Forensic Psychology

• The top down approach was introdued by

  The USA, developed by the FBI in the 1970s
• Offender profiling

  a behavioural and analytical tool used when trying to find suspects. aims to predict probable characteristics
• how is offender profiling categorised?

  • gathered data by in depth interviews w/ 36 sexually motivated serial killers
  • match whats known between crime and offender
  • classify them within categories
• organised charateristics


  • skilled, professional occupational
  • high degree of control
  • Socially and sexually competent
  • usually married and have children
• disorganised characteristics


  • below average intelligence
  • little evidence of planning offence
  • socially incompetent
  • tend to live alone and close to where offence took place
• stages of top down

  1. data assimlation
  2. crime scene classificaion
  3. crime reconstruction
  4. profile generation
• data assimilation


  info gathered from crime scene out what happened - look at photos of scene, forensic evidence, police reports etc.
• crime scene classification


  decision is made regarding whether criminal appears to be organised or disorganised
• strengths of top down approach

  • still used today in the USA
  • Evidence for organise offender e.g Ted Bundy
• weaknesses of top-down approach

  • only applies to certain crimes such as rape, arson, cult killing
  • limited approach for identifying a criminal
  • based on outdated models of personality driven by dispositional traits rather than external forces
• top down approach can be used for other crimes such as burglary

  Meketa (2017) reports that using a top down approach has led to an 85% crime rise in solved cases in the USA (wider application)
• evidence for top down doesnt support ‘disorganised offender’


  Canter (2004)

  • Analysed 100 murders in the USA
  • Examined the murders using 39 characteristics thought to be of a organised and disorganised killers
  • Evidence was found for an organised killer but not a disorganised killer
• bottomup profiling (David Canter) —> British Approach


  Profile is generated by making inferences from systematic analysis of evidence at the crime scene using knowledge of psychological theories and statistical analysis & is Data-driven

  Two types:

  1. Investigative psychology
  2. Geographical profiling
• Investigative psychology

  1. Interpersonal coherence
  2. Significane of time and place
  3. Criminal characteristics
  4. Criminal career
  5. Forensic awareness
• john duffy


  •Canter helped catch John Duffy the railway rapist(24 sexual attacks, 3 murders near railway stations in North London)

  •Canter analysed geographical information from crime scenes and combined this with details of similar attacks in the past

  •Canter drew up the profile of the offender which was very similar to Duffy
• Geographical profiling

  Rossmo (1997)

  based on the principle of spatial consistency – that an offenders operational base and future offences are linked.

  • Crime mapping

  is used to link local crime statistics, local transport and the geographical spread to make inferences about the likely home or operational base, workplace and social hangouts of the offender.

  • The assumption is that serial killers will restrict their ‘work’ to areas they are familiar with
• Circle theory (rla: yorkshire ripper)


  People operate within a limited spatial mind set that creates imagined boundaries in which crimes are likely to be committed.  

  The Marauder: the offender operates in close proximity to their home base.

  The Commuters: the offender is likely to have travelled a distance away from their usual residence.
• Evidnce supports investigative psychology

  Canter (1990)

  •Content analysis of 66 sexual assault cases

  •Several characteristics were identified as common in most cases such as use of impersonal language

  •Can lead to an understanding of how an offender’s behaviour may change over a series of offences
• evidence supports geographical profiling

  Canter (2001)

  •Collected information from 120 murder cases involving serial killers in the USA

  •Location of each body disposal site was in a different direction from the previous

  •Effect was more noticeable when the offender travelled short distances 
• scientific basis

  •More objective then the top-down approach

  •Less reliance on hunches

  •Uses geographical, biographical and psychological data
• mixed results for profiling (Copson 1995)


  Surveyed 48 police forces

  Found that the advice provided by the profiler was judged useful in 83% of cases

  But in only 3% did it lead to accurate identification of the offender
• Evaluation sheet


  -

  
• Similarities between the top-down and bottom-up approaches:

  • Both are used to narrow the field of suspects.
  • They both assume that there is a pattern in an offender's behaviour, which is not always the case.
  • Both have captured the public's imagination.
• ATAVISTIC FORM: 


  An explanation for criminal behaviour suggesting that criminals have an innate personality is a throwback to primate forms – determined by their physiological makeup.
• Lombroso said that offenders possess similar characteristic to lower primates and this could explain their criminality.
• Lombroso measured people’s height, weight, the span of their arms, the average height of their body while seated, the sizes of their hands, necks, thighs, legs, and feet, their eye color etc.
• atavistic features:


  • criminals : strong jaw, high scheekbones, dark skin extra toes, nipples and fingers
  • murders: bloodshot eyes, curly hair and long ears
  • sexual devinats: glinting eyes & swollen lips
  • fraudsters: thin and reddy lips
• somatypes


  Kretschmer (1921) studied 4,000 criminals and suggested that criminals fall into four somatotypes which have connotations with various crimes:

  
  

  1.Leptosome – tall and thin petty thieves

  2.Athletic – tall and muscular (crimes of violence)

  3.Pyknic – short and fat (crimes of deception and violence)

  4.Dysplastic or mixed (More than one type of crime, or

  Crimes against morality (e.g. prostitution).
• Strengths:

  •Lombroso’s work has legacy

  •He changed the face of how crime should be studied

  •He moved the study of crime into a more scientific discipline rather than offenders being judged as weak and wicked

  •His work has also been credited for the movement of offender profiling as he tried to describe why people commit different crimes
• DeLisi (2012)


  points out lombrosos racist undertones of his work. Many features of atavistic (curly hair, dark skin) are mor commonly found in peoplewth Arican descent. His work is more subjective han objective
• Contradictory evidence (Goring 1913)

  •Looked at 3000 offenders and 3000 non offenders

  •He found no evidence that offenders are a distinct group with unusual facial and cranial characteristics

  •Therefore, challening he idea that criminals are sub species.
• Poor control

  •Lombroso’s research was poorly controlled

  •He did not have two groups (offenders and non-offenders)

  •Therefore, how scientific is his research?
• Gender bias


  Lombroso's ideas about women were insensttive because he didn't study women directly. Lombroso believed that women were less evolved than men. They were naturally jealous and insensitive to pain but they were also passive, low in intelligence and had a maternal instinct - all of which neutralised their negative traits and meant they were less likely to be criminals.
• Support for somatypes


  Gleuck and Gleuck (1970) found that 60% of delinquents were mesomorphs, roughly equivalent to the athletic type. This supports the notion of innate criminal types identified by their physical features.
• Genetic explanations for offending behaviour

  • Christiansen (1977) studied 3500 twins in Denmark and found concordance rates for offending of 35% MZ twins and 13% for DZ twins.
  • Crowe (1972) looked at adopted children whose biological mother had a criminal record. 50% of the children were at risk of a criminal record by the age of 18 compared to 5% whose mother did not have a criminal record.
• Diathesis stress model


  Considering genetics and offending behaviour: Criminal behaviour may be genetically/biologically predisposed but is triggered by environmental factors.

  For example, being raised in a dysfunctional environment or having criminal role models
• Candidate genes


  Tiihonen (2014) analysed over 900 offenders and revealed abnormalities on two genes that may be associated with violent crime

  MAOA gene - which controls dopamine and serotonin in the brain. High levels are associated with aggressive behaviour.

  2. CDH13 gene – which regulates neural pathways and contributes to maintaining excitatory and inhibitory synapses. High levels also found in APD.

  ●

  HOWEVER, this research is in its infancy and has, so far, not be replicated.
• Weakness : issues with twin studies

  •It’s assumed by researchers that twins share the same environment as they’re brought up with each other

  •But this shared environment may apply more to MZ twins then DZ twins

  •This is because MZ twins look a like and tend to be treated more similarly

  The concordance rates could be due to the fact they’re treated more similarly in MZ twins compared to DZ
• Support for diathesis stress model

  Mednick (1984) studied 13,000 Danish adoptees.

  •Neither biological nor adoptive parents had criminal convictions.

  •The percentage of adoptees that did was 13.5% (this is high)

  •The figure rose to 20% when either biological or adoptive parents had convictions and 24.5% when both adoptive and biological parents had criminal convictions.

  •

  •This shows that GI plays an important role in offending behaviour but the environment also clearly has a an influence.
• Neural explanation of offending behaviour

  diagnosis of APD - Antisocial Persoality Disorder

  APD is associated with reduced emotional responses, a lack of empathy for feelings of others, and is a condition that characteristics many convicted criminals. (pre frontal lobe)