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
 Crime nocturnal/routine
 Spontaneous
 Sexual experimentation
when victim dead
 Minimal attempt to conceal
 Minimal media interests
 Victims selected randomly
 Minimal birth order status
 Disciplined harshly as child
 Minimal use of alcohol
Body position to degrade
Crimes occur anytime
Offense premeditated
Sexual experimentation
when victim alive
Conceals bodies
Follows crime in media
Offender hunts victims
High birth order status
Inconsistent discipline
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