FBI School Of Profiling
1
FBI AUTHORS
2
FBI AUTHORS
John Douglas
Robert Ressler
Roy Hazelwood
11 books combined/numerous
publications
3
JOHN
Background
DOUGLAS
Masters Industrial Psychology
Joined FBI in 1970
Attended 2 week hostage negotiation
course
Howard Teten & Pat Mullany
4
JOHN DOUGLAS
Chief of the operational side of the BSU,
ISU
FBI National Academy Instructor
Road Schools w/ Ressler
Prison Study
5
ROBERT RESSLER
Army Chief of CID unit
Masters Police Administration
FBI National Academy Instructor
Road Schools w/ Douglas
Criminal Personality Research Project
6
ROBERT RESSLER
VICAP
7
ROY HAZELWOOD
22 years in FBI
16 years spent in the BSU
Authored work on Autoerotic fatalities
Rapists Typologies & Lust Murder
8
FBI MODEL OF PROFILING
Question 2 OFFENDERS
2 typologies Organized/Disorganized
Organized- is one appears to plan his
murders in a conscious manner and
who displays control of the victim at the
crime scene
Disorganized- less consciously aware of
a plan and his crime scenes display
haphazard behavior. 9
ORGANIZATIONAL DIFFERENCES
Body position symbolic Body position to degrade
Crime nocturnal/routine Crimes occur anytime
Spontaneous Offense premeditated
Sexual experimentation Sexual experimentation
when victim dead when victim alive
Minimal attempt to conceal Conceals bodies
Minimal media interests Follows crime in media
Victims selected randomly Offender hunts victims
Minimal birth order status High birth order status
Disciplined harshly as child Inconsistent discipline
Minimal use of alcohol Use of alcohol in crime
10
SUB-CATEGORY OF RAPISTS
Power reassurance rapists
Power assertive rapists
Anger Retaliatory Rapists
Anger Excitation Rapists
11
FBI MODEL CONSTRUCTION
Question 3
Ann Burgess obtained a 400,000 dollar
grant from the National Institute of
Justice (NIJ)
Expected to take up 3 to 4 years
Bringing in the criminal investigative
analysis to the modern age
12
APPROACH TO STUDY
Qualitative & Quantitative
13
QUALITATIVE OBJECTIVES
Describe characteristics of the study
population of murderers
The manner in which they committed their
crimes and the crime scenes
14
QUANTITATIVE OBJECTIVES
Test using statistical procedures,
whether there are significant behavioral
differences at the crime scene between
crimes committed by organized sexual
murderers and those committed by
disorganized sexual murderers.
Identify variables or specific
characteristics, which may be useful to
profile sexual murders and for which
organized and disorganized sexual
murderers differ statistically. 15
FBI STUDY
Examined 36 convicted incarcerated
sexual murderers
Largest study known
All murderers had exhausted appeals
All cases available for review
16
FBI STUDY
7 convicted of single homicide
29 convicted of multiple homicide
Not a random sample
118 victims (primarily women)
17
DATA COLLECTION
1979 and 1983 performed by agents
form the BSU
Data collected from 2 sources
1) Official records
2) Interviews with offenders
18
DEFINITIONS
Sexual Homicide: evidence that indicate the
murder was sexual in nature
Crime Scene Characteristics: physical
evidence found at crime scene that reveal
behavioral traits
Examples (Use of restraints, manner of death,
depersonalization of victim, possible staging,
and amount of physical evidence at the crime
scene)
Profile Characteristics: variables that identify
the offender as an individual and together
form a composite picture of the suspect
19
CONTENTS of a PROFILE
Appearance/grooming
Residence in relation to the crime scene
Vehicle
Socio-economic status
Sexual Adjustment
Type of Sexual perversion
Prior Criminal Record
Motive
20
Profiling Methodologies
Question 4
The first serious and pseudo-systematic
attempt to establish profiling… as an
investigative tool based on offender
behavioral characteristics interpreted
from a crime scene.
Novel methodological approach… to
interpret crime scenes, police reports,
and autopsy reports to glean useful
information about specific offender
characteristics.
21
Profiles have shown success in capturing
murderers and rapists as well as giving
direction to on-going investigations,
narrowing suspect lists, and providing
interrogation suggestions when dealing
with a known suspect.
Extensive criticisms of the model are rife
and have resulted in the model catalyzing
an effort by true empiricists to question
and extensively research the topic in an
attempt to achieve a systematized method
via the use of statistical analysis.
22
Negative aspects of the FBI profiling
Question 5
First of all the number of serial murders
are statistically extremely rare. Second,
these were convicted murders, what about
non-convicted ‘successful’ murders, there
is a good chance that the information
would be different. Third, the study was
based on Americans, what about other
countries? Could we learn more from other
countries data and offenders? Lastly, with
only 36 interviews for a major
classification, lacks validity and reliability,
and makes their study questionable.
23
This relies heavily on the offender to
speak the truth or to speak at all.
What if the offenders is selective in
what they remember and perhaps
even more selective in what they
choose to tell ‘researchers’ from the
FBI. One might argue that serial
killers, whom are classified as
psychopaths or as having antisocial
personality disorder, are the least
suitable candidates for this type of
research.
24
Many offenders display features of
both organized and disorganized
behavior. For example the rapist’s
first attempt may be ‘disorganized’
but his enjoyment of the act and
since he went undetected may
influence him to commit a more well
planned crime.
25
A great deal of criticism of the FBI’s work
stemmed from the fact that this approach
was not objective or scientific. When the
technique is applied in the field a great
deal of subjective interpretation crept in.
Thus two profiles might examine the same
crime scene yet put a different
interpretation on the clues contained
therein. (Canter and Alison 1999b:6) The
FBI examination of content reveals a
severe lack in the accounts of any
systematic procedures. There are no
references to any commonly accepted
psychological principles, pathological or
social.
26
VALIDITY/RELIABILITY OF
FBI SCHOOL OF PROFILING
Question 6
Validity and Reliability Analysis of
The FBI School of Profiling Plagued
by the Virgin Mary in a Tortilla
Syndrome: The problem faced by a
symbolic-pattern seeking species,
homo sapiens, in a non-symbolic,
asymmetrical universe
27
Validity: Does Scale Truly Say How Fat You
Are? Reliability: Does Scale Consistently
Give Same Weight?
Common Sense Definition: Extent to which
FBI style profiling results in the investigative
identification, criminal apprehension,
successful prosecution and post-
incarceration disposition of serial offenders,
Which can be replicated or generate
verifiable or falsifiable propositions and aid
third party law enforcement activities
28
Investigative V&R:
1. Profiler Ambivalence & Investigative
Distancing
2. Inconsistent Results applying Identical
Principles (Dahmler/Ramsey)
3. Post-Facto
Justifications/Rationalizations of System
(Douglas: Most Dangerous Game case in
Alaska)
4. Profile has never been the sin qua non of
a successful criminal investigation
29
Research V&R:
1. Fundamental Conflict between deductive
investigative procedures and inductive
empirical process. FBI Profiler Linnaean
indifference to modern scientific method
2. Peer Review of investigative tool problematic
and publication in professional literature that is
concerned in certainty of results and focused
more upon correlation than causation between
criminal behaviors and offender characteristics
3. Troubling collapse of distinction between
Academic and popular literature into true crime
singularity, Celebrity driven nature of profiling
with concomitant
30
Legal V&R = Admissibility:
New York: Frye Standard: learned
census or relevant field
Federal/Daubert Standard: courts as
gatekeepers of good science
31
Motivational Analysis:
Detecting the likely motive of an
offense by behavioral evaluation
of evidence created at the crime
scene. Split Admissibility: Pro:
(Cal. App), (Colo. 2002), Ala.
Crim App. 1999) Con: (Ohio
App.), (Tenn Crim. App)
32
Linkage Analysis:
Creates exception to
evidentiary “other crimes”
prohibition by establishing
defendant’s identity as
offender Pro: (Ca. 1995),
(Wash. 1994) (La. 1993) Con:
(N.J.), (Or. App. 1999).
33
What is still needed?
Empirical studies published on the two
subtypes of serial offenders
Differentiation of offenders as an aspect
of general personality differences and
other aspects of individual differences
A theoretical basis
Research pertaining to its validity
34