please respond to the following 2 classmates with 250 words each, 1 reference and a BIBLICAL VIEWPOINT with a cited scripture.
Original Post (do not respond to this post just the classmates) : Topic: Forensic Identification, Profiling, and Predicting Violent Behaviors
Thread: In this discussion please address whether criminal profiling is effective.
Please specify cases in which profiling was effective or when it misled an investigation.
Make sure to include a discussion on the benefits and drawbacks of criminal profiling.
Include identification of the attributes of a successful criminal profiler and whether mental health professionals make good profilers.
1) Smith- Topic: Forensic Identification, Profiling, and Predicting Violent Behaviors
Include a discussion on the benefits and drawbacks of criminal profiling.
The Benefits of Criminal Profiling
Kocsis et al. (2004) state that the benefits of criminal profiling are that it can help law enforcement b saving time and resources by predicting behaviors and patterns from offenders. Criminal profiling also affords another option when there is little to no evidence at the crime scene.
The Drawbacks of Criminal Profiling
The drawbacks of criminal profiling, as stated by Kocsis et al. (2004), are the following: (1) Educated assumptions, (2) Adds information to a profiler and is not based on facts, (3) Relies on facts about a crime scene that is not factual, (4) Based on consistency, (5) Methods are limited, and (6) would sometimes employ unclear language
Identification and attributes of a successful criminal profiler
According to Petherick et al. (2012), the attributes of a successful criminal profiler include (1) critical thinking using logic and reasoning; (2) strong intuition and analytical skills; (3) emotional detachment; (4) understanding of criminal minds and psychology; (5) active listening with the ability to understand what is and isn’t said; (6) being able to offer reconstruction without evidence; (7) psychological testimony without foundation; and (8) a sympathetic/pro-law enforcement outlook.
A case in which profiling misled an investigation – A Case of Profiling Gone Wrong
In People v. Jennings (2011), Raymond Lee Jennings was convicted of the murder of Michelle O’Keefe in a Palmdale, California, parking lot where Jennings worked as a security guard. In 2000, Michelle O’Keefe, age 18 and a college student, died after bullets tore through her head and neck while sitting in her blue Mustang in a desolate park and ride that security officers patrolled.
A Los Angeles Times article entitled “How an ex-FBI profiler helped put an innocent man to prison” states not only did Jennings did not have a criminal record, but he served in Iraq with the National Guard. On the day of the murder, Jennings was with his friend distributing Christian music. Consequently, Jennings was arrested in 2005 even though there was no evidence found, i.e., blood or gunpowder, nor was any blood on his uniform. The victim had a male’s DNA under her fingernails, and it did not match his DNA.
A retired FBI profiler named “Safarik” helped to convict Jennings of the killing of Michelle O’Keefe. Safarik was retiring from the FBI but decided to look into the six-year-old murder case of O’Keefe before doing so. Safarik studied crime scene evidence, writing offender profiles in serial killing, sexual assault, and stalking cases for over a decade in Quantico, Virginia. Safarik testified in all three stages of the trial and was also the final witness for the prosecution. He explained to jurors that he had evaluated or studied approximately 4,000 crime scenes, had written numerous books and articles, and the cases were complex. He also expressed that “since he had reviewed many cases, seeing similarities in behavioral patterns” becomes “easy.”
Jennings maintained his innocence, but in 2010, he received a 40-to-life sentence in prison. At the urging of Jenning’s attorney, Mr. Ehrlich, the district attorney’s conviction review unit, began reexamining the case. By June 2016, prosecutors have convinced someone other than Jennings killed O’Keefe and requested that the judge release him from prison.
Two months later, Safarik withdrew his analysis, telling the court that he had relied on information from an incomplete investigation by L.A. County sheriff’s detectives. Had he known about its shortcomings, he wrote, “I would not have been able to formulate a reliable opinion.” Passes the buck
Jennings spent a decade in prison for a crime he did not comment on and was convicted on false criminal profiling evidence as a result.
Jennings was exonerated on these contributing factors: False or Misleading Forensic Evidence and Inadequate Legal Defense. In 2017, Jennings was awarded $538,440 from the State of California in compensation.
Word Count: 601
References
Kocsis, R.N. & Heller, G.Z. (2004). Believing is seeing II. Beliefs and perceptions of criminal psychological profiles. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol, 48(3), 313–329.
Los Angeles Times (2017) How an ex-FBI profiler helped put an innocent man behind bars. https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-profiler-wrongful-conviction-20170720-htmlstory.html
The People v. Raymond Lee Jennings (2011). California Court of Appeal December 18, 2011; P. v. Jennings CA2/8. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS. California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been approved for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. https://www.anylaw.com/case/the-people-v-raymond-lee-jennings/california-court-of-appeal/12-19-2011/h6QkSGYBTlTomsSBNHLm
Wayne A. Petherick, Brent E. Turvey, in Criminal Profiling (Fourth Edition), 2012
:2) Harris: There are many important aspects to the criminal justice system, but perhaps one of the newest and advanced aspects is criminal profiling. This is an investigative approach used by law enforcement in which they utilize details and evidence of a crime scene to identify a potential suspect (Costanzo & Krauss, 2018). This is used to link cases of similarity that may have been committed by the same perpetrator to apprehend that individual. It is also used to identify potential suspects, based on the similarities of other offenders’ crimes. Many offenders, especially serial killers, are prone to patterns and will likely repeat their crimes the same way each time. The effectiveness of criminal profiling can be argued from both ends. On one end, the people tasked with criminal profiling basically think as if they are professional killers. They analyze all of the evidence, research, and data there is on criminals and practically become them in their own mind. This gives an enormous amount of insight when it comes to thinking like a criminal and ways in which to catch them at their own game. However, there are also controversies surrounding the validity of criminal profiling. As research explains, criminal profiling is a forensic technique that allows the prediction of behavior, demographic characteristics, and personality patterns and traits from people who commit crimes (Ribeiro & Bento de Matos Soeira, 2021). This technique allows for better insight on what types of individuals will commit certain types of crimes, and while it has increasingly been used over the years, people are still not convinced that this is a valid method of profiling suspects (Ribeiro & Bento de Matos Soeira, 2021). In fact, research shows that the controversial reputation of criminal profiling is due to the low success rates in relation to the field work of offender profiling (Kappel, 2020). While criminal profiling has been used to catch some of the most dangerous criminals, it has not been successfully used to apprehend all criminals. It is important to note, however, that there is no proper way to assess the success of criminal profiling (Kappel, 2020). While there is much controversy surrounding the effectiveness of criminal profiling, this could very well be because of how newly developed the technique is.
Criminal profiling has many disparagers, but also many supporters. The drawbacks to criminal profiling is that the information in the profile may not be based on facts but more so past crimes. There is also a lot of room for interpretation, profiling relies on the facts of the crime scene that may not be true, it’s based on consistency which is not always accurate, and it is very specialized in that only the profiler knows what to look for so there is no one to question his or her decisions. The benefits to criminal profiling is that it can assist law enforcement when a case is at a standstill. It can also save time and money by predicting the behaviors and patterns of the offender to help prevent and catch them before too many crimes are committed by that offender. Criminal profiling also gives law enforcement another option when there is a lack of evidence at the crime scene. Bringing in these behavioral analysts who are trained on criminal behavior can be very beneficial and successful in that it forms a theory when there is no other evidence to go off of. While this form of criminal profiling began in the 1940s, it was not formalized until the 1970s when serial killers really became prevalent. Serial criminals are difficult to catch due to their high intelligence and disconnect from law enforcement, among other attributes, and that was the purpose of creating profilers. Criminal profiling was successfully used on at least four well known criminals which are: John Joubert, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer and Edmund Kemper (Chase, 2018). By building each one of their psychological profiles, police were able to locate and apprehend these individuals. This shows that even though the method may not be effective every time, there are still success stories when using criminal profilers, and big ones at that.
Agent Robert Ressler, and his colleague John Douglas, were the men that developed psychological profiling at the FBI in the Behavioral Science, now Behavioral Analysis Unit in 1978. He coined the term “serial killer” and took credit for some of the most infamous serial killer arrests in American history. The attributes of a successful criminal profiler are having strong intuition and analytical abilities, being able to emotionally detach from the situation, an unbelievable ability to understand the criminal mind and psychology, be an active listener who can read body language and interpret behavior, be a critical thinker, remain unbiased and have a passion for your work. I do believe mental health professionals would make good profilers, to an extent, because they do have a good understanding of mental illness and de-escalation skills. While they are trained to sympathize with unexplained behavior, and while many serial killers’ psychological profiles consist of mental illness, there are other attributes that they would need to have alongside that training. Mental health professionals are trained to provide a therapeutic environment, but they also take an oath to report any dangerous behavior. Profilers’ jobs are to create a profile on what police should be looking for, and then help prevent their future victims from being harmed while also looking for them. Mental health professionals would be good at knowing what to look for and what attributes the criminal may have. The only downfall to using a mental health professional as a criminal profiler is that they have not been trained on the criminology aspect, and may be too sympathetic towards the criminal. However, if they were trained to see them as criminals and utilize their knowledge of mental illness to create such profiles, then they would be beneficial profilers to use in law enforcement.
References
Chase, J. (2018, February 3). FBI Profiling of Serial Killers: 3 Notorious Cases. Author Jennifer
Chase.
Costanzo, M., & Krauss, D. (2018). Forensic and Legal Psychology: Psychological Science
Applied to Law, 3rd ed. Worth Publishers, Inc. ISBN: 9781319060312.
Kappel, C. (2020). What is criminal profiling anno 2020: A short communication. Social
Behavior Research and Practice, 5(1), 19-22.
Ribeiro, R. A. B. & Bento de Matos Soeiro, B. (2021). Analysis of criminal profiling validity:
Underlying problems and future directions. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,
74.
0 comments