Geographic Profiling of Serial Offenders

Geographic Profiling of back-to-back offendersAs psychological profiling seems to take in all the attention with television shows that feature FBI profilers, one should be reminded that in that location is an otherwise method of reprehensible profiling that, while less glamorous, seems to endure a very high ground level of reliability. The other method is geographical profiling that had it beginnings in a London wickedness spree involving a serial rapist. In these cases occurring in the mid-1990s, stumped police called in David Canter, Professor of psychological science at the University of Surrey to assist. After analyzing crime data superimposed over a map, Professor Canter made the suggestion that the perpetrator was to be instal in a very specific geographic rural area found upon these furloughs of crime (Wilson 2002, pp. 14-16).Subsequent retroactive studies catch confirmed a twist of precepts regarding the proposition that one can predict the composition of crimi nals from com sayerized algorithms that use more often than not one of two authorise heuristic program methods. In fact, of the area delimitate by a assay algorithm that states that is inclusive of a class defined by the two furthermost crime scenes, fully 51% of the serial rapist offenders lived within the first 5% of the defined area and an overwhelming lived within 87% of the first 25% of the defined search area (Canter, Coffey, Huntley, Missen 2000, p. 457). This algorithm holds regardless of the crime as indicated by the display panel below (Canter, et al 2000, p. 458)In addition to the circle algorithm depict above, another method employ is the Decay method with analyzes data from the assurance that perpetrators commit crimes near where they live. This method is subjectd upon the idea that crimes decay as the distance to the criminals residence decrease, in effect, creating something of a relent zone immediately surrounding their house (Snook, Taylor, Bennell 200 4, p. 107 Canter, Coffey, Huntley, Missen 2000, pp. 459-460).Somewhat against these two algorithms are the approximately 10% of perpetrators that are labeled as commuters and do not live near the crime scene (Snook, Taylor, Bennell 2004, p. 117). Nevertheless, in these cases as in the easier to classify marauder-type crimes, in that location is the idea that criminals operate from a base of familiarity such as a home or workplace or other personally significant locale or the route that connects them. eon focussinging on geography, this brings into the consideration the important psychological construct of kind maps in that the location must hit significance from the perspective of the perpetrator it need not be an actual geographic landmark to have psychological significance that plays out geo-centrically (Holmes Holmes 1996, p. 152). As such it is no force that both methods are reliable and that there is a significant degree of overlap in the two archetype predictions.Of greater interests to both researchers and jurisprudence enforcement are serious crimes such as murder, rape, arson and burglary. While there is likely a logical high correlation between other petty crimes such as speeding tickets or parking violations receivable to the correlates of where one most spends time is of course most likely a location where there is a high likelihood of violation. With regards to the applicability of the model with regards to even serious crimes, the model is based upon serial crimes, that is, a perpetrator who does so multiple times. Research suggests that as criminals gain experience there is a statistically significant correlation with the distance from home the criminal is (Snook 2004, p. 53). Further, in regards to burglary, there is the additional significant correlation of the nurture of the crime with the distance traveled to commit the crime (Snook 2004, p. 55). While difficult to put a value on personal crimes, this finding may publish to cr imes such as murder, arson or rape in which it is likely that victims could have some relative value to the criminal, similar to the monetary value gained from burglary. Such a concept may partially explain that, as these types of criminal gain experience, they tend to venture out further from their base as they commit additional predatory crimes. In terms of geographical profiling and the case in which an investigator believes that a number of crimes have been committed by a single person, this has special significance as it can serve to focus the hunt for the offender in the neighborhood of the first few crimes (Holmes Holmes 1996, p. 155).Of particular interest is that these methods can be utilized without the computer or complex mathematical algorithms. Studies indicated that, in lieu of age or experience or gut feelings, incorporating these methods simply as heuristic models whose basic precepts can be taught in a class, students can or so equal the computerized version (S nook, Canter, Bennel 2002, pp. 116-117).Though all law enforcement operates with the goal of contracting the perpetrator, authorities do not have unlimited resources of time or finances to investigate all leads thoroughly. Geographical profiling also serves to focus the attention and other resources of an investigative department into the area in which validated statistics indicate there is is a pay-off. By using these methods, search cost can be minimized and offender can be comprehended faster, ideally prior to the accumulation of an additional victim that shows up as a simply data point on a geographic profile (Canter, Coffey, Huntley, Missen 2000, pp. 459-460).Works ConsultedCanter, D., T. Coffey, M. Huntley, C. Missen. (2000). Predicting Serial Killers Home Base Using a Decision Support System. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, (16), 4, pp. 457-478.Holmes, R. S. Holmes. (1996). Profiling rough Crimes An Investigative Tool, 2nd Edition. Sage Publications Thousand Oaks, California.Snook, B., P. Taylor, C. Bennell. (2004). Geographic Profiling The Fast, frugal and Accurate Way. Applied Cognitive Psychology, (18), pp. 105-121.Snook, B., D. Canter, C. Bennel. (2002). Predicting the Home Location of Serial Offenders A Preliminary Comparison of the Accuracy of Human Judges with a Geographic Profiling System. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, (20), pp. 109-118.Snook, B. (2004). Individual Differences in outmatch Traveled by Serial Burglars. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, (1), pp. 53-66.Wilson, J. (2002, November). Mapping Murder. Geographical, (74), pp. 14-17.