Offender profiling

Question 1

Why do they make assumptions in offender profiling

Answer 1

as they think the crimes arent random

offenders have modus operandi (particular way carrying out their crimes they repeat in each offence)

combined with other info about victim, time and place of the crime

Question 2

Offender profiling

Answer 2

idea that you can make assumptions about characteristics of an offender by careful analysis of the offence they commit

Question 3

What 3 assumptions do profilers make of an offender

Answer 3

1. demographics (age, gender, occuption)
2. physical features
3. behavioural characteristics

Question 4

What is the top-down approach

Answer 4

profilers created pre-existing categories of offender types (organised/ disorganised)

use evidence collected from the crime scene and other contextual information to fit the offender into one of these types. Based on personal experience and intuition of the profiler

Question 5

Who was the top-down approach technique developed by

Answer 5

FBI’s BSU. 36 convicted murderers interviewed with 118 unknown victims between them. Result of responses 24 classified organised offenders, 12 disorganised offenders

Question 6

FBI stage strategy how to create a criminal profile, 4 stages

Answer 6

Stage1: Data assimilation - information gathered from crime scene (autopsy, witnesses) and other information such as choice of victim and location

Stage 2: Crime scene classification - analysis of information suggests the criminal type (organised/ disorganised)

Stage3: Crime reconstruction - sequence of behaviour of offender and victim before/ during offence hypothesised

Stage4: Profile generation - range of inferences are made such as demographic assumptions (gender, age, ethnicity) physical features and expected behaviours

Question 7

Characteristics of an organised criminal

Answer 7

1. Offence carefully planned
2. Crime scene reflects overall control
3. Restraints used
4. Body hidden
5. Average to above average intelligence
6. Follows crime in news media

Question 8

Characteristics of disorganised criminal

Answer 8

1. Offence spontaneous
2. Crime scene random/ sloppy
3. Minimal restraints used
4. Body left plain view
5. Below average intelligence
6. Minimalist interest in news media

Question 9

Strength of top-down approach

Answer 9

Ressler developed the definitions of organised and disorganised offender through extensive interviews with real serial offenders like Ted Bundy. As 24 could be classified as organised and 12 disorganised, this suggests there are distinct ‘types’ of offender that may predict behaviour and aid apprehension

Question 10

Limitations of top-down approach

Answer 10

However, Resslers research used a restricted sample of only 36 serial sex offenders, so the results may not be generalisable to the wider population. Also using a self-report method may have low-validity, these offenders may lie to either make their crimes seem worse, for notoriety or in the hope of a reduced sentence

Canter reviewed 100 US serial killers, analysing 39 aspects of their offence, was found disorganised features were rare and didnt form a distinct ‘type’, this suggests that there is a false dichotomy between the two types and organisation is typical of most serial killers

Question 11

What is the bottom-up approach

Answer 11

profilers gather information from the crime scene (location and criminal/ victim behaviour). Statistical analysis then used comparing details of the crime to data collected from a large number of previous similar crimes. Refers to investigative psychology devenped by Canter, who created a five factor model for interpreting a crime scene

Question 12

Five factor model for interpreting a crime scene by Canter

Answer 12

1. Interpersonal coherence - suggests a persons interactional style with the victim is the same as with other people in their lives eg aggressive, shy, manipulative
2. Time and place significance - the location is chosen by the offender, so is significant to them. This ties into the offenders mental model of their environment (schemas). Offenders are likely to feel more comfortable/ control in a place they know better
3. Criminal characteristics - how the crime has been committed suggests aspects of the offenders characteristics, based on evidence from previous criminal studies
4. Criminal career - how following crimes by the same offender change due to the criminal becoming more experienced
5. Forensic awareness - does the criminal show some knowledge of the criminal justice system and use techniques to reduce the evidence at the crime scene

Question 13

What is geographical profiling

Answer 13

branch of investigative psychology, focused on where an offender is likely to be based, not personal characteristics. Assumes the locations of the crimes is not random. Helps investigators narrow down their search areas

Question 14

3 Assumptions of geographical profiling

Answer 14

1. Least effort principle - if there are multiple equal potential locations to commit a crime, the offender will pick the closest one to their home base
2. Distance decay - the number of crimes will decrease the further away from the offenders base (reduced effort). However, there is a ‘buffer zone’ immediately around their home base to decrease the chance of being recognised
3. Circle hypothesis - suggests because offenders operate according to a limited spatial mindset, crimes radiate out from their home base creating a circle

Question 15

What did Canter suggest a marauder is

Answer 15

criminal behaviour of offender based within the circle

Question 16

What did Canter suggest a commuter is

Answer 16

criminal behaviour of offender travelling a distance away from their location

Question 17

What is criminal geographic targeting

Answer 17

a more complex version of geographical profiling which includes geographical data and features of the environment to create a 3D heat map of where the offender’s base may be location (called Jeopardy surface)

Question 18

Strength of bottom up approach

Answer 18

Canter and Larkin showed 87% of a sample of 45 British serial sexual assaulters were marauders. This supports the circle hypothesis and the idea that choice of the place of the crime is a significant factor in offender behaviour

As bottom up investigative psychology makes inferences based on careful statistical analysis from published research is it seen as more scientific than top down criminal investigative analysis, relying on the intuition and experience of individual crime profilers.

Question 19

Limitation of the bottom-up approach

Answer 19

However, it is difficult to know if a criminal is a marauder or commuter before being apprehended. Also can be difficult to distinguish offences by separate offenders, the number of offences could be small or not all of the offences recorded. These factors reduces the application of geographic profiling in directing police resources

Question 20

Offender profiling general evaluation - Strength

Answer 20

Snook found Canadian major crime officers agreed that criminal profiling helps solve cases (94%) and is a valuable investigative tool (88.2%). Positive feedback via customer satisfaction surveys suggests that detectives feel offender profiling is effective in helping with their work.

Question 21

Offender profiling general evaluation - Limitation

Answer 21

The effectiveness of offender profiling is difficult to assess. This is because it is never used in isolation. Other forensic techniques are used and so it can be difficult to identify how much a profile contributed to solving a particular case.

Allison argues many of the predictions in profiles are ambiguous. Allison gave two groups of police detectives the same profile, but each group was provided with the details of two very different offenders. In each group 75% rates the profile as somewhat accurate and 50% as generally/ very accurate. This suggests that police are adding meaning to what are ambiguous statements and is an extension of the Barnum effect

All profiling methods suffer from the problem of statistically abnormal offenders. These people behaviour wouldn’t match what would be expected by intuition based on experience or by considering what is statistically probable behaviour based on previously solved cases of offenders who have actually been caught.