During the 1970's, the US top-down approach was developed by the FBI's _________________
Behavioural Psychology Unit
Behavioural Science Unit
Scientific Behaviour Unit
As well as studying the family backgrounds, personalities and motives of serial killers with sexual aspects to their crimes, the FBI also did what?
Conducted interviews with 28 convicted rapists.
Conducted observations of killers in the dark.
Conducted interviews with 36 convicted murderers.
The US approach is a top-down approach because...
It focuses on crime types, and this is driven from above by the crime scene analysis.
It focuses on what the criminal likes to do in his spare time, like eat ice cream or rape dogs.
It focuses on crime scene information.
The UK approach assumes what?
Individuals aren't associated with the crime scene, as they try to disassociate themselves as much as possible from the crime.
That individuals are consistent within their behaviour, and so characteristics left at the crime scene will reflect their everyday lives.
Criminals have lower intelligence levels, and so they can be caught very easily through analysing the crime scene.
Data analysis is used within the British approach to identify what?
Statistically uncommon events, that on several occasions can be linked to each other.
How many detectives need to be working to catch this son of a bitch.
The possibility that the criminal is a man or a woman.
It is important to be forensically aware when using the bottom-up approach, what did Davies find that supported this idea?
That people guilty of rape were really horny during the court case.
That individuals who try to conceal their fingerprints when committing rape, were more likely to have previous convictions of burglary.
Individuals who try to conceal their semen in rape cases had previous convictions of verbal abuse to policemen.
Why is the British approach a bottom-up approach?
Because it focuses on how many criminals are guilty of the crime.
Because it is the least effective form of profiling, so it's trying to work it's way "up" the rankings.
Because it focuses on crime scene analysis and builds a profile from there.
The US approach has been criticised in that it far from guarantees a conviction, although what did Douglas find?
That although in most cases it rarely led to a conviction, in 77% of cases it helped focus the investigation.
That in 80% of cases the US approach guaranteed a conviction.
That criminals couldn't hide from helicopter search lights.
Canter criticised the US approach for being too simplistic, what research did he carry out to prove this?
Analysed evidence from 80 murders and found that no evidence was sufficient enough to classify any of them as organised.
Analysed evidence from 100 murders and found no distinct subsets of the organised/disorganised typography.
Analysed 60 rapes, and found no supporting evidence.
Unlike the US approach, the British approach has much evidence in the public domain to support its effectiveness, for example, what did House find using SSA (Smallest Space Analysis)?
The evidence provided by 300,000 rapes and murders showed how the way a criminal conceals certain evidence can effect the way they behave after the offence has taken place.
Different types of murder didn't matter, and they were all the same and should be treated as equally horrific.
That different types of rape could be identified by different characteristics left at the crime scene.
However, it has been questioned as to whether the British approach is effective, what did Britton find?
Observed CID chiefs in interviews and found that they thought profiling was a pile of shit.
Gave a set of questionnaires to CID chiefs and found that they thought that profiling was neither accurate nor contributed to arrests.
Gave a set of questionnaires to children and asked them to comment on whether the effectiveness of eye witness testimony interests them. They then tried to employ one of the children, as he showed exceptional spark and flare. The child accepted, but following that acceptance, was hit by a bus driven by a black man. Silly, silly black man.