Living-Room

 

[hiker]

Re: Re: Michael Jackson Dies

What's the deal with the host? She keeps talking about "the problem I have with..." in every video. I hear more from her than him! PLEASE, LET THE EXPERT SPEAK MORE.

Yeah, like I said, she is such a put-off. She can't even talk coherently. It's painful to listen to her.

It's almost like she is there to "downplay" Clemente's contribution with her comments and demeanor.

 

[H-KQGE]

Re: Re: Michael Jackson Dies

What's the deal with the host? She keeps talking about "the problem I have with..." in every video. I hear more from her than him! PLEASE, LET THE EXPERT SPEAK MORE.

Yeah, like I said, she is such a put-off. She can't even talk coherently. It's painful to listen to her.

It's almost like she is there to "downplay" Clemente's contribution with her comments and demeanor.

I know what you mean. I'm trying not to be cynical anymore but still... btw, did you notice that she's the producer? And the way she poses a question, sort of answers it, then poses another with her opinions (who the heck cares?) tucked in... and he responds with "well let's just go back for a minute." Thankfully he's very clear-headed (probably dealt with "wafflers" aplenty lol) & bats her nonsense away with ease. I want her to go off on holiday or something, bring back the other dude (one of the earlier videos posted over on the Clemente thread) that stood in for her, he was tolerable.