Is Geographic Profiling a Myth or Reality?

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Abstract
Introduction
Literature Review
Methodology, Data collection and analysis
Analysis
Conclusion
Works Cited

Abstract

The objective of this study is to conduct an academic review of geographic profiling theory and its application in criminal investigations pertaining to postal related crimes. Geographic profiling was originally developed as an investigative methodology tool for use in criminal investigations, especially for solving cases of serial crimes. This methodology has been adopted by law enforcement agencies to prioritize lists of suspects by using the location of crime scenes as the basis to identify the areas in which the criminal is most likely to dwell, commonly known as the “anchor point” or base of the suspect (Rossmo, 2000). The two primary concepts are: the ‘buffer Zone’, where criminals are considered less likely to commit crimes since these areas are in the immediate vicinity of their home. These areas are also known as the ‘anchor points’. The next is the distance decay concept that describes the idea that criminals commit fewer crimes as the distance from their anchor points increase (Rossmo, 2000). The techniques of geographic profiling can successfully be applied to those non-violent crimes like breaking and entering into mailboxes and the fraudulent use of information stolen from the mail. This study details the use of geographic profiling tool, a computerized system (Rigel) which is used to perform analysis of the crime sites to generate color-coded maps called ‘geo-profiles’ (Rossmo, 2000). This study examines and reports on the reported mail theft incidents in the city of Coquitlam and Port Coquitlam, British Columbia for the year of 2008. The data gathered has been evaluated and has been input into the Rigel system. The analysis generated by the Rigel system is applied to prioritize list of suspects to further provide investigative recommendations to the investigators involved in those unresolved criminal investigations.

Introduction

Geographic profiling theory is based on part of forensic psychology and environmental criminology. Geographic profiling in fact is an investigative methodology that makes use of the locations of an interconnected series of crimes to establish the most likely area of the criminal’s anchor point, commonly known as the residence of the offender (Rossmo, 2000). This method is generally applied to solve cases of serial murder, rape, arson, and robbery. However, the tool may be of use in solving single crimes such as auto theft and burglary; but the case must involve multiple scenes or other significant geographic characteristics (Rossmo, 2000). The basis of geographic profiling is the link between geographic crime site information and the known tendencies of serial criminals in their selection of a target victim and location (Rossmo, 2000). “The underlying principle is essentially an application of Tobler’s First Law of Geography, to the effect that all things are related, but closer things are more related than more distant things” (Harries & LeBeau, 2007) It is vitally important that the profiler takes two factors into consideration for applying this methodology in solving crimes:

“valid linkage analysis to determine that a set of crime sites belong to the same series;
valid geographic modeling of the travel distance to crime sites for a particular type of crime, criminal, and geographic area” (ERCI website).

Geographic profiling can be used as the basis for many investigative strategies, including a suspect and tip prioritization, address-based searches of police record systems, patrol saturation and surveillance, neighborhood canvasses and searches, DNA screening prioritization, Department of Motor Vehicle searches, postal/zip code prioritization and information request mail-outs (Rossmo, 2000). It is important to stress that geographic profiling does not solve cases by itself, but rather provides a method for collating the large volume of information typically generated in major crime investigations. Even more importantly, it is imperative to recognize that this methodology deals in probabilities and not in certainties; therefore, it must be deployed as an overall investigative strategy to locate the unknown criminal (Rossmo, 2000). This methodology does not have the capability to provide an “X” that marks the spot; instead, it provides an optimal search strategy” (Rossmo, 2000) to locate the anchor point of the criminal.

There are various options available for conducting criminal investigations and geographic profiling is one of those investigative tools and is best deployed in conjunction with other proactive investigative methods. Geographic crime patterns are clues that, when properly decoded, can be used to point in the direction of the offender (Rossmo, 2000). Geographic Profiling is a “process that predicts where a serial offender is most likely to initiate his or her operations” (Wilson and Maxwell, 2008). The real goal of this methodology is to help officers systematically prioritize the search area to reduce the time and effort they spend identifying and arresting an offender (Wilson & Maxwell, 2007).

Definition of Geographic Criminal Profiling

Geographic criminal profiling is commonly defined as a “collection of leads as an educated attempt to provide specific information about a certain type of suspect, and as a biographical sketch of behavioral patterns, trends, and tendencies” (Douglas, Ressler, Burgess, & Harman, 1986). Prior to the actual “profiler” concept psychologists and psychiatrists were the ones that used to give suggestions and recommendations to police on suspect profiles. The first profiling was carried out in England in the 1880s by Dr. Thomas Bond who completed the autopsy on one of Jack the Ripper’s victims and explained the actions of the Ripper at the scene of the crime (Petherick, 2007). The methodology found its use continued into World War II when psychiatrist Walter Langer completed a profile on Adolph Hitler and explained what Hitler’s actions would be if he was to be defeated (Petherick, 2007). Another notable example in the last century was the profile of “The Mad Bomber of New York conducted by psychiatrist James Brussels where he profiled the specific characteristics of the offender (Petherick, 2007).

According to M. Lyman in his book Criminal Investigation, the art and science of profiling branched out into several areas such as psychological profiling, hostage negotiation, terrorism profiling and use in courts, etc. (Lyman, 1999) When profiling science is used correctly it can be a helpful tool for investigators, in particular, for crimes of interpersonal violence between strangers such as serial crimes, robbery and break and enters.

Scope of the Problem

‘Mail and Identity Theft’ related crime is becoming a serious and growing concern throughout the Vancouver Lower Mainland and the Province of British Columbia. In fact this is to be viewed as a global issue. Mail thieves, who are often linked to methamphetamine users, operate and commit offences in various jurisdictions and against various unexpected victims. The methods used by criminals to steal mail are varied and the techniques used continue to grow in sophistication with the advancement of technology.

Criminals who steal mail are organized and specifically target mail receptacles and customer mailboxes. The primary targets for mail theft include high value items such as cash, credit cards and cheques, but more specifically, personal and financial information to commit “identity theft” and “identity takeover.” Most often these criminals are also linked to other serious crimes such as theft of autos, break and entry, robberies and other violent crimes.

The public has trust and confidence that mail sent through the postal system will be delivered safely and securely. Significant and extraordinary efforts have been made by the Postal Service and Law Enforcement and Investigative agencies to enhance the confidence in our national mail system and to prevent crimes of mail theft against the general public. Postal Inspectors have partnered with law Enforcement agencies to combat this growing problem and have set-up two major Identity Theft Task Forces in cities of Vancouver and Surrey, British Columbia. These two task forces have been very successful in investigating and apprehending criminals responsible for mail and identity theft related crimes. This study will further examine the tool of geographic profiling, the investigative options available with this tool and it’s applicability to criminal infestations involving mail and identity theft related crimes.

Profile of Incidents

A brief review of the profile of the crime incidents are provided below:

Postal Service

Theft of mail from receptacles (Street Letter Box, Relay Box, Community and Group Mail Boxes)
Theft of mail receptacles
Use of stolen Corporate keys or counterfeit keys to access mail receptacles illegally
Vandalism to mail receptacles including prying and overturning

Public

Theft of mail after delivery from Apartment and Business Mail Panels, and Community / Group Mail Boxes (same methods as above)

Literature Review

The objective of this chapter is to make a detailed review of the available literature in order to provide the reader an in-depth knowledge on the topic being studied.

Scope of Geographic Criminal Profiling

While the geographic profiling helps to narrow the investigative focus, it is imperative for the profiler to focus on a fuller understanding the crime and not just on solving it. This impartial focus allows the profiler to further study the criminal behaviour through crime scene analysis such as the crime location, the victim and the offender’s patterns and characteristics (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1991). This principle is based on the work of criminologists in the field of Environmental Criminology in general which involves the study of physical and behavioural actions of offenders and more specifically “…how the criminals journey to a crime site and choose the location and the victim, specifically the Brantingham’s Model of Crime Site Selection (BCIT, 2006:10). The Environmental Criminology model focuses on the principle that the “crime site selection is not random, but based on the awareness space of the offender” (BCIT 2006:10). This suggests that criminals target their victims or targets within their comfort zone and have an active and complete awareness of their surroundings. Research has shown that each time a criminal depart their house to commit a crime they follow typical behaviour patterns as they select their direction, distance, and the crime site (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1991). This research is further supported with the old-aged principle that human beings are social animals and are habitual in nature; therefore, just like ordinary people, criminals follow certain definite travel paths as they traverse between their residences and social settings such as a club, restaurant, community centre, half-way house, work, shopping, school, entertainment etc. It is quite likely that they carry out their criminal activities close to these places as well as along the major pathways between them (Brantingham and Brantingham 1991).

Patterns in Committing Crimes

The Environmental Criminology Model further explains that “criminal events must be understood as confluences of offenders, victims or criminal targets, and laws in specific settings at particular times and places” (Brantingham and Brantingham, 1991:2). It is suggested that in order to have a complete crime analysis, one should take four dimensions into consideration; “a legal dimension, an offender dimension, a victim or target dimension, and a spatio-temporal or location dimension” (Brantingham and Brantingham, 1991: 2). For the purpose of this project, attention will be drawn to the spatio-temporal dimension as this is where the other three dimensions intersect each other for a criminal event to take place. The job of the profiler is to focus on finding answers to the questions where and when the crime occurs and to examine the physical and social characteristics of the crime sites (Brantingham and Brantinham, 1991). It is important to recognize the location dimension can provide fruitful analysis in learning about the offender due to the fact that “most of them behave as ordinary people most of the time” (Brantingham and Brantinham, 1991:25) and are always mobile. Another important aspect of the location dimension to take into consideration is that single offence maybe connected to a number crime locations and each of the locations offers different meanings to the offender. For instance, in some homicide cases, “such location types include victim encounter, attack, murder, and body dump sites” (Jackson & Bekerian, 1997: 159). Although, these noted actions could have occurred at one place but, in many of the cases, there is a possibility to link those actions to two or more locations as was the situation with the Paul Bernardo case, in which the offender encountered and attacked his victims on the street, strangled them in his home, and then dumped their bodies at remote sites (Burnside & Cairns, 1995).

Analysis of Spatial patterning in crime has been discussed by several well-known Criminological researchers over the past centuries, in particular, Guerry (1833) looking at the difference in conviction rates in France and Tobias (1972) described fine differences in the distribution of criminal residences and crimes in Victorian London and Manchester (Brantingham and Brantingham, 1991: 27). Research suggests that criminals tend to operate their criminal behaviour only within certain spatial means or boundaries. In fact, the study conducted by Bullock (1955) supports the concept that criminals feel comfortable within their comfort zone. For instance, Bullock found that “40 percent of all Huston homicides in 1945 – 1949 occurred within one city block of the offender’s residence and 74 percent occurred within two miles (Brantingham and Brantingham, 1991: 30) Research further suggests that violent crimes appear to have occurred close to offender’s residence, whereas, crimes involving property, and break and entry occurred farther from criminals’ anchor points. The latter is definitely linked to the “distance decay” concept, which suggests that criminal activity which is an interaction between the victim and offender reduces when the distance increases (Brantingham and Brantingham, 1991: 30). Another point to be considered in this context is the ‘cluster of criminals’ which suggests that criminals tend to focus their activity in or clustered around in given areas. This concept is very similar to the demographic clusters of certain class of residential areas, for instance, the Westside of Vancouver area tend to be clustered with professionals whereas the eastside of Vancouver, close to East Hastings area tend to be clustered with individuals on social assistance programs or individuals with drug and alcohol dependency which tend to attract drug smugglers.

Geographic Criminal Profiling Explained

According to Dr. Kim Rossmo, who introduced the geographic profiling concept to the Canadian Law Enforcement communities in the early 1990’s, the basic principles of this methodology can be understood from the perspective of set theory, commonly known as the three hypothetical crime locations, a, b, and c, with medial circles surrounding each crime site as illustrated in the following diagram (Rossmo, 2000:196).

The circles have radius ‘r’, within which a percentage, ‘p’, of an offender’s crimes usually occurs. The probability of the offender residing within a single circle is thus also ‘p’. In view of the fact that the crimes are inter-related, areas of overlap between two or more circles are correspondingly more likely to include the criminal’s anchor point (Rossmo, 2000). Rossmo continues to explain that the highest probability of criminal’s anchor point can be located in the central point where all three circles overlap (Rossmo, 2000). It is important to recognize the fact that in certain circumstances the anchor point of the offender may very well be the actual crime site or his immediate past residence. Since human beings are social animals and habitual in nature, criminals are likely to use their social settings such as a club, restaurant, community centre, half-way house etc., as the core centre for committing the crimes. On the other hand, some criminals may be transient and or living in the street and hence may not have a real anchor point; but it is a fact that criminals often operate in an area which is familiar to them and tend leave notable distances between the locations of the crimes and their anchor points (Rossmo, 2000)

Model of Geographic Criminal Profiling

The model described by Rossmo, (2000) envisages the most probable location of the criminal’s centre of activity, which in most cases is the offender’s residence. When related to additional information associated with the crime incidents, together with additional data sources, such as suspect, DNA, and motor vehicle databases, geographic profiling has been proven to have profound impact on the effectiveness of an investigation as evidenced in the following cases analysed by certified profilers:

Robber, Staffordshire, England – suspect was found within 10.3 % of area as identified in the profiling system;
Sexual Assault – Marl, Germany, 2000 – suspect was found within 3% hit score area;
Sexual Assault, Mississuga, Ontario, Canada, 1998 – suspect was found within 2.2 % (0.03 squire miles);
Sexual Assault, Leads, United Kingdom, 1998 – suspected criminal was identified within the highest probability – 3.3 % (21 squire miles); and
Burglary, Midland, Ontario, Canada, 1998 – suspect was found within 0.06% of the total area of the crime, an area less then 100 meter x 100 meter. (ECRICaseStudies, 2008)

The geographic principles and criminological theories help to explain that criminals do not select their victims / targets at random and that there exists a strong association between a criminal’s anchor point and his crime location sites. Each time a crime takes place there is an intersection in both time and place between the offender and the victim, and therefore, “crime is the product of the criminal, the victim/target, and the physical environment” (Rossmo, 2000). It is quite evident that in order for a crime to get solved, there must be the presence of a witness, confession from the accused and the physical evidence. The geographic profiling appears to assist in identifying the probable anchor point of the offender through the analysis of crime sites, interviewing witnesses; examining the physical evidence as well as analysing the routine activities of the victim prior and after the crime took place.

Principles behind Geographic Criminal Profiling

The geographic profiling uses both geographic principles (distance decay) and criminological theories (routine activities, rational choice and crime pattern (Rossmo, 2000) with a focus to “understand how the offender might behave within the given space while examining its geographical context” (Wilson & Maxwell, 2007). The distance decay concept which looks at the spatial interactions, the routine activity of the offender or a journey to crime (route taken by the offender to actual crime location from his residence), postulates that crimes occur at locations disproportionately close to the criminal’s anchor point (Rossmo, 2000). This is based on the premises that any travel on the part of the criminal requires effort, time and or money. Therefore, the experts argue that the majority of the crimes occur close to the criminals main anchor point (Rossmo, 2000). A study conducted by Sapp in 1994 concluded that a 70% of serial arsonists tend to commit crimes within two miles of their residence (Sapp, Huff, Gary, Icove, & Horbert, 1994). This analysis is further supported by the “buffer zone” concept, an immediate area surrounding the criminal’s anchor point, is likely to have fewer crimes compared to an area outside the criminal’s comfort zone (Rossmo, 2000). This is influenced by the fact that offenders view their targets “…as less desirable because of the perceived level of risk associated with operating too close to home. For the offender, this area represents an optimized balance between the maximization of opportunity and the minimization of risk.” (Rossmo: 2000:120). These factors do not apply to all crimes, for the reason that most domestic crimes, in particular, the homicides often occur within the area where the offender reside (Rossmo, 2000: 120). Although, buffer zone is likely to have fewer crimes, it is not a safe or no crime free zone as there have been cases where serial rapists have carried out their attacks on women residing in their own apartment buildings (Rossmo, 2000:121). The other influencing factor which may force the offender to focus his crimes away from his residence is the fact that there are a greater number of target opportunities available as the distance increases from the offenders anchor point.

The Rational Choice Theory suggests that human being is rational. Because the humans are rational, they choose to take certain behavioural actions and they tend to calculate the costs and benefits of their action prior to actually pursuing those actions. In the event of an offender planning to commit a crime, it is quite likely that he would have gone through the mental process of reaching a rational choice or followed other decision making approaches. The theory states that crime is a voluntary behaviour and is the result of an offender’s choices which are further influenced by the rational consideration of the efforts, rewards and costs involved with alternative course of action on the offender’s part. This theory underpins the assumptions that criminals seek to benefit from their actions, make decisions and choices, and show a measure of rationality (Brantingham and Brantingham 1991). Under the Rational Choice Theory there are three basic concepts, “criminals are rational and make their choices, criminals have a crime specific goal and that there is a distinction between choices related to criminal involvement and decisions related to criminal events” (BCIT, 2006). Offender reviews the pros and cons of each criminal activity, in particular, the risk of being arrested, risk of being sentenced, value of the target though the value does not necessarily has to be monetary but could be to attain empowerment of the victim, emotional control and or psychological control.

Geographic Criminal Profiling – Previous Studies

Harries and Lebeau reviewed several studies to determine whether the distance decay concept plays a consistent role on criminal behaviour. The analysis exhibited several points of view. For instance, a study by Rossmo in 2004 which looked at the traits of non-serial and serial offenders discovered that “serial rapists travelled further than non-serial rapists with median distance of 4.0 km for the former and 2.3 km for the later (Harries & Lebeau, 2007:322). However, in another study by Lebeau in 1997, the author discovered the opposite of Rossmo’s hypotheses by reporting that “serial offenders travelled an average of 2.84 km from their residence while non-serial offenders travelled an average of 5.63 (Harries & Lebeau, 2007). Both researchers reported one common observation which focused on “how the offender approached his victim and more significant than whether or not the offender was serial or non-serial” (Harries & Lebeau, 2007: 322). It is this integrity and validation of data that can be used in the application of geographic profiling.

Another heated debate among the experts is about the minimum number of crime sites to be analysed in order to complete a crime scenario and geo-profiles. For instance, Rossmo claims that a minimum of five incidents or occurrences are mandatory where as others such as Levine, (2005) argues that a minimum of ten cases (Harries & Lebaue, 2007:232) are required. Levine (2005) explains less crime incidents “mean that the probability of authorities recognizing interrelatedness is reduced, particularly in cases involving extended periods and long distances between events (Harries & Lebeau, 2007:323). There appears to be some validity in this criticism. For instance, any increase in the number of crime incidents will give a consistency in the modus operandi (method used by the offender to attack his victims) of the offender. On the other hand, five events as suggested by Rossmo, gives a sound starting point for police to commence the process of identifying the offender’s anchor point, which will increase the probability of arresting the offender as opposed to waiting for 10 events to occur. It is also noteworthy, that geographic profiling should only be viewed as an investigative tool and decision support system in major crime infestations where a large amount of information could be overwhelmed on the investigator and support staff.

Methodology, Data collection and analysis

There are several stages involved in the geographic profiling process. The first stage is the data collection stage, which includes the physical address, background information on the victim, witness testimony, forensic evidence and photographs of crime scene. The second stage deals with the decision process model which examines the classification of criminal offences / crime being committed and developing of theories as to reasons why the criminal offences occurred (Rossmo 2000). Most often this portion of the analysis includes examining the entire crime scene and identifying scene characteristics by applying the Crime Prevention through Environment Design concept. This concept enables the investigator/profiler to assess whether the crime location could have provided an opportunity for offender to hide and/or provided an easy escape after committing the crime. The profiling process will require the profiler to consider the questions relating to locations, time, and site selection

The third stage is the Crime Assessment, which involves the generating a criminal profile, based on the reconstruction of the events, in particular, the behaviour of the victim and the offender as well as the sequence of events prior and after the criminal attack. This is followed by developing a criminal profile including the description of the type of person who committed the offence and the offender’s behaviour before and after the crime. The fourth stage deals with the investigation and apprehension of those involved in the criminal activity. The investigation involves the generation of a written report, which is provided to the investigating agency. The final and most important stage involves the apprehension of the suspects and successful conclusion of the file.

Determination of Data / Quality and Accuracy

The determination of the data quality and accuracy of the resulting report on the criminal profiling depends largely on the nature of data being input into Criminal Geographic Profiling System. In order to have a purposeful analysis of the criminal profile there needs to be a complete and detailed review the Report generated by Criminal Geographic Profiling System. Based on the report it is possible for the investigator or the profiler to develop recommendations and to provide investigative leads for S&IS Enforcement Team to narrow down the criminals.

The Model and Rigel Computer System

The Rigel is a user friendly “computerized geographic profiling workstation based on the patented Criminal Geographic Targeting (GCT) algorithm. It incorporates an analytic engine, GIS capability, database management, and powerful visualization tools”. (Rossmo 2000:222-223). The system was designed by a Vancouver based company, the Environmental Criminology Research Inc. (ECRI) and it provides a high-end workstation with “computing power for the 1,000,000 or so calculations of the GCT algorithm a typical analysis requires (Rossmo, 2000; 223). The Rigel supports a variety of geographic information systems and text data sources as well as it is capable of data integration such as address and location information and different geographic layers, for example, playgrounds, schools, community centers, post offices etc. (ERCI). The results are displayed in “a two or three-dimensional surface maps called “jeopardizes” showing the most probable locations of an offender’s residence” (ERCI) which is further used by investigators to develop leads. The following is a photographic presentation of the Rigel Software.

Figure 3.1: Rigel Software

The user “profiler” is required to collect information / data from crime locations and input into the specialized software. The data from “crime locations, that are broken down by type (e.g. victim encounter, murder, and body dump sites for a homicide), provide the input for the system and the data are entered by the optional means of street address, latitude/longitude, or digitization” (Rossmo 2000:223). The profiler is required to develop scenarios and carries out an analysis based on “certain theoretical and methodological principles” (Rossmo, 2000:223). The system produces a “map of the most likely area of the offender residence” (Rossmo 2000;223) and hit score percentage which can assist field investigators to further evaluate the data against know suspect addresses and/or their common visited activity places such as community center, school, pub, social club etc. Examples of Rigel output maps are shown in Figure 1.2.

Figure 3.2: Examples of Rigel Output

“In the above 3-D image, the dark red area with a circle predicts, in this case, the street containing the offender’s residence, with a 70% confidence level” (ERCI) The core foundation of the geographic profiling is “the link between geographic crime site information and the known propensities of serial criminals in their selection of a target victim and location” (ECRICaseStudies, 2008:1). The software generates a map based on predefined calculations to show the most probable anchor point of the offender’s base or home.

Figure 3.3: Probability of Offender Residence

The effectiveness, validity and reliability of the Rigel system are based on the detailed analysis of each crime site, methodological assumptions and scenarios created by the profiler. The profiler creates scenarios, “wherein crime locations are weighted based upon certain theoretical and methodological principles, are created and examined” (Rossmo 2000; 223). The profile is required to take a number of assumptions into consideration when creating scenarios for each crime location. First of all, the profile ensures that the series of crimes are linked together and there is sufficient evidence to suggest the same individual(s) committed the crimes. The second step involves the profiler having to ensure that series is relatively complete, meaning that they are not a large number of offences that have not been connected. The third assumption ensures the offender(s) are locally based and do not commute. The fourth assumption deals with the fact that if there is more than one offender, they live together or in the same immediate area and finally, the anchor point or the residence of the offender(s) has not changed during the period of the crime series. (BCIT, 2006:8).

The profiler is also required to take a number of analytical questions into considerations, in particular, the locations, time, site selection, target backcloth and hunting method used by the offender (Rossmo, 2000). For the location question, the profiler will need to identify the location types and determine their connections to the crime and or crime series as well as determine the distances and travel times between them. The time is also a very important concept in the process, which helps to answer the questions as to when the crimes occurred, more specifically, the time, weekday, date, the lag between each crime as well the type of weather for those given days. Site selection, provides certain clues to profilers, for example, it helps to answer the question how did the criminals accessed each crime location, did they use a vehicle, public transportation and or other methods of transportation. Site selection analysis helps to answer questions as to what other facilities or possible targets maybe located in the general area and how did the criminal know of the locations and what purposes did these locations serve for the criminal and the victim. Target Backcloth is another important concept which looks at the geographic arrangement and availability of the victim / target. Target Backcloth helps to understand the environment as well as the degree of control the criminal had over his selection of crime site. Here the profiler will be required to analyze the issue, were there any circumstances which would have caused the criminal to move his crimes to another location; whether they maybe due to spatial or temporal displacement. Finally, the profiler is required to review the type of hunting method the offender used during his series of crime and answers the question as to why did the offender used these particular crime sites and not others (Rossmo, 2000 and BCIT Geographic Profiling Analysis – Rigel Analyst course, 2006).

Results of Rigel Analysis

This section of the project presents the Geographic Profile Report Preparation and Presentation using the Rigel Computerized Software. The report will have the following items:

Cover Page

Agency Crest
Confidentiality Statement
The date of the report
Name of the series
Agency name of Geographic Profiling Analyst
Geographic Profiling analyst contact information

Case Information

Type of series
Agency Case number
Jurisdiction of offenses
Investigator
Agency of jurisdiction of offenses
Report date
Name of Geographic profiling analyst

Criminal Geographic Targeting Discussion

Crime site location information
Description of peak profile area: Describe the area using the streets names for each edge of the profile to the north, south, east, and west.
70 % confidence level descriptors

Suspect Discussion

The area will contain either one of two statements:

“No suspects were provided as relevant or (number) suspects were provided as relevant to this series;

If the suspects were provided, each will be listed from highest to lowest probability with their name and hit score”

A short discussion about the location of the suspects in relationship to the geo-profile will be included.

Profile Discussion and Investigative Strategies

The discussion will focus on the target selection, how the offender was selecting the target and the target backcloth, time and date patterns, offender method of travel and any other relevant factors

Tables

There will be a total of three tables:

Table one will list the crimes with the site type and location
Table two will list the site type, the date, weekday, and interval between each crime
Table three will include crimes that have been weighted out

Maps

Crime location map; all crime sites
Geographic Profile: Chosen scenario calculated at 100 %
Peak Profile; Chosen scenario calculated at hit score percentage rounded up

Suspect Map

Suspect locations shown with geo-profile calculated at 100%

Discussion

This portion of the report will analyze the practical application, use and the effectiveness of geographic profiling methodology as it relates to the actual criminal cases pertaining to mail theft crimes.

Analysis

It is observed from the study that crime scene analysis is one important component of psychological profiling. The offender profile is drawn on the basis of behaviors exhibited during the committing of the crime and based on the behavioral patterns inferences are drawn on the profile of the criminal. These inferences are reported to the investigating team to pursue their work. The crime characteristics are generally related to the typologies from which deductions are made.Such inferences and deductions are used to sketch the psychological map of the perpetrator of the crime. The fashion in which the crime is committed is assumed to have been evoked by the specific motivation of the offender. However the assumption of an offender’s intention can also be the result of an element of geographical profiling. Just as similar to psychological profiling geographical profiling is another methodology put in use to assist the investigators in solving crimes especially serial crimes having a link with each other. While the psychological profiling tries to detail the characteristics of the criminal geographical profiling attempts to define the area that is likely to contain the residence of the offender. “Geographical Profiling is, essentially, the reversal of the location choice of the offender. The pattern of crime locations is seen as the imprint of the journey to crime. In reversing the location choice geographical profiling also makes assumptions about the decision of the offender for choosing these specific crime locations, like a least effort principle for travelling for instance.” (Kemp n.d)

From the foregoing discussion it is observed that geographic profiling is more an information management system developed as an investigative methodology. The objective of the method is to evaluate the locations of connected serial crimes so that it may be possible to arrive at the most probable location of the offender’s residence. This method can be applied in solving criminal investigations concerning the crimes of serial murders, rapes, arson, robbery and bombings. Professors Paul Brentingham and Patricia Brentingham have developed a theoretical crime model. This model examined the crime locations in order to determine the possible areas where crimes are likely to happen and this examination was based on the residence, workplace and leisure activity locations of the offender. Brentingham model suggests that all human beings will have an activity space related to the areas in which they live, work and play. It is this activity space according to the authors produces a movement that has a discernible pattern of movement around the city. “In relation to criminal activity, therefore, it follows that an offender has to know about a particular geographical area before he or she begins selecting crimes to commit; and where the offenders movement patterns intersect within this geographical area, will to a large extent determine where the crime takes place.” (Webb, 2006)

It has been observed that this method is being described invariably by different terms like behavioral, statistical and geographical profiling, crime scene profiling, psychological profiling and offender profiling. Despite various names being used, geographical profiling is viewed as an additional tool that can be used after various crime scenes are found to be having a link with each other.

According to Turvey (1997) there is a growing misconception among various agencies like law enforcement agencies, prosecutorial bodies or defense attorneys who makes a request for a criminal profile that the profiling process will by some means be able to provide them an answer about the behavior of the criminal involved in the crime. In this expectation they tend to shorten the complex process of analyzing the physical evidences in any particular case. However it is also true that in most of the criminal cases there is no involvement of any physical evidence and even when any evidence is available there is no one who could find any intrinsic value of such evidence. It is also found out of a study that in the United States physical evidence is used in less than 25% of the cases. Turvey (1997) states the presence of physical evidence greatly facilitate the work of the profiler. He advocates that the profiler should first go through and analyze all the available physical evidences like “first responder’s reports, investigators’ reports, autopsy reports, results of sexual assault examination, witness interviews, victim statements (when available), and all available photos and videos.” This enlarges the knowledge of the profiler and makes him better informed about the larger picture of the investigation.

Issues in using Rigel for Investigations of Volume Crimes

According to Clare Daniell Geographic profiler the use of Rigel has been confronted with certain issues in investigating cases of volume crime as against other crimes like rape, robbery and the like. The main issue while putting Rigel in detecting volume crimes is the crime linkage. Volume crimes such as distraction burglaries, criminal damage, car arson and others cannot be considered to be as rich in behavior as sexual offences. In the case of volume crimes there will be no much opportunities for witness information, and forensic opportunities. “Therefore, ascertaining whether all of the crimes included have been committed by the same offender(s) is problematic, as is ensuring that there are no crimes within the series that have been committed by other offender(s).” (Daniel, n.d)

Another issue arises because of the presence of a number of offenders. It is likely that certain offences are committed by two or more offenders together. This poses problems for profiling using Rigel. In this case Rigel and the subsequent analyses are not able to contribute much towards zeroing in on the locations of the offenders. Hence the profilers are not in a position to offer any strategic directions to the investigation team. (Daniel, n.d)

There are other considerations like the target backcloth; the hunting style of offenders, influence of geographic and demographic features which vitiate the results arrived at using Rigel. “However, once these issues have been considered, analysis of the crime series using spatial, temporal and the results to date have been extremely successful in assisting volume crime investigations. “ (Daniel, n.d)

The success of the geographic analysis can be ensured by the ability of the profiler to extrapolate the meaning from the analysis conducted and make use of the results of the analysis by passing it on to the investigating team in their efforts to nab the criminals. In order that the profiler can make best use of the analysis it becomes critically important that the profiler links a number of criminal events and make use of the information to look for patterns in the spatial and temporal information. This will enable the identification of the location of the criminal in better ways. However it must be remembered the descriptive analysis has its own limitation that the officers can only apply the technique to some extent only. While Rigel can be considered as one of the elements that aid the analysis it cannot be relied completely for providing the support for identification of the location of the criminals involved. At best Rigel can only produce calculations and it is important that the calculations are interpreted and combined with other techniques available. The profiler has to undertake extensive research and experiential casework on the behaviors of the offenders so that he will be able to provide adequate geographic support and investigative strategies to aid the team involved in the investigation of the crime. (Daniel, n.d)

Conclusion

Criminal profiling consists of psychological profiling and geographical profiling. Geographical profiling is a term coined by Kim Rossmo the Canadian Criminologist in the early 1990s. “Geographic profiling brings the science of geography, criminology, mathematical modeling, statistical analysis, and environmental and forensic psychology into the realm of criminal investigation.” (Novelguide) The method is used to describe the use of computerized processes to generate reliable predictions on the places of residence or the base of operations of an offender of crimes linked with each other. There are different software like Rigel Profiler, Rigel Analyst, CrimeStat and Dragnet that have changed the pace and nature of criminal investigations in urban areas.

The process of geographic profiling traces the whereabouts of the criminals by using a scientific method. The method makes use of a user-friendly and easily adaptable output map. The reports brought out by the method enables the investigators to concentrate their efforts on some most likely areas where the possibilities of the offender of serial crimes living are more. The Rigel software being used by the method can make the output maps of the geographical locations where the offenders might be located in to a two or three dimensional one. These maps which are known as ‘jeopardies’ use color coding techniques to indicate the highest probable area that may include the residence of the offender. According to the literature on the Rigel system, “A Rigel analysis starts with a street map of the study area, the geographic coordinates of the crimes, and any database that the profiler wants to prioritize.” The Rigel software that is employed in geographical profiling is used along with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and the system can be carried and used in any mapped area in the world. Rigel software has gained much popularity among the police and other investigating agencies because of its capabilities in helping the agencies organize a vast amount of data created during the process of investigation of a linked series of crimes.

However there is one serious issue with the geographical criminal profiling is that most of the techniques used make a priori assumption that it is quite possible that the scenes of crimes and the residences of the offender; both have located on an isotropic surface where there is an opportunity for committing the crime is uniformly distributed around the residence of the offender. But according to Environmental criminology there are other complex factors that are connected with the location of the crime that makes it unlikely that the incidence of a crime can happen randomly. These are environmental and social factors that determine the nature and location of the crime as well as the movements of the offender. Therefore currently efforts are on for the revision of and expansion on the existing geographic profiling methods so that they include the environmental and social factors in the profiling methods.

It follows from the text that geographical profiling at best can be used as a tool that will be of great benefit when used along with other aspects of police investigations. The method relies heavily upon the investigative work already carried out by the investigating team and the physical evidences available on the case. Abru (2004) comments “Yoking together the power of GIS and computing, geographic profiling has enormous potential as a tool for sifting, matching, clarifying and analyzing information. It has yet to reach its peak.” However geographic profiling has not been found to be more useful in tracking the criminals involved in solitary crimes and crimes committed by offenders by travelling to longer distances between successive offenses. The method is also not useful for small rural forces where there may be no instances of major serial crimes. It also is incapacitated to offer any material contribution in the investigation of volume crimes. There is tremendous scope for improvements in the software. With the advancement in the field of geographic profiling and with the improvement in software capabilities there is likely to be significant growth in the geographic profiling technology.

Works Cited

BCIT. (2006). Geographic profiling analysis: Rigel Analyst Course. FSCT 8304.

Brantingham, P. J., & Brantingham, P. L. (1991). Environmental Criminology. Prospect Heights IL: Waveland Press.

Burnside, S., & Cairns, A. (1995). Deadly Innocence. New York: Warner Books.

Daniel Clare (n.d) ‘Geographic Profiling in Volume Crime’ 2008. Web.

Douglas, J., Ressler, R., Burgess, A., & Harman, C. (1986). Criminal Profiling from Crime Scene Analysis. Behaviooural Sciences and the Law , 4 (4), 401-421.

ECRICaseStudies. (2008). What is geographic profiling. Web.

Abru Elly (2004) ‘Corodinates of Crime’ Australian Police News.

Harries, K., & LeBeau, J. (2007). Issues in the Geographic Profiling of Crime: Review and Commentary. Police Practice and Research , 8 (4), 321-333.

Jackson, J. L., & Bekerian, D. A. (1997). Offender Profiling: Theory, Research and Practice. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Kemp Jasper van der ‘Geographical Offender Profiles, Choosing Crime Locations’ 2008. Web.

Novelguide ‘Geogrpahic Profiling’ Web.

Levine, N. (2005). Crimestat: A Spatial Statistics Program for the Analysis of Crime Incident Locations (v3.0),.

Lyman, M. (1999). Criminal Investigation: The Art and Science. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Petherick, W. (2007). Criminal profiling: How it got started and how it is used. Web.

Rossmo, D. K. (2000). Geographic Profiling. Boca Raton Florida USA: CRC Press.

Sapp, A. D., Huff, T. G., Gary, G. P., Icove, D. J., & Horbert, P. (1994). A report of essential findings from a study of serial arsonists.. Quantico VA: National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime.

Turvey E Brent (1997) “The Role of Criminal Profiling in the Development of Trial Strategy,” Knowledge Solutions Library, Web.

Webb, D. A. (2006). The Role Of Geographic Profiling In Serial Violent Crime Investigation. Web.

Wilson, R. E., & Maxwell, C. D. (2007). Research in Geographic Profiling:. Police Practice and Research , 8 (4), 313-319.

Click Here To Order Now!