“Sorry. My concern is that the case study that’s become enshrined in the annals of contemporary psych is just a giant circle dance. The manifesto, the details of the shootings, the offender profile, media mythmaking, popular imagination, and academic theorizing have all been contributing to the story—shaping it, polishing it, turning it into unassailable truth. Problem is, there’s nothing solid to support this unassailable truth.”

“Except, of course,” said Holdenfield sharply, “the first two items you mentioned, which are very solid indeed—the manifesto and the details of the shootings.”

“But suppose the details and the manifesto were specifically designed to reflect and reinforce each other? Suppose the killer is twice as smart as anyone thinks he is? Suppose he’s been laughing his ass off at Agent Trout’s team for the past ten years?”

Trout’s eyes hardened. “You mentioned that you’d read the profile?”

Gurney grinned. “Which sounds to you like more proof of illegal access to precious files? Actually, that’s not what I said. I referred to the profile, but I didn’t say I’d read it. Let me just speculate for a minute. I bet the profile tries to explain how the killer is both efficient and inefficient, stable and crazy, atheistic and biblical. How am I doing?”

Trout sighed impatiently. “No comment.”

“The problem is, you accepted the killer’s manifesto as a legitimate expression of his thinking—because it confirmed your own thinking. It validated the ideas you were already forming about the case. It never occurred to you that the manifesto was a charade, that you were being played for fools. The Good Shepherd was telling you your conclusions were right. So of course you believed him.”

Trout shook his head in a bad imitation of sad resignation. “I’m afraid we’re on different planets here. I’d have thought from your background that we’d be on the same side.”

“Nice thought. Bit out of touch with reality.”

The head shaking continued. “The FBI goal with the Good Shepherd case—as it is with every case, and as it should be with every honest law-enforcement officer on every case—is to discover the truth. If we shared the integrity of our profession, then we’d be on the same side.”

“You believe that?”

“It’s the foundation of everything we do.”