Forensics- Offender Profiling: Top-down Approach Flashcards
Offender profiling -
Also known as ‘criminal profiling’, a behavioural and analytical tool that is intended to help investigators accurately predict and profile the characteristics of unknown criminals.
The top-down approach -
Profilers start with a pre-established typology and work down in order to assign offenders to one of two categories based on witness accounts and evidence from the crime scene.
Organised offender -
An offender who shows evidence of planning, targets the victim and tends to be socially and sexually competent with higher than average intelligence.
Disorganised offender -
An offender who shows little evidence of planning, leaves clues and tends to be socially and sexually incompetent with lower than average intelligence.
What is the top-down approach to offender profiling?
The top-down approach is an investigative tool used by the police to narrow the field of enquiry and identify likely suspects. It originated in the United States from the FBI’s work in the 1970s and involves matching crime details to pre-existing templates, classifying offenders as either organised or disorganised.
What is the main aim of offender profiling?
The main aim is to narrow the field of enquiry and the list of likely suspects by generating hypotheses about the probable characteristics of the offender, such as their age, background, and occupation.
How did the top-down approach originate?
It originated from the FBI’s Behavioural Science Unit in the 1970s, based on data gathered from in-depth interviews with 36 sexually motivated serial killers, including Ted Bundy and Charles Manson.
What are the two categories of offenders in the top-down approach?
The two categories are organised and disorganised offenders, classified based on their modus operandi and social and psychological characteristics.
What are the characteristics of an organised offender?
Organised offenders plan crimes in advance, target specific victims, maintain control during the crime, and leave little evidence. They tend to be of above-average intelligence, in skilled professions, socially and sexually competent, and often married with children.
What are the characteristics of a disorganised offender?
Disorganised offenders show little planning, commit spontaneous crimes, leave evidence at the scene, and exhibit a lack of control. They tend to have lower IQs, be in unskilled work or unemployed, have a history of sexual dysfunction and failed relationships, and often live alone near the crime scene.
What are the four stages of constructing an FBI profile?
The four stages are:
1. Data assimilation - reviewing evidence like crime scene photographs and pathology reports.
2. Crime scene classification - categorising the scene as organised or disorganised.
3. Crime reconstruction - forming hypotheses about the sequence of events and victim behaviour.
4. Profile generation - creating hypotheses about the offender’s demographics, physical characteristics, and behaviour.
What types of crimes is the top-down approach best suited for?
It is best suited for crimes that reveal significant details about the suspect, such as rape, arson, cult killings, and crimes involving sadistic torture, body dissection, or acting out fantasies.
Why is the top-down approach considered limited?
It is limited because it does not apply to more common offences like burglary or property destruction, where the crime scene reveals little about the offender.
What is a key criticism of the top-down approach’s classification system?
Critics argue that the organised/disorganised classification is based on outdated models of personality that assume behaviour is driven by stable traits rather than external, changing factors.
What evidence challenges the disorganised offender classification?
David Canter et al. (2004) found evidence supporting the organised type but not the disorganised type, undermining the validity of the classification system.
Why is the classification system considered too simplistic?
The behaviours of organised and disorganised offenders are not mutually exclusive, and combinations can occur that do not fit neatly into either category.
What alternative typologies have been proposed?
Ronald Holmes (1989) proposed four types of serial killers: visionary, mission, hedonistic, and power/control. Robert Keppel and Richard Walter (1999) focused on different motivations rather than specific types.
What is a criticism of the original sample used to develop the top-down approach?
The typology was based on interviews with only 36 killers (25 serial killers and 11 single/double murderers), which is considered too small and unrepresentative for a reliable classification system.
Why is self-report data from convicted killers problematic?
Self-report data may be unreliable due to biases, inaccuracies, or the killers’ attempts to manipulate their image, making it an unsuitable basis for a classification system.
What is a key limitation of the top-down approach’s validity?
Its reliance on static models of personality and outdated assumptions about behaviour reduces its validity in identifying suspects or predicting their actions.
What is the significance of the organised/disorganised distinction despite its criticisms?
Despite criticisms, the distinction is still widely used by professional profilers in the US and has widespread support.
What does the top-down approach reveal about the offender’s behaviour?
It reveals patterns of behaviour and motivations that are assumed to remain consistent across situations, though this assumption is often challenged.
What is the role of professional profilers in the top-down approach?
Profilers work alongside the police, especially in high-profile cases, to analyse crime scenes and evidence, generating hypotheses about the offender’s characteristics to guide investigations.
