Beyond the Darklands

I thought it might be of interest
to people to know some more about the process that goes into making Beyond the Darklands, and in particular
the information that underlies the opinions I give about each offender.
The first step is always to get
the consent of the victims and/or their families. It was my position from the
very beginning that if victims and/or their families didn’t believe we should
be making the episode then we shouldn’t do it. This is a view that is shared by
the entire production team and we work very hard to make sure as best we can
that victims and their families are treated with every consideration and
respect. There have been occasions when we have been covering offenders where
it was simply not possible to contact all their victims. In these cases we have
continued with the episode because we considered that, on balance, there were
compelling reasons to make the episode. These are always tough decisions and
are never taken lightly or without concern for those who might be affected.
Conversely, if families or victims
said they did not want us to make a programme, we don’t.
At the beginning of each season we
sit down and nominate a list of offenders to investigate. Rather than looking
for ‘extreme’ crimes we try and find cases which illustrate particular issues,
or which can bring something important to the public arena. Over the last three
seasons we’ve investigated a number of issues including the following:
- The impact of child abuse and neglect
- Psychopathy
- Antisocial Personality Disorder
- Domestic violence
- Mental illness and violence
- Child sexual abuse
- Cults
- Female intimate partner violence
- Youth offending
- Family homicides
Obviously this is a one hour
television programme and not a psychological textbook so we do not enter into
an extensive and technical exploration of these issues, but over the course of
the last 18 episodes we have, I believe, been able to provide people with a
fuller understanding of these issues in the context of criminal offending.
The next step is that we spend 6-8 months tracking down all kinds of information about the nominated
offender. I would have to say that the dedication and diligence of the
production team on this account is outstanding. They live and breathe each
episode for months and months. We all take it very personally, and there is a
huge commitment to doing justice to these stories. As a result by the time we
have accumulated all the information there is a comprehensive body of
information on which I am able to base my opinions. Every case is different but
these are the various data sources often available to me:
- Review of the Court File.
- Review of the Crime Scene evidence (including
scene photographs and pathology reports).
- Review of videoed police interviews with the
offender.
- Previous Psychological and/or Psychiatric
Assessments.
- A review of the recent/relevant scientific
studies pertinent to each offender.
There is an extensive body of
scientific research in the field of forensic psychology which is an invaluable
tool in helping to understand why people offend, and the impact of various
developmental/life events. Science has a great deal to tell us about these
issues and, as much as possible within the time confines of each episode, I
talk about this research in reference to each offender.
Obviously the backbone of each
episode, at least as far as the construction of the show itself is concerned, are
the interviews with a broad range of informants from throughout multiple
domains of the offender’s life. This might include the offender’s parent(s),
other family members, childhood friends, neighbors, teachers, social workers,
youth workers, previous employers, lawyers, former prison officers, the Police,
and often the offender’s victims and/or their victims’ families.
The offenders themselves are not
interviewed. There are two reasons for this. The first is that, for the
offenders who are currently in prison, the Department of Corrections does not
allow prisoners to take part in interviews. Amongst other reasons they, quite
rightly, are concerned about offenders using this as an opportunity to
grandstand. The second reason is that, when we have approached offenders who
are living in the community, they have all declined to participate.
There is an obvious point that can
be made here that if the offender is not interviewed then this limits what you
can say about him. After all, if you haven’t met the guy, how can you know what
he’s like? While it is true that there are obvious limitations which flow from
not interviewing the offender in person, this does not mean the analysis is
therefore inevitably flawed. In reality psychologists frequently make
judgments about offenders whom they have not met. For example if a
psychologist is asked to complete an assessment for the Court of a prisoner, it
is relatively common for the prisoner to decline to be interviewed. In that
case the psychologist utilizes a range of other information to complete the
report, such as formal psychological risk assessment tools, previous reports, prison records, and information from other
informants such as prison officers. Indeed, what we know is that self-report
(what the offender says) is the least accurate information to draw conclusions
from. Quite simply, offenders not only have very good reasons to lie and/or
distort the truth, but many of them are actually very good at it.
The irony here is that the
extensive range of background information I have on each offender we profile is
far more than I have ever had when completing a formal court ordered
psychological assessment. I have never had, for instance, hours of taped
interviews with people who went to school with an offender, grew up with him,
taught him, and worked with him.
It’s important to be clear though that Beyond the Darklands is
not a formal psychological assessment, far from it. It’s a television show. In each episode I simply offer my opinion/conjecture about why I think these men ended up the way they are. Nothing more and nothing less.
It’s important to remember too,
that you shouldn’t use this show as some kind of diagnostic tool. I get a
number of emails from people worried about someone they know, often a child,
after watching the show. I cannot say strongly enough that you should not use Beyond the Darklands as some kind of
guide for assessing risk. This is a television show. If you are concerned about
someone’s behavior, be it your partners, or ex-partners, or your child, or anyone
else, then please get some professional assistance. Do NOT diagnose problems
using Beyond the Darklands as some
kind of template. If you are worried about yours or someone else's safety you
should contact the Police, or Child Youth and Family Services, or Womens' Refuge, or any one of a number of such services.
Bottom line is remember that this
is a television show and not a text book so if you are worried about yourself
or someone else then get some actual professional help.
What is hugely
gratifying for the entire team who work on Beyond
the Darklands is that so many families and individuals have found the show
helpful in understanding and coming to terms with what happened to them. For
some victims it has given them a voice to finally say the things they were not
able to say at the time. For some families it has allowed them to have a
greater understanding of the reasons behind the unimaginable tragedies they
have experienced.
This is both humbling, and
very gratifying, and it’s why I am very proud to be associated with the team of
highly dedicated people who work as hard as they do to produce this series.
