Offender profiling

Question 1

What is offender profiling?

Answer 1

behavioural and analytical tool that is intended to help investigators accurately predict and profile characteristics of unknown criminals.

helps police forces across the world identify the criminal who commit serious crimes.

used for serial offenders such as arsonists, serial murders and serial rapists.

does not solve crimes but can provide useful information to narrow down the suspect group.

Question 2

Why is offender profiling useful?

Answer 2

The process attempts to reduce the scope of an investigation by providing information on the offender’s characteristics, to predict where and when further offending is likely to occur and to provide strategies for interviews (Holmes 1989).

Question 3

What is the top-down approach?

Answer 3

The first profiling technique was the FBI’s approach created in the 1970’s.

Based on interviewing sexually motivated serial killers (36) including Ted Bundy and Charles Manson and analysing crime scene photographs for indicators.
From this the theory then developed that criminals are either ‘organised’ or ‘disorganised’. This classification then forms the subsequent police investigation.

Question 4

Why is the technique considered a ‘top down’ approach?

Answer 4

Profilers approach every crime scene with the two categories in mind and interpret the evidence to match one of the two sets of criteria.

Question 5

What’s the basis of FBI Approach (top-down)?

Answer 5

Crime scene and MO (ways of serial killers working, modus operandi) as indicators of individual pathology
Compare with known offenders
May fit pattern

Question 6

How does Ted Bundy fit the profile as an organised offender?

Answer 6

His victims were deliberately targeted – they were all brunette college girls so he planned these crimes. He tended to lure them away by asking for help.

He won the trust of his victims, which shows he was competent socially and confident in approaching women. This also suggests he had had relationships before.

He left few clues and evaded capture for a long time.
He attended university so had higher than average or at least average IQ.

Question 6

What does a disorganised crime look like?

Answer 6

Spontaneous offence
Victim or location known
Victim depersonalized
Minimal conversation
Crime Scene random or sloppy
Sudden violence to victim
Minimal use of restraints
Sexual acts after death
Body left in view
Weapon and evidence often present.

Question 7

What does an organised crime look like?

Answer 7

Evidence of planning
Victim targeted
Victim personalised
Controlled conversation
Crime scene reflects control
Victim submissive
Use of restraints
Aggressive acts prior to death
Body hidden
Weapon and evidence absent

Question 8

What’s a disorganised criminal?

Answer 8

below average IQ
unskilled work/unemployed History of sexual dysfunction/failed relationships.
Live alone and close to where the offences took place

Question 9

What’s an organised criminal?

Answer 9

above average IQ
in a skilled, professional job
socially and sexually competent
Married/with children

Question 10

What are the four main stages in the construction of a FBI profile?

Question 11

What did Ressler et al (1988) find?

Answer 11

Sex killers seemed to follow a pattern - white, unmarried, males, unemployed or unskilled jobs, psychiatric/alcohol histories, dysfunctional family backgrounds & sexual interest in voyeurism, fetishism and pornography.

Question 12

What did Holmes (1983) find?

Answer 12

FBI data found out of 192 cases of profile constructions 88 arrests were made, but in only 17% of these did the profile contribute to the arrest.

Question 13

What did Mokros & Alison (2002) find?

Answer 13

Found no correlation between offender backgrounds and offending behaviour, suggesting offenders that commit similar crimes don’t have similar backgrounds.

Question 14

What did Douglas (1981) do and find?

Answer 14

Reviewed FBI approach - Profiling doesn’t lead to direct identification of suspect but benefits outweigh costs. In 77% of cases it helped focus the investigation.

Question 15

What is the strength of offender profiling?
includes counterargument

Answer 15

It has practical applications - Copson 1995 questioned 184 police officers of whom 82% said it was operationally useful and 90% said they would use it again.
However, Holmes (1983) - FBI data found out of 192 cases of profile constructions 88 arrests were made, but in only 17% of these did the profile contribute to the arrest.

Question 16

What are the limitations of offender profiling?

Answer 16

Its subjective - each individual will interpret the characteristics of a crime differently, for example one person may think the offender displays control whilst another may believe they haven’t controlled anything about the crime scene, therefore classification and he profile could be different depending upon which member of a team interpreted the crime. This reduces the validity of the findings of research for offender profiling.
However there is a solution, all members of the team aid in generating a profile to eliminate bias and subjectivity.

The methodology to develop this approach is flawed. Only 36 male offenders were utilised to create such an important tool. The offenders used are also highly manipulative and may revel in attention therefore the information given in the interviews may not be accurate. This reduces the reliability of the approach.

It’s too simplistic (Reductionist). It only considers organised and disorganised offenders whereas in reality there should be more classification categories. Canter (2004) analysed serial murders committed by 100 US serial killers and found no clear division between organised and disorganised but a number of subsets

The top down approach is non scientific (based on subjective opinion of profilers in some cases)

Samples size = 36 offenders
Low population validity?

Question 17

What’s the bottom-up approach?

Answer 17

Unlike the FBI approach the bottom up model does not begin with a fixed model.

It is data driven. Grounded in Psychological theory

Rigorously scrutinises the detail of individual offences, scenes and evidence.

Then generates a picture of the offender based on evidence.

Question 18

What are the two parts to Canter’s approach?

Answer 18

The geographical approach – this looks at patterns in the location and timing of offences to make judgements about links between crimes and suggestions about where offenders live and work.
Investigative psychology – this grew out of geographical profiling and uses established psychological theories and methods of analysis to predict offender characteristics from offending behaviour.

Question 19

What does investigative psych?

Answer 19

Attempt to apply statistical procedures with psychological theory to the analysis of crime scene evidence

Aim: establish patterns of behaviour likely to occur / co-exist across crime scenes
This then develops statistical database to reveal info about offender:
Personal history, family background etc

Helps determine if offences linked (same person)

Question 20

What’s the central of the approach?

Answer 20

Interpersonal coherence- looking at the way the offender behaves at the scene
E.g. how they ‘interact’ with victim may reflect their behaviour in everyday situations
If individuals want control over their victims, could indicate about their personal views of women

Question 21

What are the two parts to investigative psych?

Answer 21

Significance of time/ place – indicates where offender lives

Forensic awareness – been interrogated by police before, behaviour might indicate how they can cover their tracks

Question 22

What are the parts of geographical profiling?

Answer 22

Commuter
Marauder
Circle theory

Question 23

What’s the circle theory?

Answer 23

most offenders (marauders) do operate in an area they are familiar with, and their crimes form a circle around their usual residence

Question 23

What’s the difference between a commuter and a marauder?

Answer 23

commuters - travel away from home to offend

marauders - commit crimes close to home

Question 24

What are the three types of geographical profiling that was proposed by Canter and Larkin (1993)?

Answer 24

Inferences about the offender based on location - crime mapping habitual ways of working.

Marauder or commuter – marauder close to home commuter travels a further distance.

Circle theory – offences form a circle around offenders home.

Question 25

What does geographical profiling do?

Answer 25

Understanding their spatial awareness provides investigators with centre of gravity

Helps them look at where they might offend next – jeopardy surface

Circle theory: marauder / commuter

Question 26

What’s the overall on geographical profiling?

Answer 26

Pattern of offending forms circle round their residence
More offences there are = becomes more apparent
Offers the team important insight into nature of offending
planned / opportunistic
Other important factors e.g. mode of transport, employment status, approximate age etc

Question 27

What does the real life case of John Duffy support and what did Canter suggest?

Answer 27

Supports one type of bottom-up profiling – geographical profiling – crimes near the railway.
Canter suggested Duffy had a good working knowledge of the railways and would live locally in Kilburn, as it turned out he was a carpenter for British Rail and indeed was based in Kilburn.
Investigative psych – which looks at the specific details of an offence, or related offences, so can then be ‘matched’ in a database to determine whether a series of offences are linked and likely to have been committed by the same person.
there was consistency in the location of the crimes as they occurred near to the railway, and the behaviour of the offender was consistent – many victims were treated in the same way.

Question 28

What are the strengths of the bottom-up approach?

Answer 28

Alternative evidence from Canter and Heritage supports investigative psychology. (66 sexual offences)

Lundrigan and Canter (2001) 120 murder cases where geo profiling has been useful

More scientific basis and data driven therefore objective than other approaches.

Application to real cases – John Duffy

Question 29

What is alimitation of the bottom-up approach?

Answer 29

Mixed results – Copson’s research led to accurate ID in 3% of cases.