Forensic Psychology and Criminal Investigation - Case Study Example

Part One Introduction In the current case of Leonard C. Thornhill, it is noticeable that the offender is on an increasingly risky behaviour of re-offending. As stated, in the last five years, the offender has not been subject to any major offences except for one complaint regarding cannabis use outside and inside his premises. However, search of the premises produced long knives that the offender could not properly account for indicating some form of inclination for violence. These events coupled with the recent sexual abuse charge placed by Miss Valery Aberdeen indicate that the offender’s risk for reoffending is increasing and needs to be dealt with at the earliest using a MAPPA Panel assessment. Recommendations for Current Case as per MAPPA Panel The first thing to be realised is that Thornhill is at greater risk for reoffending perhaps because of some inadequacy in his current life in conjunction with his previous history [ CITATION Lau12 \l 1033 ]. The period between Thornhill’s previous offence and current offence is around five years indicating a period of calm in his life. It is highly likely that some stimulus such as perhaps problems with his girlfriend are bothering Thronhill and causing him to reoffend. It would be unadvisable to look into Thornhill’s case without a fresh forensic psychologist review. Based on the review provided by the forensic psychologist, it could be seen if Thornhill requires community support or time at a regular detention facility to solve his current problems[ CITATION Lau12 \l 1033 ]. The presence of long knives at the home of Thornhill provide for the possibility that the offender might use these in order to inflict violence and possibly murder his girlfriend especially when under the influence of alcohol or drugs. In order to preclude such a possibility, it would be advisable to send a Domestic Violence Officer (DMO) to the house of Thornhill and his live in girlfriend to find out if violence has occurred or is suspected. Given the nature of Thornhill’s unfaithfulness, it is likely that his girlfriend may refuse his entry into the house. However, this is just a possibility as yet and the DMO can discuss this issue with the girlfriend as well. In case that the live in girlfriend does not wish to accommodate Thornhill, it would be advisable to provide her a security plan since Thornhill might attack her out of rage. However, in case that she allows Thornhill back, she should still be given a security plan to contact the police as soon as she is threatened by the offender. If Thornhill’s girlfriend does not allow him to return, he should be placed in an ex offender’s domicile where he can be monitored closely for further treatment. Moreover, it should also be taken into account that Thornhill’s behaviour improved before while in detention so there might be a possibility that his behaviour might improve while at the domicile. Conclusion Given the circumstances of Thornhill’s case, he should be assessed for psychological problems before any other treatments are provided. Once the actual causes for offence are settled, Thornhill should be placed under community care or in a detention centre depending on the outcomes of the assessment. Moreover, while this process takes place, Thornhill’s live in girlfriend should be provided with a security plan to ensure her safety. Part Two Introduction The current case concerning Richard Bleech requires the utilisation of at least two different assessment methods. Bleech has been party to both violent offences and sexual offences that entail the use of differentiated tools to assess current levels of aggression and future concerns. It is proposed that Bleech should be assessed utilising the Violent Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) for violent offences and the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG) for sexual offences and chances for their future occurrence. The justification for these choices is outlined below through an appraisal of Bleech’s circumstances and the strengths and limitation of the proposed assessment methods. Proposed Risk Assessment Methods Violent Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) The VRAG has been developed in order to assess the risk of violence in violent, mentally challenged offenders. The test is aimed specifically at the period following the release of such an offender into society. The largest mainstay of the VRAG is on the psycho social historical component in order to estimate the likelihood of the offender’s risk for reoffending once released. This method of assessment stands opposed to other such tests that rely on interviews and questionnaires alone. The largely appreciated and tested Hare PCL-R score system has been incorporated into the VRAG in order to tabulate risks[ CITATION Has11 \l 1033 ]. The VRAG has been utilised pervasively in the detention settings for both male and female inmates in order to assess the likelihood of violence offence risk. Results provided with the VRAG methodology over time have shown that male inmates are more likely to produce accurate findings when compared to women inmates as per violent offence reoccurrence[ CITATION Has11 \l 1033 ]. Moreover, the VRAG method has been applied in various different ethnic settings as well that have proved its strength in predicting violent offence reoccurrence in both Europe and North America [ CITATION Hil10 \l 1033 ]. Validation attempts of the VRAG method have been tried in various different settings and have been validated for a number of different ethnic, lingual, social and cultural settings that lend credence to the belief that the VRAG method is applicable to most population samples [ CITATION Ros091 \l 1033 ]. In addition to the factors listed above, the VRAG is also applicable in the current case since Bleech is an adult and so measures such as Structured Assessment of Violence Risk for Youth (SAVRY) are not applicable. On the downside, VRAG suffers on two different counts. For one thing, VRAG is not intended as a standalone assessment method and must be complemented with other measures such as SORAG[ CITATION Har09 \l 1033 ]. In addition, VRAG provides a purely actuarial approach to assessment and leaves little room for case study based settings. Sexual Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG) The SORAG much like the VRAG depends on the PCL-R scoring system. In addition, the SORAG has been developed in order to assess the risk for sexual as well as violent recidivism in an offender. The SORAG is typically applied to previously convicted sexual offenders and is meant to provide a risk assessment for a specific period after release. In the current case, Bleech has been previously convicted of sexual abuse charges and is at risk for violence as well so the SORAG can be seen as a fitting assessment method. The SORAG also relies on the utilisation of clinical records in order to score in an actuarial fashion for the offender[ CITATION Faz12 \l 1033 ]. In the current case, Bleech is not only a repeat sexual and violence offender but also signals to the possibility of murdering someone at his next sexual offence in order to cover up the crime. The overwhelming tendency for violence mandates that the VRAG + SORAG combination is used so that violent impulses are assessed twice. The relative valid application of SORAG as a standalone assessment tool to measure future chance for risk demonstrates its efficacy in various ethnic and cultural settings [ CITATION Han091 \l 1033 ]. However, like the VRAG, the SORAG suffers from the internal defect of relying excessively on actuarial measures alone[ CITATION Har09 \l 1033 ]. Conclusion In light of the circumstances displayed by Richard Bleech, it would be advisable to utilise the VRAG in combination with the SORAG to assess the likelihood of Bleech reoffending once released into society. The VRAG would allow relatively valid assessment of whether Bleech would resort to violent measures in order to satisfy his impulses. On the other hand, the SORAG would allow the valid assessment of whether Bleech is susceptible to both sexual and violent offences once released back into society. References CITATION Lau12 \l 1033 : , (Laureate International Universities, 2012), CITATION Lau12 \l 1033 : , (Laureate International Universities, 2012), CITATION Has11 \l 1033 : , (Hastings, Shilpa, Tangney, & Stuewig, 2011), CITATION Hil10 \l 1033 : , (Hilton, Harris, & Rice, 2010), CITATION Ros091 \l 1033 : , (Rossegger, Urbaniok, Danielsson, & Endrass, 2009), CITATION Har09 \l 1033 : , (Hart, 2009), CITATION Faz12 \l 1033 : , (Fazel, Singh, Doll, & Grann, 2012), CITATION Han091 \l 1033 : , (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2009), Read More