Week 5.4 Flashcards

1
Q

Pathology report

A

The pathologist report states that the young lady was killed between 6pm and 8.30pm the previous Friday. The cause of death has been identified as strangulation. As a result of the pattern of the bruises around the neck it seems to have been a large chain of some form. Also it is noted that there are defense wounds where the victim had attempted to struggle free. Further to this there is a slight bruising to the top of her thighs suggesting an attempted sexual assault; however, no bodily fluids were found and a tampon was still in place

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Eyewitness report

A

Two local residents have reported that they saw a man aged between 25 and 40 looking confused and disorientated walking from the short-cut to the housing estate around 6.45pm on the Friday. The man was carrying a carrier bag and walked towards a tower block within the estate.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Police analysis of the crime scene

A

The police reported there appeared to be little planning/preparation [disorganized crime scene], there was little attempt to hide evidence at the crime scene, there was minimum use of constraint, and the attack appeared random [one of opportunity].Officers searching the scene of the crime have found several items of interest:

A piece of chain approximately 1.5m long thrown in bushes around 300m away from the crime scene. It appears that this chain was taken from a building sites store only 25m from the crime scene.

An open, but unused condom and wrapper were found within 5m of the crime scene.

A receipt for 20 Cigarettes and a bottle of cider from a local 24-hour store was also found in very close proximity to the crime scene.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Who was convicted (suspect A, B or C)?

A

Suspect A was the person that was convicted

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

One example of unsuccessful offender profiling

A

Washington DC [Beltway] sniper

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Washington DC [Beltway] sniper

A
  • Over three weeks in October 2002, a cross section of ordinary people were slaughtered by an assault rifle while they were going about their everyday lives
  • All shootings just off the Beltway [or ring road that circles Washington DC
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What was the final victim count?

A

Final count - 13 dead, 5 wounded

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What was the first problem?

A

First problem, no evidence [other than single bullet from the same rifle] at each crime scene

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Profile given by various professionals [none given by FBI] for Beltway Sniper (10)

A
  • Lone gunman
  • White male
  • Late 20’s early 30’s
  • Military training
  • Lives close to the Beltway
  • Angry, disgruntled employee
  • Strong leader, but cold, calculating
  • Driving van [to conceal sniper shot]
  • Possible terrorist link
  • Would die in a blaze of glory
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

How successful was the profiling?

A

Using inductive reasoning, got all of the profile incorrect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Actual profile of Beltway Sniper (10)

A
  • Two people, a driver, a shooter
  • Both African-American
  • One 41 years, other 17 years
  • No military training
  • Homeless, vehicle interstate plates
  • Both unemployed
  • No drive, no motivation
  • No terrorism link
  • No resistance when arrested
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Problem with this type of profiling (2)

A
  • Not enough information [crime scene evidence] to produce a profile - relied on comparison to previous serial killers/mass shooters
  • Real [professional] profilers actually declined requests to present “profile” at any stage - good lesson
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Negative consequences to poor profiles (3)

A
  • Type 1 error [false positives] - police and general public focussing on and stressing white males, aged 30, living in Washington DC, who are ambitious workers etc
  • Type 2 errors [false negatives] - police and general public were interacting with two dangerous killers and ignored any “suspicious” behaviours
  • As a consequence of the wrong profile, suspects passed through 10 road blocks [immediately after crime] and one “stop” at a rest stop but no searches because “they did not fit the profile” - certainly added to the body count
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Example of successful offender profiling

A

Mad bomber of New York

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Mad bomber of New York

A
  • For 16 years [1940-1956], a “mad” bomber planted/detonated more than 30 bombs in New York city- all the bombs were deliberately built not to kill people
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly