Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
28 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
what is offender profiling |
also known as crime scene analysis top down approach - because uses old data FBIs inferred personality and behavioural traits of an offender by a detailed analysis of the way she committed a crime |
|
|
The typology approach |
Two distinct types 1. Organised 2. Disorangised Act as templates for FBIS Interview 36 serial killers - Ted Bundy Then came up with investigative analysis of different types of behaviours |
|
|
Organised offender |
1. evidence of planing 2. victim is a stranger 3. removes weapon from scene 4. high IQ 5. good social skills 6. body is hidden 7. living with partner |
|
|
Disorganized offender |
victim is sometimes know little conversation leaves evidence body left at crime scene low IQ lives alone and close to scene |
|
|
Four stages of FBI profile |
1. Data assimilation - proilier views evidence 2. crime scene classification - organised/dis 3. crime scene reconstruction - sequence of events, behaviour of victims 4. Profile generation - Physical characteristics |
|
|
one strength of top down approach |
P - widely used E- e.g. organised/disorganised distinction is widely used of pro investigators E- Because according to crime classification, the typology can be applied to all sexually motivated murders E- strength because shows approach is useful in crime scenes |
|
|
one limitation of top down approach |
P- challenging evidence E- e.g. Canter assessed 100 murders. he found a subset of characteristics was found to be common in most serial killers. e,g, the body body in a spot. E- means organised appears to be an identifiable criminal type E - shows approach is invalid |
|
|
one limitation of top down approach |
P- too simplistic E- because criminal type does not mean that it fits into 'dis/organised' categories, may overlap E- e.g. some murder scenes show signs of the body however, little evidence E- therefore it is flawed |
|
|
one limitation of top down approach |
P - developed from interviews E- self report is inaccurate E - e.g. they may lie due to social desirability and not wanting to commit to the crime E - invalid |
|
|
the bottom up approach |
- uses systematic analysis of crime to determine personality and behaviour of offender - scientific principles - Psychological theory |
|
|
Investigative psychology |
developed by Canter - bottom up approach = matched details from the crime scene with statistical analysis of offenders patterns - based on psychological theory |
|
|
3 important features of bottom up approach |
1. Interpersonal coherence 2. Forensic awareness 3. Smallest |
|
|
Interpersonal coherence |
- people are consistent with behaviour, therefore links with elements of crime and how they behave in everyday life - e.g. a rapist who dominates and humiliates his victim might help police understand how he relates to women in life |
|
|
forensic awareness |
certain behaviours may reveal a certain awareness of particular police techniques and past experiences e.g. a rapist who hides their DNA may also have a history of burglary |
|
|
smallest |
data about crime scene and offender characteristics are correlated (common connections are identified) |
|
|
Geographical psychology |
Bottom up approach = location of crime to home base of offender |
|
|
Assumption of Geographical psychology |
- Most offenders like to operate in areas they know well. - Narrows down the search of point of origin of offender |
|
|
2 types of offender |
1. Mauraders - offenders home is in area they commited the crime 2. Commuter - the offender travels to different area and commits the crime |
|
|
what does David canter claim |
people store information about their lives and experiences in schemas/mental maps |
|
|
what does David Canter suggest |
Location and detail of crime scenes can be used to make judgements about where the offender is based and their interests/employment |
|
|
evidence from case studies |
John Duffy - - raped women aged 15-32 at railway stations in London - canter placed all scenes on a map, allowing him to see where the rapist may be John Duffy was a Maurder |
|
|
:) and :( of John Duffy case study |
:) useful because profiling proved successful due to canter finding Duffy :( Only one male was studied :( Lack of validity because Canter didn't predict there was an accomplice |
|
|
Evidence to support geographical profiling |
Lundrigan and Canter AIM - investigate the spatial behaviour of 120 serial killer in USA Method - info from solved murder cases involving serial killers was located. for each offender the distances between offenders home and body disposal sites were analysed Results - 1. Homes were in the centre of the pattern 2. Location of each disposal site was in a different direction to the previous disposal site |
|
|
One strength of the bottom up approach |
P - strength = evidence to support investigative profiling E - E.g. Canter and Heritage used smallest space analysis technique to correlate patterns of behaviour among 66 sexual assault cases. Found that several characteristics were identified as common in most cases E - means that we can establish if 2 or more offences are committed by the same person E - strength because it supports the usefulness of investigative psychology and shows how statistical techniques can be applied |
|
|
One strength of the bottom up approach |
P- useful for all types of offences E - this is because small space analysis can be used on all types of offences e.g. burglary E - top down approach only for sexual offences E - strength because it shows the bottom up approach may be more useful method of profiling |
|
|
One strength of the bottom up approach |
P- grounded psychological theory E - means that it is more objective and scientific than top down (hunches) E - more valid use of profiling |
|
|
One strength of the bottom up approach |
P - useful in real life E - e.g. John duffy was a railway rapist, canter located all crimes on a map and noted that he would live locally in Kilburn E - it gives specific details of offence. theerfore easy to see crimes are linked due to a consistency E - strength because it shows the principles of the bottom up approach are useful |
|
|
One limitation of the bottom up approach |
P - there has been some failures using the bottom up approach E - e.g. the case of Rachel Nickell was led to the wrongful identification of Colin Stagg E - this is because stagg walked his dog on the area where she was murdered and fitted the description E - limitation because doesn't always draw up an accurate profile |
