Criminal Profiling in Forensic Psychology - Assignment Example

? Literature Review on Criminal Profiling in Forensic Psychology of Criminal profiling (also called offenderprofiling) is a very important aspect of law enforcement. Criminal profilers find ways to help police officers find criminals when all other efforts have failed. Criminal profiling is not an exact science, which creates some challenges for those who do the profiling. Also, many profilers are psychologists and psychiatrists, which means that they do not have formal training in law enforcement. This literature review provides information on the topic of criminal profiling and on how law enforcement perceives this assistance. There is a general argument according to which criminal profiling should only be used when all other methods have failed. One the other side of the argument are those law enforcement professionals who rely on this type of assistance when they are involved in finding serial murderers or people who are committing several similar crimes. More information is required in this area in order to provide law enforcement with the assistance needed. Literature Review for Criminal Profiling in Forensic Psychology Many people watch various television programs that show police officers looking for answers about specific types of criminals. In many of these, such as Criminal Minds, a forensic scientist is called who has a specialty in criminal profiling. Generally, a profiler is used when an individual commits more than three crimes and these crimes have patterns (Davies & Beech, 2012). Although there are many definitions of criminal profiling, one that seems to adequately fit the necessity of this literature reads as follows: “The practice of inferring an offender’s characteristics or behavior from crime scene behavior” (Davies & Beech, 2012, p. 172). The profiler’s responsibility is to help law enforcement professionals understand the individual they are pursuing by providing as much information as possible about his or her behavior and characteristics. History of Criminal Profiling The origins of criminal profiling (also called offender profiling) start with Dr. Thomas Bond, who was the doctor who provided insight into the case of Jack the Ripper in 1880. At that time, this was an opinion by the doctor about the murderer’s dress, possible state of mind, and the possible motivation for these murders (Davies & Beech, 2012). The American FBI is credited with beginning the process officially in contemporary times. Devery (2010) states that criminal profiling came out of the efforts of the FBI Behavioral Unit (BAU) in the 1970s at Quantico. The first criminal profilers included Howard Teten, John Douglas and Bob Ressler, all profilers in the 70s who contributed to various FBI cases. These men did not have formal training, and they began with informal interviews with serial killers. In the 1980s, two other serial killers, Roy Hazelwood and John Douglas, published an article in the FBI Law Enforcement that provided more information of how profiling services could be used by police departments. Dr. Ann Wolport-Burgess, a psychiatrist, began to work with Hazlewood and Douglas, who helped to increase the number of interviews with various criminals. As the number of interviews increased, the BAU was able to launch a more specific program that interviewed violent criminals, and they organized this information into specific patterns of information (George, 2008). The BAU was able to provide information to law enforcement that gave a profile “based on information about the victim, the crime scene and the nature of the exchange between the victim and the offender” (George, 2008, p. 227). These men and women laid the foundation for contemporary criminal profiling. Criminal Profiling as an Uncertain Science Within the subject of criminal investigation, criminal profiling is seen as an uncertain science. Muller (2011) points out that criminal profiling is not routinely used as a way to understand crime but it is used as a last resort, when other methods have failed. Small law enforcement agencies do not have a budget for profiling cases and will only employ profiling when they have unsolvable cases (Muller, 2011). Trojan and Salfati (2011) suggest that in order for a profile to be taken seriously, there needs to be a direct link between an individual’s criminal history and the crime scene characteristics. In understanding how criminal profiling can help police departments, more work can be done through profiling (Trojan & Salfati, 2011). Torres, Boccaccini, and Miller (2007) further the research on profiling and its validity by stating that many psychologists and psychiatrists stay away from involvement in profiling because they also question its validity. Other psychologists see that profiling is important to the study of criminal behavior and criminals’ cognitive processes. On the other side of this debate is Kocsis (2010), who suggests that criminal profiling is important to the process of criminal investigation. This article refutes the idea that criminal profilers are unable to provide information that will help investigations. In fact, Kocsis (2010) supports more research in this area as a way to promote criminal profiling as an important aspect of the investigative process. Canter and Hammond (2007) provide information on the advantages of geographical profiling. The challenge for researchers who study this phenomenon is that they have to work with small amounts of data because there can be challenge for them in gaining access to specific data or in finding weak data-sets. In some situations (e.g. serial killers, serial rapists) the idea of geographical location may not be as valid as in other types of crime (Canter & Hammond, 2007). Another issue that is important when using profiling is that in many cases, the use of a criminal profiler as an expert in court may or may not stand. As an example, Youngs (2009) reports that in some courts the profiler information is accepted initially, but can be thrown out of court on appeal. This is often because psychology has not been a science that has been used in the court system over time. Today, as Youngs (2009) states, psychologists are being used more often outside the court room in relation to jury selection, the impact of techniques used by lawyers in questioning, and as experts in psychological issues. These actions have helped to create a new model for psychology called “Investigative Psychology” (Youngs, 2009, p. 2). Part of the reason that psychology has not been embraced in the courtroom more often is because psychologists and lawyers are governed by very different rules (Youngs, 2009). Criminal Profiling as it is Applied by Officers Beauregard (2012) begins this discussion by examining the relationship between criminal profiling and sexual offenders. This author’s report specified the areas that provide insight into sex offenders and what is known through criminal profiling. Beauregard (2012) found that the sexual offenders are able to change the way they commit their crimes and they can vary their decision as to the type of victim they choose. Goodwill, Alison and Beech (2009) further this discussion after their study on serial rapists. The authors concluded that more information must be gathered through studies to analyze those criminals who rape or commit other types of sexual crimes. Alison, Goodwill, Almond, Van den Heuvel and Winter (2010) point out that the information found from a profile must have relevance for the officers using the information or the profile will not work. As an example, if police officers are looking for a specific suspect, they need to have information readily available to them about the perpetrator’s behavior, age and prior convictions. If this information is available, they are able to observe certain suspects more easily. Dr. Julian Boon suggests that there are a variety of ideas of how to work with profilers that make this both an art form and a science, because it cannot be done by every individual who claims to understand the perpetrators (“Offender Profiling”, 2012). Vaughn, DeLisi, Beaver, and Howard (2008) provide some answer to the question of whether this information can be useful to law enforcement. They suggest that developmental theories can provide an understanding of how those criminals who do what society expects of them – they get married, have a career or go to school – can limit their antisocial behavior. However, this is more important for those people who are committing crimes that are not serial murders, according to their research. Goodwill and Alison (2007) present information on how offender profiling can be used to help officers. As an example, they state that profiling is only useful when it meets two criteria. The first criterion is that the offender is committing crimes that are consistent and different from those of other criminals. The second criterion is that the way that they commit the crime relates to something within the offender. In other words, the offender can commit crimes against a certain type of persons who have something in common with something in the offender’s life. The authors provide a thorough examination of how the offender’s attitude and behavior toward a victim can be used to find them. The study was created to determine whether the academic debate about the behavior in offenders was not an “either or” situation but one that took in a variety of factors to make the profile. Goodwill and Alison (2007) conclude that “the real challenge is to identify what features of an offense make which characteristics more or less conducive to profiling” (p. 838). Offender Profiling and Forensic Science When offender profiling is connected with forensic science, there are many factors to consider. West and Greenall (2011) provide information on index offense analysis when dealing with offenders once they are caught. The authors explain that forensic professionals are asked to provide information about an offender’s index throughout the assessment of the offender and to state whether or not the individual is still a danger to society. The challenge for forensic professionals is that the index is not always clearly defined. West and Greenall (2011) suggest that there forensic professionals should look at the crime scene and any documentation about the crime to gather all information about the offender’s nature and the crime in order to provide a better understanding from the index. The authors created a guide through a qualitative study, and provided information to support that the use of crime scene data and other information that was taken in by law enforcement professionals is important in gaining an overall understanding of the criminal. This allows them to have first-hand knowledge about what is going on with the offender instead of relying on reports given by others. First-hand knowledge is important because the forensic professionals need to give an accurate account of the offender as they go through the court system. Boylan (2011) cautions that when profiling is being done, forensic professionals must make sure they are ethical in their profiling. The author states that there are several phases to make profiling ethical. The first phase is to make sure that the crime scene is secured and make sure that there actually has been a crime. The second phase is to define the crime that has been committed. Determining the risk to both the offender and the victim is an important aspect of this phase. Boylan (2011) states that this is not always an easy phase because there are so many factors that must be taken into account. As an example, a serial killer who may be escalating is going to have a different way of handling a crime scene than a general murderer. The serial killer may change the way that a crime scene looks to try to redirect the investigation. In this case, the amount of time that the victim spent with the offender is very important. In addition, the location and the personality of the crime scene can be important for catching a serial criminal. The third phase is to create the criminal profile. There are three parts of the criminal profile that include the “psychological/behavioral profile, the witness profile, and the physical evidence (forensic) profile” (Boylan, 2011, p. 134). The first question to ask is why the individual was a victim and what triggered the offender to hurt this victim. The answer to this question will help the forensic professionals to narrow down the scope of their search and understand more directly the reason why the individual was chosen as the victim. When the profiler looks at the crime scene characteristics and the circle of people who knew the victim (from closest family members to strangers), the profiler is better able to identify the type of person who committed the crime and this can end in an arrest. In phase four, all the evidence is taken to the district attorney for it to be scrutinized from his or her point of view. On the basis of the information that is taken, a profile is provided. Eventually, in phase five, the individual responsible for the crime is arrested (Boylan, 2011). In another study by Yokota, Fujita, Watanabe, Yoshimoto, and Wachi (2007), the Behavioral Investigative Support System (BISS) was reviewed for the use with perpetrators who committed serial sexual assaults. The authors provided this study to show a more scientific approach to offender profiling. The BISS was created by the National Research Institute of Police Science (NRIPS), a research group in Japan, for the purpose of providing a more scientific way of profiling. Yokota et al. (2007) provided an extensive opportunity for research by creating a database of offenders and unsolved crimes related to the target incident. They then provided each offender with a probability score. The higher the score, the closer they were to the target incident. The authors found that BISS was accurate in 30% of the cases overall, and in sex offender cases they were able to identify certain criminal characteristics displayed by offenders that were similar to the ones displayed in the target incident. This was very encouraging to Yokota et al. (2007) because it provided an opportunity to see how computers could be used in developing a way to scientifically conduct profiling. Many areas of forensics must be taken into consideration when a criminal profile is being made. Another area to discuss is DNA profiling and testing. Kayser and de Knijff (2011) presented information about new directions for DNA profiling that could reduce the limitations of current DNA profiling that uses different genetic markers. As an example, the current comparative DNA profiling is only able to match DNA to criminals who are already in the criminal justice system. Newer methods of DNA profiling are using more sophisticated human genetics and genomics to provide information about offenders who are not part of the system. Some of the new systems use biogeographic ancestry and “externally visible characteristics” (Kayser & de Knijff, 2011, p. 180) from DNA samples to provide the necessary information for finding offenders. Samuels, Davies, Pope and Holand (2012) present evidence that there are a number of states across the United States that are taking DNA samples from people who are arrested in target crimes. The challenge for this type of DNA collection seems to emerge in relation to ethical considerations. One ethical consideration would be the rights of the individual who is incarcerated. Although one could argue that those who commit crimes do not have any rights, in a court of law an offender who committed a crime where DNA was left prior to his or her court appearance may be able to challenge the admission of the DNA in court (Kayser & de Knijff, 2011). Generally speaking, there are 13 states that allow DNA collection from any offender convicted of a felony. The other states allow DNA collection when there is a crime of sexual assault or violence. The decision to take DNA samples and when to take them is made at the state level (Kayser & de Knijff, 2011). The development of this type is costly and there can be problems with offenders who are already in the system or who have been convicted of many crimes. In addition, DNA collection from arrestees may not be as easy as it seems, as it takes planning and there may be many changes that have to be made in the system, which means that DNA collection of all arrestees may take time. Summary The history or criminal profiling goes back to Jack the Ripper. In the United States, it goes back to the 1970s, when the FBI created the Behavioral Unit (BAU). The literature shows that there are many issues to consider when conducting criminal profiling. The first issue is that many professionals in law enforcement do not see criminal profiling as an exact science. They tend not to use profilers in court and they may not ask for the assistance from a profiler as they are working on a case. Usually, the profiler will not be brought into the situation until all other techniques have been exhausted. This attitude has created two sides of the issue and presented many challenges for profilers, who are usually not law enforcement officers but are psychologists or psychiatrists (Muller, 2011). Criminal profiling must connect the crime to the offender in order for it to be taken seriously (Trojan & Salfati, 2011; Torres, Boccaccini, & Miller, 2007). Criminal profiling is very helpful in solving serial crimes and in crimes where the individual has avoided detection (robberies, sexual crimes) (Kocsis, 2012; Canter & Hammond, 2007). In order for criminal profiling to become more scientific, studies must be done that use statistical information and mathematical calculations (Boylan, 2011; Yokota et al., 2007). These studies also use DNA testing as a factor or geographical location (Boylan, 2011; Kayser & de Knijff, 2011). Programs like BISS (Boylan, 2011) are showing positive results in being able to accurately find offenders who have not been found in the past. In addition, profiling professionals must make sure that they are treating all cases ethically and are presenting an accurate profile based on the five phases process. By going through the five phases systematically, profilers can be sure they are working ethically (West & Greenall , 2011; Yokota et al., 2007). Future Recommendations There are many areas that are important to research in criminal profiling. There need to be more scientific studies, both qualitative and quantitative, that provide an understanding of how profiling works. As an example, one of the reasons that profiling was shown not to be an exact science was because the information received is not based on hard data; instead, it is based on the softer, psychological, data. Because profilers are most often called in when every other method has failed, it seems that profiling is more like an opinion. There needs to be a better understanding of how profilers come to their assumptions, and specific criteria for creating this information may be needed. A good example of this is to interview a variety of people who have already been convicted to see which characteristics seem to be most important to the perpetrators. Future study could also be created on the basis of large samples to test assumptions that are already made about certain types of individuals. As an example, although many people who commit serial crimes have similar characteristics, they may not be able to be used across cultures. There needs to be a more accurate way of understanding these characteristics. Currently, there are differences in methods that are used to do criminal profiling. If this is to continue, there needs to be more accirate definition as to how profiling should be done and a more systematic and scientific way of using these methods must be devised (Gregory, 2005). In order for police officers to accept criminal profiling, there may need to be more training for profilers in criminal justice techniques so they understand how to better integrate profiling techniques into the criminal justice system. Muller (2011) suggests that in order to reduce the uncertainty of cases using criminal profiling, a clear understanding of what this technique is and how it is used must be established. Generally, there are many experts in this field who have learned from experience. Muller (2011) states that those using profiling must make it clear that there are limitations in this work. In order to create a stronger commitment to using profiling, law enforcement professionals must have confidence that this method is appropriate for the use in their cases. This clarity can come from devising a more evidence-based policy, and then studies must be conducted to make sure that evidence-based profiling is sound. References Alison, L., Goodwill, A., Almond, L., Van den Heuvel, C., & Winter, J. (2010). Pragmatic solutions to offender profiling and behavioural investigative advice. Legal & Criminological Psychology, 15(1), 115-132. doi:10.1348/135532509X463347 Beauregard, E. (2010). Rape and sexual assault in investigative psychology: The contribution of sex offenders' research to offender profiling. Journal Of Investigative Psychology And Offender Profiling, 7(1), 1-13. doi:10.1002/jip.114 Boylan, M. (2011). Ethical profiling. Journal Of Ethics, 15(1/2), 131-145. doi:10.1007/s10892-010-9092-9 Canter, D., & Hammond, L. (2007). Prioritizing burglars: Comparing the effectiveness of geographical profiling methods. Police Practice & Research, 8(4), 371-384. doi:10.1080/15614260701615086 Davies, G. M., & Beech, A. R. (2012). Forensic psychology: Crime, justice, law, interventions. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Devery, C. (2010). Criminal profiling and criminal investigation. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 26(4), 393-409. doi: 10.1177/1043986210377108 George, J. (2008). Offender profiling and expert testimony: Scientifically valid or glorified results? Vanderbilt Law Review, 61(1), 221-260. Goodwill, A., Alison, L., & Beech, A. (2009). What works in offender profiling? A comparison of typological, thematic, and multivariate models. Behavioral Sciences & The Law, 27(4), 507-529. Goodwill, A. M., & Alison, L. J. (2007). When is profiling possible? Offense planning and aggression as moderators in predicting offender age from victim age in stranger rape. Behavioral Sciences & The Law, 25(6), 823-840. doi:10.1002/bsl.778 Gregory, N. (2005). Offender profiling: A review of the literature. The British Journal of Forensic Practice, 7(3). Retrieved from http://independent.academia.edu/NathanGregory/Papers/892824/Offender_profiling_a_review_of_the_literature\ Kayser, M., & de Knijff, P. (2011). Improving human forensics through advances in genetics, genomics and molecular biology. Nature Reviews Genetics, 12(3), 179-192. doi:10.1038/nrg2952 Kocsis, R. N. (2010). Criminal profiling works and everyone agrees. Journal Of Forensic Psychology Practice, 10(3), 224-237. doi:10.1080/15228930903550574 Muller, D. A. (2011). Qualitative approaches to criminal profiling as ways of reducing uncertainty in criminal investigations. Policing: A Journal Of Policy & Practice, 5(1), 33-40. Offender profiling – myth and reality. (2012). Psychologist, 25(6), 427-428. Samuels, J., Davies, E., Pope, D., & Holand, A. (2012). Collecting DNA from arrestees: Implementation lessons. National Institute Of Justice Journal, (270), 18-25. Torres, A. N., Boccaccini, M. T., & Miller, H. A. (2006). Perceptions of the validity and utility of criminal profiling among forensic psychologists and psychiatrists. Professional Psychology: Research And Practice, 37(1), 51-58. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.37.1.51 Trojan, C., & Salfati, C. G. (2011). Linking criminal history to crime scene behavior in single-victim and serial homicide: Implications for offender profiling research. Homicide Studies, 15(1), 3-31. DOI: 10.1177/1088767910397281 Vaughn, M. G., DeLisi, M., Beaver, K. M., & Howard, M. O. (2008). Toward a quantitative typology of burglars: A latent profile analysis of career offenders. Journal Of Forensic Sciences (Blackwell Publishing Limited), 53(6), 1387-1392. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2008.00873.x West, A. G., & Greenall, P. V. (2011). Incorporating index offence analysis into forensic clinical assessment. Legal & Criminological Psychology, 16(1), 144-159. doi:10.1348/135532510X495124 Yokota, K., Fujita, G., Watanabe, K., Yoshimoto, K., & Wachi, T. (2007). Application of the behavioral investigative support system for profiling perpetrators of serial sexual assaults. Behavioral Sciences & The Law, 25(6), 841-856. doi:10.1002/bsl.793 Youngs, D. (2009). Introduction to a special issue of the journal of investigative psychology and offender profiling. Journal Of Investigative Psychology & Offender Profiling, 6(1), 1-9. doi:10.1002/jip.98 Read More