offender profiling: the bottom up approach

Question 1

what is the aim of the bottom-up approach?

Answer 1

to generate a picture of the offender through systematic analysis of evidence at the crime scene

Question 2

what features want to be found through the bottom-up approach?

Answer 2

• characteristics
• routine behaviour
• social background

Question 3

compare the top-down and bottom-up approaches (from BU perspective)

Answer 3

• US = TD, UK = BU
• no fixed typologies
• profile is data driven
• profile emerges as investigator engages in deeper and more rigourous scrutiny of the details of the offence
• more grounded in psychological theory

Question 4

what is investigative psychology?

Answer 4

a form of BU profiling that matches details from crime scene with statistical analysis of typical offender behaviour patterns based on psychological theory

Question 5

how can a statistical database be used?

Answer 5

• baseline for comparison
• specific details of an offence can be matched against database to reveal important details about offender, their personal history, family background etc.
• can determine whether a series of offences are committed by the same person

Question 6

investigative psychology: interpersonal coherence

Answer 6

the way an offender behaves at the scene, including how they interact with the victim, may reflect their behaviour in everyday situations

Question 7

dwyer (2001) and interpersonal coherence

Answer 7

• some rapists want to maintain maximum control and humilitate their victimes, others are more apologetic
• this tells polic something about how the offender relates to women more generally

Question 8

investigating psychology: significance of time and place

Answer 8

• timing and location of crimes can provide insight into offender’s routine or personal life
• patterns in time and place can point to an offender’s familiarity with the area, daily routines, work, or family commitments

Question 9

investigative psychology: forensic awareness

Answer 9

• refers to an offender’s knowledge and avoidance of leaving evidence
• indicates prior encounters with criminal justice system or understanding of investigative procedures

Question 10

what is geographical profiling?

Answer 10

using information about the location of linked crime scenes to make inferences about the likely home or operational base of an offender (crime mapping) based on the principle of spatial consistency

Question 11

what is the principle of spacial consistency?

Answer 11

that people commit crimes within a limited geographical space

Question 12

how can geographical profiling be used in conjunction with investigative psychology?

Answer 12

• create hypotheses about how offender is thinking
• their modus operandi

Question 13

what is the assumption with geographical profiling?

Answer 13

• serial offenders will restrict their work to geographical areas they are familiar with
• understanding the spatial pattern of their behaviour provides inevestigatory with a central point which is likely to include offender’s base (often in middle of spatial pattern)

Question 14

what does circle theory suggest (canter and larkin 1993)?

Answer 14

offender’s base is often centrally located within the area of their crimes, allowing for easy access and escape routes

Question 15

what 2 ways can offenders be described based on circle theory?

Answer 15

• marauder - operates in close proximity to home base
• commuter - likely to have travelled a distance away from their usual residence

Question 16

characteristics of a marauder

Answer 16

• crimes form a cluster around a central base
• familiar with the area, possibly lives nearby
• low in familar area; comfortable blending in
• can use circle theory to identify central base

Question 17

characteristics of a commuter

Answer 17

• crimes are dispersed in areas away from home
• travels to unfamiliar or separate locations
• avoids home area to reduce risk of being known
• consider transport routes or major roads

Question 18

what insight does spatial decision-making offer the investigative team?

Answer 18

• whether offence was planned or opportunisitc
• offender’s mode of transport, employment status, approximate age etc.

Question 19

evaluation: evidence for investigative psychology

Answer 19

• canter and heritage (1990) analysed 66 sexual assault cases using smallest space analysis
• several behaviours were identified as common in different samples of behaviour eg. use of impersonal language, lack of reaction to victim
• each individual displayed a characteristic pattern of behaviours which can help establish whether two or more offences were committed by the same pereson (case linkage)
• supports base principle of investigative psychology and BU that people are consistwnt in their behaviour

Question 20

evaluation: unreliable evidence

Answer 20

• case linkage depends on the database which only consists of historical crimes that have been solved
• cases may have only been solves as it was straightforward to link these crimes together in the first place, which makes this a circular argument
• investigative psychology may tell us little about crimes that have few links between them so remain unsolved

Question 21

evaluation: evidence for geographical profiling

Answer 21

• lundrigan and canter (2001) collated info from 120 murder cases involving serial killers in the US
• smallest space analysis revealed spatial consistency in behaviour of killers
• location of each body disposal site created a ‘centre of gravity’
• may be because when offenders start from their home base they may go in a different direction each time they dispose of a body, but all these different sites create a circular effect around the home base
• offender’s base was invariably located in centre of pattern
• effect was more noticeable for offenders who travelled short distances (marauders)

Question 22

evaluation: information from geographical profiling insufficient on its own

Answer 22

• as with IP, success of GP may rely on qualityof data that police can provide
• recording crime is not always accurate and can vary between police forces
• estimated 75% of crimes are not reported to police in the first place
• calls into question the utility of an approach that reiles on the accuracy of geographical data
• even if this info is correct, cirtics claim that other factors are just as important in creating a profile eg. timing of offence, age and experience of offender (ainsworth 2001)
• geographical info alone may not always lead to successful capture of an offender

Question 23

evaluation: mixed results

Answer 23

• copson (1995) surveyed 48 police departments and found that advice provided by profiler was judged to be useful in 83% of cases, suggesting it is a valid investigative tool
• however, same study revealed that it only led to accurate identification of offender in 3% of cases
• rachel nickell case highlights how profiling can be inaccurate
• kocsis et al. (2002) found that chemistry students produced more accurate offender profiles on a solved murder case than experienced senior detectives