Professional Documents
Culture Documents
8. “Profiling equation”A ➔ C equation ● Inferences (indicated by the arrow) are derived from ●
Actions in an offense (crime location, time, nature of the victim, etc.) about the ● Characteristics
of the offender that will be useful to an investigation (Canter, 2011))
9. VICTIM RISK: the amount to risk (high, moderate, or low) a victimplaced him/herself in to
become a victim. ● High risk victims: they placed themselves in vulnerable situation, such as
prostitution ● Low risk victims: their occupation and lifestyle Schlesinger (2009)
10. VICTIM RISK (contd)Murdered five prostitutesWhitechapel, London circa 1888Victims throat
were cutAbdominal mutilationsRemoval of organs TruTV
11. VICTIM RISK (contd)“Jack the Ripper”Jack the Ripper was motivated, atleast in part, by a
tortured sexualpathology. Therefore, prostituteswere logical targets. They wereeasily accessible
victims ofopportunity who had the misfortune of crossing pathswith Jack the Ripper. TruTV
12. VICTIM RISK (contd)Dr. Bonds 1889 profile of “Jack the Ripper”Offenses were sexual in
natureRage against womenPhysically strong, cool, and daringQuiet and inoffensive in
appearance,Middle-aged Body of Mary KellyNeatly attired, probably wearing a cloakLoner,
without a real occupation, eccentric, andMentally unstableSuffered from satyriasis TruTV
13. VICTIM RISK (contd)“Jack the Ripper” Profile by Gregg McCrary, former FBIagent and
professor of forensic psychologyWhite male living alone in the Whitechapel area30 to 37 years of
ageSame socio-economic class as victimsWithdrawn loner with menial jobLikely went to same
pubs as victimsMay have encountered victims beforehand Q: In the case of JonBenet Ramsey,
did her in involvement in child beauty pageants elevate her victim risk? Other examples of high
risk victims? TruTV
14. OFFENDER RISK: the level of risk (high, moderate, or low) an offenderplaced himself in that
might lead to his apprehension. ● High risk offender: For example, abducting a victim a broad
daylight with many people around with a high likelihood of getting caught. ● Low risk victims: For
example, an abduction where the chanced of apprehension are minimal, such as at night with no
obvious witnesses. Schlesinger (2009)
15. OFFENDER RISK (contd)Murdered 10 peopleWichita, 1974-1991Known for his three-part
method of murderCommunity leaderTaunted police with lettersLow-risk offender: He would cut
the phone lines, andthen he would get into the house somehow, waiting forhis victim to come
home. TruTV
16. OFFENDER RISK (contd)“BTK Killer” profileBy Dr. Deborah Schurman-KauflinSingle, white
male 28-30Resided near Oteros or spent time there to form fantasy about JosephineLived in a
house, not apartmentOver 61, tall and trim. Neat in appearance with shorthair. Clothes darker by
choiceQuiet, modest, and conservativePsychopathHad a car, dark in colorComfortable with
people much younger than him. TruTV
17. ESCALATIONMost individuals who commit crimes begin with lessserious offenses and, over
the years, their level ofcriminality increases.Ex: An offender may begin with voyeurism, progress
toburglary, then assault, rape, and murder. Schlesinger (2009)
18. TIME & LOCATION FACTORSVarious time elements in criminal conduct are revealingof the
unidentified offenders lifestyle or occupation.How long the offender spent with the victim
providesadditional insight into the crime and the criminal. Thelonger an offender spends with the
victim, his risk ofapprehension increases.Factors: Where the offender apprehended the victim
How the offender got the victim to go with him Where the victim was killed Body disposition Was
a vehicle used Schlesinger (2009)
19. MODUS OPERANDI (M.O): the method or technique of carrying out of the crime. The
offenders M.O. can change over time.As an individual gains more experience, he often adapts
hiscriminal technique to increase his efficiency.Since the offenders M.O. can change it is often
not auseful method for linking (or connecting) a series of crimesto the same offender.Instead,
examination of the offenders engagement inrepetitive-ritualistic behavior at the crime sense is
oftenmore important in linking crimes to the same offender. Schlesinger (2009)
20. SIGNATURE: a unique set of acts an offender engages in with eachvictim.Many serial
offenders engage in repetitive-ritualisticbehavior at the crime scene since the offense itself
isinsufficient in providing enough psychosexual gratification.Thus, an offender have a signature
or calling card.Ex: Postmortem body positioning Mutilation Symbolic gestures Written statements
left behind Schlesinger (2009)
21. SIGNATURE (contd)Northern California – late 60s, early 70sClaimed 37 victims, but
investigatorsagreed on 7, two of whom surviveWent after couples at least three timesWrote letters
to local newspapers and had a specific signHe would taunt the authorities from a superior
perspective and to watch the police make fools of themselves TruTV
22. SIGNATURE (contd)“Zodiac killer” profileUnsolvedLow-risk offender: Attacks occurred at
dusk or after dark, on weekends, often around holidaysChanged M.O. – Different weapons and
no apparent motiveFour men and three women between the ages of 16 and 29 were targetedHis
letters included four cryptograms (or ciphers)Only one has been confirmed to have been
decodedHis signature was both clinical and literal. TruTV
23. CRIME SCENE PATTERNSThe crime scenes of violent sex offenders and sexualmurderers
can be divided into two general groups: ● Organized: Reflects a great deal if planning in which
little evidence is left behind ● Disorganized: Reflects an impulsive, unplanned crime with a lot of
evidence left.Individuals who leave high organized crime scenes seemto have distinctly different
personalitycharacteristics and behavioral patterns than those wholeave notably disorganized
crime scenes. Schlesinger (2009)
24. PERSONALITY INFERENCESORGANIZED CRIME: Organized crime scenes reflect a high
level of control.Restraints are used and the body is disposed of in athought-out manner, often
transported to another locationfrom where the murder took place.TRAITS OF AN ORGANIZED
OFFENDER: ● socially competent and intelligence ● lives with a partner ● follows the crime in
the media ● changes location after the offense ● psychopathic, narcissistic, or manipulative
personalities ● charming, neat in appearance, physically attractive ● can talk with members of
opposite sex Schlesinger (2009)
25. PERSONALITY INFERENCES (contd)DISORGANIZED CRIME: Disorganized crime scenes
reflect impulsivity and lackof planning. The victim is often known to the offender andbodies are
left in plain sight. A weapon of opportunity isused.TRAITS OF AN DISORGANIZED OFFENDER:
● poor work history ● lives alone and near the crime scene ● has little interest in media coverage
of case ● does not change lifestyle following case ● schizoid, schizotypal, borderline,
schizophrenic ● physically unattractive ● little experience with members of opposite sex
Schlesinger (2009)
26. PERSONALITY INFERENCES (contd) Schlesinger (2009)
27. PERSONALITY AS AN INTERVENINGVARIABLEORGANIZED CRIME: Offenders who
commit planned offenses typically havepersonality disorders that do not disorganize their
thinking.They are manipulative and deceptive by psychopathologicalsymptoms like hallucinations
and delusions.DISORGANIZED CRIME: Offenders who commit unplanned, impulsive offenses
have moreobvious psychopathological disturbances. Their disorganizedpersonalities can prohibit
thoughtful planning. They may lackthe control and defenses needed to contain their behavior.
Iftheir fantasies grow to the point of compulsion, they can actout in a thoughtless manner likely to
get them caught. Schlesinger (2009)
28. PERSONALITY AS AN INTERVENINGVARIABLE (contd)EXCEPTIONS TO THE GENERAL
NOTION THAT SEVERE PSYCHOPATHOLOGYLEADS TO UNPLANNED CRIMES: Paranoid
personality disorder and paranoid form ofschizophrenia do not disorganize ones thoughts.
Behavior ofindividuals with these types of disorders is organized,systematized, and thoughtful.
Also, individuals with intact personalities can actimpulsive when intoxicated.Note: Most crime
scenes are neither highly organized ordisorganized, but rather fall on a normal distribution
withhighly organized/disorganized as the extremes. Schlesinger (2009)
29. IS PROFILING USEFUL?Schlesinger (2009): Some researchers argue thatprofiling is not
scientific and relies too much onclinical experience instead of on empirical validation.Despite a
lack of strong empirical validation, somestudies have demonstrated its usefulness when done
bythose experienced in the process.
30. INDUCTIVE VS.DEDUCTIVE PROFILINGBoth assume that the crime and crime scene reveal
infoabout the offender. Profilers using the inductive approach examineresearch based on
identified offenders of a particulartype of crime. The profiler uses research on similartypes of
committed crime to determine possiblecharacteristics of the offender. Profilers using the
deductive approach incorporateeach piece of evidence in a case to create the offenderprofile.
They use education, experience, and logic toanalyze the crime scene and create a unique
offenderprofile for each crime. Yonge & Jacquin (2010)
31. INDUCTIVE VS. DEDUCTIVEPROFILING (contd)The FBIs crime scene analysis and
Cantersinvestigative psychology are inductive approaches, yetboth incorporate deductive
reasoning to a smallerdegree.Yonge and Jacquin (2010) studied the effectiveness ofthe two
primary approaches. It was hypothesized thattrained participants would produce more
accurateprofiles than those not trained. It was alsohypothesized that the FBI approach would
produce themost accurate profiles. Yonge & Jacquin (2010)
32. YONGE & JACQUIN (2010)METHOD:213 undergrad psychology studentsMean age: 19
years64.3% femaleNo prior profiling historyThree groups: control, inductive & deductiveHour-long
training session with multiple-choice quizParticipants were given a two-page summary of
doublesexual homicide and were asked to study the case andcomplete the Profiling Offender
CharacteristicsQuestionnaire. Yonge & Jaquin (2010)
33. YONGE & JACQUIN (2010)RESULTS:Participants trained in the inductive approach
producedprofiles that were more accurate than the profiles ofcontrols (p=.02). These participants
were also moreaccurate that those in the other two groups in profilingthe offenders physical
characteristics (inductive vs.deductive p=0.001, inductive versus control p=0.001,deductive
versus control p=0.48)Neither type of profiling training had greater profileaccuracy for the
offenders cognitive characteristics,offense behaviors, social history and habits, or
adultconvictions. Yonge & Jaquin (2010)
34. YONGE & JACQUIN (2010)CONCLUSION:The results suggest that the inductive approach
toprofiling may be useful for teaching naïve profilers toprofile the offender of a sexual
homicide.Deductive profiling relies on the application of logic.And when forming logical deductions
about the offender,profilers may have relied on stereotypes and faultybeliefs. This may be
overcome by experience and realtraining. It is possible that the deductive approachcannot be
taught in an hour-long session. Yonge & Jaquin (2010)
35. CHALLENGES TO PROFILINGRESEARCHProfiling equations – information from
controlledconditions are not what people actually do in theirdaily lives.Difficulty in obtaining
information about what actuallyhappens in crimes.Police databases are notoriously inaccurate,
Aerial Boundaries
Aerial boundaries are “landmarks”, usually classified under natural landmarks or
man-made landmarks; both are originally used to help navigation on finding direction
and/or determine area of jurisdiction.
Vital Installations
Vital installations are those immovable properties owned and controlled by the
government, including private properties, such as schools, churches, reservoirs,
towers, resorts, irrigations, malls, etc. It is imperative that the police unit/station should
be mandated to secure vital installations situated in the area of jurisdiction, from being
attacked/harassed/destroyed by the enemy.
Friendly Forces and Other Government Agencies
Friendly forces are those government agencies performing law enforcement
functions. A Police Officer must know the existence of friendly forces in the area,
and coordination must be regularly encourage, to establish smooth cooperation in
combating insurgency and criminal activities in the area
Andrews and Bonta identified the following criminogenic needs as important to reducing
offending: substance use, antisocial cognition, antisocial associates, family and marital relations,
employment, and leisure and recreational activities. This study examines dynamic criminogenic
need changes across a 12-month period and identifies which need changes are the best
predictors of criminal offending and illicit drug use among a sample of drug-involved probationers
who participated in an intervention (N = 251). Probationers had significant changes in several
need areas, and treatment participation moderated some changes. Probationers who had
reductions in criminally involved family members they associate with, improved work
performance, and decreased alcohol use had the greatest reductions in offending. Those who
increased time spent engaged in leisure and recreational activities were less likely to self-report
subsequent drug use. These findings suggest that certain dynamic need changes may be more
important than others, and designing interventions to impact these needs might improve
outcomes.
The risk–need–responsivity (RNR) model is based on the premise that tailoring treatment and
controls for offenders should be based on criminal justice risk and criminogenic need factors that
are related to offending behaviors. Assigning the appropriate dosage, type of controls, and
correctional programming will facilitate reductions in criminal offending. The underlying theory is
that offending is a product of the history of criminal justice involvement and specific criminogenic
needs. By attending to dynamic criminogenic needs through proper treatment and control
programming, one can affect offending behavior.