top down approach

Question 1

define top down approach

Answer 1

analysis of previous crimes where profile of likely offender is created
- profiler uses knowledge and intuition to narrow down suspect

Question 2

where did top down originate from

Answer 2

• originated in US by FBIs

Question 3

why was top down approach developed

Answer 3

• developed as way of trying to solve extreme murder cases in which profile of offender is made

Question 4

6 stages of profile construction

Answer 4

1. profiling inputs
2. decision process models
3. crime assessment
4. crime profile
5. crime assessment
6. apprehension

Question 5

what occurs at stage 1 of profile construction - profiling inputs

Answer 5

• data collected (description of crime scene - photos/sketches, background info of victim + weapons, cause of death autopsy report)
• possible suspects SHOULDNT be considered at this stage as it may create further bias of info

Question 6

what occurs at stage 2 of profile construction - decision process models

Answer 6

• profiler starts to made decisions about data + organises meaningful patterns
• murder type - mass, spree, serial killer
• time factors - day/night, long/short time
• location factors - did crime scene occur at same spot as murder scene

Question 7

what occurs at 3rd stage of profile construction - crime assessment (prt1)

Answer 7

• based on data collection, criminal identified as organised or disorganised
• distinction presumes correspondence between offences and offenders

Question 8

define organised offender

Answer 8

• planned, victim targeted, high IQ, weapon hidden, body moved (high control)
• e.g. Ted Bundy

Question 9

define disorganised offender

Answer 9

• unplanned, random selection of victim, low IQ, scene likely to hold clues (low control)

Question 10

what occurs at 4th stage of profile construction - crime profile

Answer 10

• profile constructed of offender (hypothesis about likely background/habits)
• description used to work out strategy for investigation to help catch offender

Question 11

what occurs at 5th stage of profile construction - crime assessment (prt2)

Answer 11

• written report, given to police so persons matching profile can be evaluated

Question 12

what should happen if new information or no suspect is found at stage 5 (crime assessment)

Answer 12

• if new evidence is generated or no suspect is identified the process has to go back to step 2

Question 13

what occurs at 6th stage of profile construction - apprehension

Answer 13

• is suspect is apprehended, entire profile generating process is reviewed (checking each stage)
• consider how process may be revived for future classes

Question 14

eval points for top down approach

Answer 14

(-) distinguishing between organised and disorganised
(-) no supporting evidence for ‘disorganised offender’ characteristics
(+) top down approach is useful
(-) basis is flawed)

Question 15

expand on eval point for top down approach - distinguishing between organised/disorganised

Answer 15

• Turvey suggested dichotomy (division of 2) between organised and disorganised characteristics is false as it is more likely to be continuum (ongoing) rather than 2 distinct categories
• Doughloas suggest third category (mixed offender) which would address Turveys issue
• however critics argue this would lessen the usefulness of classification between the 2 (organised//disorganised)
• Canter provided evidence that classification has little basis in reality - he analysed murderers committed by 100 US serial killers and found no clear division between 2 offender types
• suggests more appropriate way is needed when considering criminals behaviour - on spectrum rather than seperate

Question 16

expand on eval point for top down approach - no supporting evidence for ‘disorganised offender’ characteristics

Answer 16

• canter used small space analysis were he analysed data from 100 murders
• details of cases examined - referring to 39 typical organised/disorganised characteristics
• findings suggested there was only evidence for distinct organised characteristics
• therefore approach lacks validity due to limited future research of disorganised characteristics

Question 17

expand on eval point for top down approach - top down approach is useful

Answer 17

• police who used FMI methods believed top down approach to offender profiling as useful
• Copson questioned 184 US prison officers - 82% said technique was useful/90% said they’d use it again
• supports usefulness of approach in investigation

Question 18

expand on eval point to top down approach - basis is flawed

Answer 18

• original data which organised + disorganised offenders were classified with may be flawed
• data was collected from 36 interviews of sexually motivated + dangerous murderers (ted bundy)
• data was then used to identify likely characteristics (not best source of info for reliability)
• approach can be difficult to apply to more ‘typical’ offenders due to not meeting certain characteristics
• suggests approach may not be reliable/generalisable to all offenders