Forensic Psychology Flashcards
(125 cards)
Offender profiling
- Tool employed by the police to narrow down the list of likely suspects.
- Offender profiling is based on the idea that the characteristics of the offender can be deduced from details of the offence and crime scene.
Profiling methods of offender profiling
-Profiling methods vary, but usually involve careful scrutiny of the crime scene and analysis of evidence, including witness reports, in order to generate a
hypothesis about the probable characteristics of the offender (their age,
background, occupation etc.).
The Top-down approach
- Templates of organised offender and disorganised offender are pre-existing in the mind of the profiler.
- Evidence from the crime scene and other details of the crime/victim/context are then used to fit the offender into either of the pre-existing categories and determine the offender as one type or the other.
Organised Offenders
-These offenders show evidence of having planned the crime in advance; the victim is deliberately targeted and will often reveal the fact that the killer or rapist has a preference for a certain type of victim.
-They maintain a high level of control during the crime and operate with an almost
detached surgical precision.
-There is little evidence left behind at the scene of the crime.
Characteristics of organised offenders
-These offenders tend to be of above average intelligence, in a skilled,
professional occupation and are socially and sexually competent.
-They are often married and have children.
Disorganised offenders
- These offenders show little evidence of planning, suggesting the offence may have been spontaneous.
- The crime scene tends to reflect the impulsive nature of the attack, the body is usually left at the scene and there appears to have been very little control on the part of the offender.
Characteristics of disorganised offenders
-The offender tends to be of lower than average intelligence, be in unskilled
work or unemployed, and often have a history of sexual dysfunction or failed relationships.
-They tend to live alone and often relatively close to where the offence took place.
Top down approach evaluation
- Top-down profiling only applies to certain crimes (e.g. rape, arson, cult killings, and murders that involve macabre practices such as sadistic torture, dissection etc.). Common offences, such as burglary do not lend themselves to top-down profiling because the crime scene reveals very little about the offender.
- The organised or disorganised distinction was developed based on interviews with 36 serial killers in the USA. Critics have pointed out that this is too small and unrepresentative a sample upon which to base a typology system.
- Top-down profiling was developed based on interviews with 36 sexually motivates serial killers, including Ted Bundy and Charles Manson. Canter (2004) has argued that it is not valid to rely on self-report data from convicted serial killers when constructing a classification system.
- The organised or disorganised distinction is overly simplistic. Holmes (1989) suggests there are four types of serial killer; visionary serial killer (kill because God or the Devil is directing them to), mission serial killer (kill to eradicate a group of people they consider to be undesirable), hedonistic serial killer (kill for the thrill) and power serial killer (kill to have complete control over the victims).
- Canter et al. (2004) analysed data from 100 murders in the USA with reference to the characteristics thought to be typical of organised and disorganised killers. The findings did suggest evidence of a distinct organised type, however this was not the case for disorganised type which undermines the entire classification system.
The Bottom-up approach
-The bottom-up approach was developed in the UK, the aim of this approach is to generate a picture of the offender, including their likely characteristics,
routine behaviour, and social background.
-This is achieved through systematic
analysis of evidence left at the crime scene.
-The bottom-up approach does not begin with fixed typologies (as the top-down approach does), instead the profile is data-driven and emerges as the profiler engages in rigorous scrutiny of the
details of the offence.
-Bottom-up profiling is far more grounded in psychological theory than the top-down approach.
Investigative psychology
-The aim of investigative psychology is to establish behaviours that are likely to occur at certain crime scenes.
-This is done in order to create a statistical
database which then acts as a baseline for comparison.
- Specific details of an
offence can then be matched against this database in order to reveal
statistically probable details about the offender (their personal history, family background etc.).
- This can also help determine whether multiple offences are
linked and likely to have been committed by the same individual.
Interpersonal coherence
- The way in which an offender behaves at the crime scene, including how they
interact with the victim, may reflect their behaviour in everyday situations.
-This might tell the police how the offender relates to women more generally.
-The significance of time and place of the crime is also a key
variable and may indicate where the offender lives.
Example of interpersonal coherence
-For example, whilst some rapists want to control and humiliate their victim, others can be apologetic.
Forensic Awareness
-Forensic awareness
describes individuals who have made an attempt to ‘cover their tracks’ (i.e. hide the body/murder weapon or clean the crime scene).
-Their behaviour may
indicate that they have been the subject of police interrogation in the past, or even that the police already have their DNA or fingerprints on file.
Geographical profiling
-study of spatial behaviour in relation to crime and offenders. It focuses on the location of the crime as a clue to where the
offender lives, works and socialises.
Relevant data in geographical profiling
includes the crime scene,
local crime statistics, local transport, and geographical spread of similar crimes.
Assumptions of geographical profiling
- The assumption is that a serious offender will restrict their criminal activities to an area that they are familiar with, and the offender’s base will therefore be in the middle of the spatial pattern of their crime scenes.
- Earlier crimes are likely to be closer to the offender’s base than later crimes.
- As an offender becomes more confidence they will often travel further from their comfort zone.
Canter and Larkin (1993) on geographical profiling
- Canter and Larkin (1993) propose two models of offender behaviour: the marauder (who operates close to their home) and the commuter (who is likely to have travelled a distance away from their home).
- Crucially, though, the spatial pattern of their crime scenes will still form a circle around their home.
- This becomes more apparent the more offences that are committed.
Importance of spatial pattern for investigative psychology
-The spatial pattern of a crime can also tell the police whether the crime was planned or opportunistic, as well as other important facts about the offender such as their mode of transport, employment status, approximate age, etc.
Evaluation of Bottom-up approach
Strengths
+ Canter argues that bottom-up profiling is more scientific than top-down profiling because it is more grounded in evidence and psychological theory and less driven by speculation and hunches than top-down profiling.
+ Bottom-up profiling, unlike top-down profiling, can be applied to a wide variety of offences, such as burglary and theft, as well as murder and rape.
Evaluation of bottom up approach
Weaknesses
- There have been some significant failures when using bottom-up profiling. In 1992, 21 year old Rachel Nickell was stabbed 47 times and sexually assaulted in a frenzied attack on Wimbledon Common. In 2008, following examination of forensic evidence, Robert Napper was convicted of the murder. He had been ruled out early on in the initial investigation because he was several inches taller than the profile had claimed the offender would be.
- Copson (1995) surveyed 48 police forces and found that the advice provided by a profiler was judged to be useful in 83% of cases, but in only 3% of cases did it lead to the accurate identification of the offender.
- Kocsis et al. (2002) found that chemistry students produced a more accurate offender profile than experienced senior detectives. This implies that the bottom-up approach is little more than common sense and guess work.
What was Cesare lombroso’s approach to offending?
- He wrote a book called L’Huomo Delinquente in which he suggested that criminals were genetic throwbacks,
What are genetic throwbacks?
A primitive sub-species who were biologically different from non-criminals.
How were offenders seen by Lombroso?
- he saw offenders as lacking evolutionary development and that their savage and untamed nature recent that they would find it impossible to adjust to civilised society and would eventually turn to crime.
- he saw criminal behaviour as a natural tendency, rooted in the genealogy of those who engage in it.
What was the atavistic form?
- Lombroso argued that the criminal sub-species could be identified by a set of particular physiological characteristics that were linked to particular types of crime.