Offender Profiling (Forensic Psychology)

Question 1

Offender Profiling

Answer 1

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

Question 2

The ‘top down’ approach

Answer 2

(typologies): profilers start with a pre-established typology and work down in order to assign offenders to one of two categories (organised or disorganised) based on witness accounts and evidence from the crime scene.

-based on FBI’s 1970s Behavioural Science Unit
• data gathered from in depth interviews with 36 sexually motivated killers
• organised into one of two categories: organised or disorganised

Question 3

Top Down typologies/modus operandi (‘ways of working’)

Answer 3

Organised:
-planned
-deliberate target
-‘type’
-high degree of control and work with detached surgical precision
-little evidence
-above-average intelligence
-socially and sexually competent

Disorganised:
-spontaneous
-spur of the moment
-impulsive
-lower IQ
-sexual dysfunction

Question 4

Constructing an FBI profile

Answer 4

• data assimilation
• crime scene classification
• crime reconstruction
• profile generation

Question 5

(Evaluation of Top Down) Application to crime

Answer 5

• rape, arson, and cult killings- important details
• limited approach to identifying criminals, suggests every criminal falls into org and disorg, ignoring other types of violent crime

Question 6

(Evaluation of Top Down) Outdated models of personality

Answer 6

• typology classification system is based on assumptions of patterns of behaviour and motivations that remain consistent
• Alison et al. (2002)- approach is naïve and informed by old-fashioned models of personality: behaviour as being driven by dispositional traits, poor validity and static

Question 7

(Evaluation of Top Down) Evidence does not support the ‘disorganised offender’

Answer 7

• Canter et al. (2004): smallest space analysis technique
• analysed data from 100 murders in the USA
• examined with reference to 39 characteristics typical of O or D killers
• no evidence for disorganised killers

Question 8

(Evaluation of Top Down) Classification is too simplistic

Answer 8

• not mutually exclusive; a variety of combinations could occur
• Godwin (2002): how would police classify a highly intelligent and sexually competent killer who commits a spontaneous murder where the body is left at the scene
• Holmes (1989) and Holmes and DeBurger (1998)- 4 types of serial killer: visionary, mission, hedonistic and power/control
• Keppel and Walter (1999) motivations of killers
—other, more precise ways of profiling

Question 9

(Evaluation of Top Down) Original Sample

Answer 9

• original typology- 25 serial killers and 11 either single or double murderers
• too small and unrepresentative
• Canter- not sensible to rely on self report data of convicted killers (Criticism of Holmes and the serial killer types)

Question 10

Holmes and DeBurger (1998) typology of serial killers

Answer 10

• Visionary: typically out of touch with reality, may be psychotic or schizophrenic, and feel impelled to commit murder by visions or ‘voices in my head’
• Mission-oriented: feel it is their mission in life to kill certain kinds of people such as prostitutes and homosexuals
• Hedonistic: the majority of serial killers. They kill for the thrill and joy of it, engaging in cruel and perverted sexual activity
• Power/control: gain more satisfaction from exercising complete power over their victims rather than from ‘bloodlust’m though there is often sexual activity

Question 11

‘Bottom-Up-‘ British approach

Answer 11

• bottom up approach involves using research and statistics of similar crimes to develop a profile of the criminal based on previous convictions
• generate a picture of the offender
• characteristics, routine, behaviours and social background

Question 12

Investigative Psychology

Answer 12

Applying statistical procedures and psychological theory to analyse crime scene evidence
• patterns of behaviour that occur or co-exist
• create a statistical data base with a baseline for comparison
• interpersonal coherence: the way the offender behaves at the scene, including how they interact with the victim, may reflect their behaviour in more everyday situations
• forensic awareness- describes those individuals who have been subjects of police interrogation before; their behaviour may denotes how mindful they are of covering their tracks

Question 13

Geographical profiling (Rossmo (1997))

Answer 13

• using information about the location of the crime scene to make inferences about the likely home or operational base of an offender- crime mapping
• used to create hypotheses about what the offender was thinking and their modus operandi

Question 14

Modus Operandi

Answer 14

• the core assumption of profiling is the existence of a MO
• serial offenders restrict their ‘work’ to geographical areas they are familiar with
• criminals often operate in a similar way and this reflects their personality
• provides investigators with a ‘centre of gravity’
—includes their base (often in the middle of the spatial pattern)
—Jeopardy surface- educate guesses about where the offender is likely to strike next

Question 15

Circle theory- Canter and Larkin (1993)

Answer 15

Two models of offenders’ behaviour
• the marauder- who operates in close proximity to their home base
• the commuter- who is likely to have travelled a distance away from their usual residence

Question 16

The UK’s first offender profiling case

Answer 16

• a horrific spate of rapes and murders were committed in London during the 1980s
• Forensic police were unable to gather enough evidence from the rime scenes to find a suspect
• the use of psychological offender profiling lead to the eventual capture and conviction of the two men responsible
—Canter’s profile was close to the facts about Duffy, the murderer: Duffy lived in Kilburn, separated, physically small and unattractive, familiarity with martial arts, violent with women, fantasies of rape and bondage

Question 17

(Evaluation of Bottom Up) evidence supports investigative psychology

Answer 17

• Canter and Heritage (1990) conducted a content analysis of 66 sexual assault cases
• smallest space analysis: correlations across behaviour
• common in most cases: impersonal language and lack of reaction to victim
• supports the use of statistical techniques in profiling

Question 18

(Evaluation of Bottom Up) scientific bases to support bottom up approach

Answer 18

• Canter: bottom up profiling is more objective and scientific than top down approach, as it is grounded in evidence and psychological theory
• with the use of AI, investigators are able to manipulate geographical, biographical and psychological data quickly to produce insights
• smallest space analysis can be applied to different crimes such as theft, whereas top down is generally murder

Question 19

(Evaluations of Bottom Up) research on offender profiling

Answer 19

• Abumere (2012) found more than 75% of the British police officers said that the advice of the profiler had been useful to them in making predictions about the crime. For them, the advice improved their understanding of the offender. Other Police officers also stated that it supported their ideas and feelings about the offender.
• However: Police from the Netherlands stated that they found the profiler’s advice was vague, that it was not financially viable, and that it needed follow up work. They also ignored advice if they didn’t agree with it.

Question 20

(Evaluations of Bottom Up) Mixed results for profiling

Answer 20

some significant failings and studies examining the effectiveness have mixed results
• Copson (1995) surveyed 48 police forces and found that the advice provided by the profiler was judged to be ‘useful’ in 83% of cases but in only 3% did it lead to accurate identification of the offender
• Kocsis et al. (2002) argued there is little empirical research into the skills required for profiling- chemistry students did better than trained profilers

The case of Rachel Nickell (1992)

Question 21

The case of Rachel Nickell (1992)

Answer 21

• was murdered on Wimbledon Common
• wrong man, Colin Stagg, fitted the offender profile and often walked his dog on the common
• Stagg spent years in prison until 2008, when examination of forensic evidence revealed it was Robert Nabber, who was several inches taller than the profile
• Nabber had killed others of a similar description