Effect of Technological Advances on the Validity and Reliability of Criminal Profiling - Research Paper Example

Effect of Technological Advances on the Validity & Reliability of Criminal Profiling Known as offender profiling, criminal investigative analysis has come a long way, particularly with the invention of new and advanced technologies that have completely revolutionized the practice of criminal profiling (Winerman, 2004). Significantly, the arrival of the Closed Circuit TV (CCTV), DNA collection and comparison, GPS, Cell phone technology, as well as 3D computer modeling, among other technologies have completely altered the face of criminal investigations in the contemporary age. While providing criminal investigators with data and techniques, the new technologies have had a profound influence on the developments shaping the contemporary criminal profiling process and completely impacted both its validity and reliability at the same time. This paper sets out to interrogate the effect of technological advances on the validity and reliability of criminal profiling; specifically, this paper will explore the manner in which the new technological innovations are preventing crime and enhancing police performance. Furthermore, this paper will investigate the allegations that criminal profiling and the American criminal justice processes are flawed and skewed by human limitations leading to false confessions and improper convictions. Eventually, the impact of technology, in terms of both the intended and unintended consequences of technology-driven solutions to crime, as well as through the contributions and limitations of information technologies, will also be highlighted. Evidently, criminal profiling is one of the critical behavioral and investigative tools used by criminal investigators to accurately envisage and establish a sketch for the features of an unidentified criminal subject of offender. Based on an analysis of the nature of a crime and the manner in which that crime was committed, as well as an evaluation of the offender’s choices before, during and after the offence, criminal profilers are able to identify a perpetrator and numerous aspects of the offender’s personality make up. Combining these insights with any other vital information and existing evidence as well as comparing that with the traits of known personality types and mental disorders, criminal investigators are able to establish a practical working profile of the offender. The principle goals of criminal profiling are to give law enforcement a social and mental evaluation of the offender as well as a psychological assessment of the possessions of the offender; criminal profiling also aims to yield suggestions and strategies for the interviewing process. The police all over the world have been entrusted with the most daunting tasks ever, including controlling crime, maintaining law and order, and to providing a vast range of complicated services to the public (Braga & Weisburd, 2006). On many occasions, the police put their lives on the line to accomplish astonishing feats during criminal investigation, to interrogate violent criminals and to question rowdy crowds for any vital leads that could be helpful in putting bad guys away. In the line of their work, the police face a wide range of challenges that could potentially threaten and possibly hinder service delivery to the public (Seaskate, 1998). In that respect, the police must think critically about the challenges they are facing now, and those they are likely to face in the future, to enhance their capacity to fulfill their responsibilities in society. Over the years, the police have often turned to technology-driven solutions to enhance their effectiveness in fighting crime and fulfilling their responsibilities (Byrne & Marx, 2011). Arrival of the fingerprinting technology in the 1900s and the establishment of crime laboratories in the 1920s inspired the integration of technological innovations into the police department thereby greatly enhancing the capability of the police to fight crime. The police capacity to respond to crime incidents was also greatly boosted by the arrival of the two-way radio communication technology and the prevalence of the automobile in the 1930s (Seaskate, 1998). Nevertheless, despite this early use of technology by the police, progress towards the adoption of technologies in solving crime has been slow and uneven; the rise in crime rates and urban disorders revived calls to build and expand capacity of the police in solving crime, thereby leading to the adoption of 911 system for handling emergency calls (Seaskate, 1998). Agencies were also equipped with computers to automate their functions and boost their ability to address crime; increasingly, agencies are finding the application of information technologies extremely critical in solving crime. Technological innovations in the criminal justice department fall into two broad categories namely hard technology, which comprises of hardware or material, and soft technology, which entails computer software and information systems. All the new materials, devices and equipment that are used to prevent and control crime today are hard technologies; these include CCTV cameras, metal detectors, baggage screening facilities, bullet proof windows, as well as security system installations, among others (Byrne & Marx, 2011). Contrariwise, software technologies entail all the strategic uses of information to solve and prevent crime; for instance, all the new software programs, classification systems, crime investigation systems, as well as data sharing or system integration methods comprise soft technologies. Hard technologies are developed to help prevent crime in many ways; for instance, home alarm systems were developed to reduce the prevalence of breaking and entering crimes, by notifying the police of any unauthorized entry into homes. Increasingly, portable personal alarm systems have also been adopted, to enable users reach out to friends or relatives when in dire need of assistance in emergencies. Street lighting, on the other hand, was developed to promote public safety, by increasing visibility as well as increasing the risk that offenders might be detected and even recognized by victims. CCTVs were developed to deter crime and facilitate the identification of criminals, particularly in restricted public places and in commercial premises. Infrared technologies coupled with light intensifying technologies may also be incorporated to further enhance the capacity of CCTVs in deterring crime in confined public places. The artificial intelligence technology has been adopted to detect crimes such as fraud and money laundering, by instantly detecting anomalous transactions and notifying the police; a vast array of location and tracking technologies have been adopted to deter crime by facilitating the location and recovery of stolen automobiles and other valuables such as cellular devices. Questionable import/export shipments and individuals, particularly children with Alzheimer’s disease, who are more likely to get lost, can also be located or tracked down using GPS technologies; personal location systems are increasingly being used to monitor the movement of people on bail/probation, or those that have been placed under restraining orders (Grabosky, 1998). With the rise in the global threat of terrorism and general crime, a vast range of technological innovations has been adopted to help in the detection of explosives and firearms. For instance, vapor detectors for bomb detection and X-ray analysis of luggage have been adopted at the airports; agencies are currently exploring the adoption of Low-Level Scattered X-Rays and computer image processing, among other new technologies, which would permit the detection of concealed weapons from a distance, without the need of having to frisk suspects. Technologies such as infrared spectroscopy have been developed to facilitate in the detection of illicit substances such as illegal drugs and ingredients used in making them; similarly, magnetic resonance imaging (MRIs) have been adopted as a non-invasive way to identify ingested contraband material. Fingerprinting and DNA testing were adopted in forensic science to conclusively establish the guilt of an offender; they have also been applied effectively to exonerate subjects in criminal investigations or persons that were convicted for crimes they did not commit (Grabosky, 1998). Target hardening technologies (technologies of blocking and controlling access) have been developed to obstruct access to targets, thereby making it hard to commit crime; for instance, the padlock era has slowly given way to smart locking technologies such as the new vehicle security systems, which inhibit ignition of the automobile. Other technological innovations have also been developed to restrain or incapacitate individuals who, under the influence of alcohol/ drugs or unruliness, may pose threats to themselves and/or others. For instance, incapacitation technologies have been adopted to immobilize or capture fleeing offenders as in the transmission of electromagnetic pulses to damage the electronic components of the vehicle’s ignition system in high-speed pursuits. Criminal profiling in the US dates back to the 1950s, when the “mad bomber” George Metesky, who had eluded the New York police for so long, was arrested with the help of profiling provided by psychiatrist James Brussel in 1956 (Winerman, 2004). Ever since, criminal investigators in the US have often consulted psychologists and psychiatrists to establish criminal profiles for the so-called “hard-to-catch” criminals that often elude police traps. Both criminal profiling and the American criminal justice process have been contested on the allegations of being flawed and skewed by human limitations, thereby leading to false confessions and improper convictions. With regards to the issue of criminal justice profiling, it has been alleged that offender profiles are often influenced and/or driven by stereotypes; significantly, profiles based on negative and inaccurate stereotypes are not only counterproductive, but also unfair, unethical and immoral (Bumgarner, 2004). For instance, the stereotype that all urban African Americans are involved in drugs and crime have led to inaccurate profiling of individuals from that group as criminals, which results to false inquiries and charges on innocent people. Also, the stereotype that all Hispanic teenage males who wear low-hanging pants and bandanas, especially in Los Angeles, are gang members, has often led to the inaccurate profiling of all males who dress in that manner as members of gangs by the police. The US criminal justice system has been accused of being flawed and skewed because of allegedly perpetuating myths about certain groups of people such as the blacks, Hispanics, young males, among others (Bumgarner, 2004). In fact, it has been argued that the American criminal justice system considers all young black men to be dangerous, expendable, and guilty until proven otherwise; the seeming virulent relationship between law enforcement and young black males is the manifestation of perceived racism in the contemporary American society. Evidently, the criticisms leveled against criminal profiling and criminal justice profiling in the United States are not new; for many years going back, the US has attempted to address these issues through objective, race-neutral validations for reforms in the criminal justice system. However, there are many angles to the racial discrepancies in the criminal justice system than meets the eye; irrefutably, the American criminal justice system has not yet reached its goal of race neutrality in the dispensation of justice. Nevertheless, that alone does not account for the racial composition of America’s prisons (Wilknson, n.d); on one hand, the history of more black African American and Hispanic males being convicted for crimes and murder inevitably leads to more convictions of these races. On the other hand, the history of arrests of black and Hispanic males also instigates understandable anger and resentment from the affected groups that find themselves the target of repeated false suspicion and frequent frisks when they are genuinely seeking to live a decent American life. Addressing the issues in the American criminal justice system does not necessarily call for a total overhaul of the system as it has been argued before, as doing so only diverts attention from the much broader social problems affecting the American society. The American criminal justice system does everything necessary to reduce and control crime, through the accurate profiling, identification, location and conviction of criminals (Wilknson, n.d). The advent of technological innovations in criminal investigations has completely aided the criminal profiling process, thereby considerably diminishing the likelihood of false confessions and accusations. Technological innovations have increased the capacity of the police to store and process large volumes of information, as well as their access to criminal registers and information related to crimes. Most importantly, technological innovations have significantly enhanced the intelligence and investigative capabilities of the criminal justice system, thereby leading to accurate profiling and convictions of offenders. Technological innovations in the criminal justice system have resulted to both intended and unintended consequences for crime and social control (Braga & Weisburd, 2006); one of the critical impacts is the replacement of people by these technological innovations. For instance, CCTV cameras are being used to monitor public places remotely, to identify offenders, and only a small number of police officers are required to address the crime issues identified; consequently, technological innovations have led to the downsizing of police force labor. The prevalence of technological innovations has also resulted to the sustained development and expansion of criminal justice policies that significantly diminish the likelihood and prospects for both individual and community change. The increased focus on offender control systems and mechanisms in institutional settings has considerably reduced spending on treatment that might result to behavior change in offenders, both while in prison, and at the point of re-entry into communities. Furthermore, in the context of increasing sophistication of technological innovations and the dearth of technology-based skill sets in criminal justice agencies, essential criminal justice functions such as information management as well as offender monitoring and control have been entrusted to the private sector. Overall, technological innovations could potentially enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system by enhancing the validity and reliability of criminal profiling; nevertheless, an excessive fascination with these technological innovations may also divert essential resources from the more conventional and safer crime control and policing strategies. Nevertheless, adoption of technological innovations in the criminal justice system have had dramatic impacts including increasing the capacity to store and process large volumes of data, enhanced intelligence and investigative capacities and provided ready access to criminal records and other critical information. References Braga, A.A., & Weisburd, D.L. (2006). Police Innovation And Crime Prevention: Lessons Learned From Police Research Over The Past 20 Years. Retrieved from: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/218585.pdf Bumgarner, J.B. (2004). Profiling and Criminal Justice in America: A Reference Handbook. California: Abc-Clio. Byrne, J., & Marx, G. (2011). Technological Innovations in Crime Prevention and Policing. A Review of the Research on Implementation and Impact. Cahiers Politiestudies Jaargang, nr. 20: p. 17-40. Grabosky, P. (1998). Technology & Crime Control: Trends & Issues in crime and criminal justice. Retrieved from: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/4/2/9/%7B4291E338-C2CE-41CF-B947-DB268AD13B13%7Dti78.pdf Seaskate. (1998). The Evolution and Development of Police Technology. police-technology, Retrieved from: http://www.police-technology.net/id59.html Wilknson, H.J. (n.d). In Defense of American Criminal Justice. Vanderbilt Law Review 67:4:1099 Winerman, L. (2004). Criminal profiling: The reality behind the myth. Monitor Staff, 35(7): p.66. Read More