Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 2002, Volume 17, Number 1 Reliability, Validity, and Utility of Criminal Profiling Typologies Maurice Godwin Methodist College Criminal profiling has received attention from the academic community and from the en- tertainment world since the FBI first published accounts of its profiling principles. It be- came popular through films such as Silence of the Lambs and the X-Files making headlines. However, beyond the victims’ pin pictures that help create the sensationalism in these resources, there have been few, if any, reliable criminal profiling classification designs. This work examines deductive and inductive profiling models that classify crime scene activity including the first systematic review of the FBI’s organized and disorgan- ized profiling typology. The paper concludes with a discussion about how to turn profiling from an art too more a scientific process through the use of investigative process man- agement research. INCE ITS EMERGENCE, criminal major flaw of current profiling methods profiling has been given several is that most all profiles emphasizes the S different terms to describe the various psychological functions that technique. For instance, psychological murder has for the offender not what va- profiling, criminal profiling, criminal rieties of action the murder actually con- personality profiling, criminal investiga- sists of. Consequently, these profiles tive analysis, and behavioral evidence make little distinction between the overt profiling. Regardless, though, of the de- crime scene behaviors as they occur in scriptive label applied, profiling as inves- murders and the psycho-dynamic proc- tigative tool today is entirely intuitive esses that are taken to account for or based and represents a less than educated produce that behavior. Hence, there is attempt to provide law enforcement little attempt by profilers to differentiate agencies with detailed information about between aspects of the offender’s moti- the behavior of an unknown individual vations and life-style from aspects of his who has committed a crime. For exam- offending behavior. Another problem, ple, most published accounts of profiling, which exist with profiling, is many pro- which details the methods employed by filers view profiling as ‘crime scene re- various individuals, have tended to take construction’ and completely ignore the form of semi-autobiographical books aspects of psychology. and journalistic articles rather than sys- Most published accounts that claim tematic academic work and, hence, are ‘new’ or ‘recent’ findings in criminal difficult to evaluate from an accuracy or profiling are often a part of the cultural scientific point of view. As such, the one baggage past down over the years and 1 Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, Volume 17, Number 1 are fraught with frailties of human think- ence Unit (BSU) (Ressler, 1988). In ing such as confirmation bias and selec- 1995 a restructuring phase combined the tive thinking (Holmes, 1996; Turvey, BSU, Violent Criminal Apprehension 1999). Current profiling attempts are Program (VICAP), and the National predominantly anchored in opinions Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime based on what has already been written into one unit, calling it the Critical Inci- or told in the past. On the one hand, dent Response Group (CIRG) (Douglas some profilers claim that patterns associ- & Olshaker, 1995). ated with serial offending occur as a re- The primary purpose of the serial sult of recognizable mental illness or murder project was to use interviews mental disorder in the offender and these with convicted killers as a basis for con- disorders directly relate to and can be structing future classifications, which classified using a personality theory. On then could be used to aid police investi- the other hand some profilers attempt to gations. A series of interviews with 36 guess at the motive of an offender based incarcerated offenders, of whom 25 were on his crime scene actions and refer to defined as serial murderers (i.e., the kill- this process as behavioral profiling. ing of three or more individuals over However, profiling from a true behav- time) took place between 1979 and 1983 ioral approach considers the individual in the USA. The interviews were guided differences between offenses (not of- by an unstructured checklist of questions. fenders) by looking at crime scene ac- Prior to the interviews, data sources on tions that can be observed rather than each offender and his crimes were ob- guess at the individual’s internal work- tained by reviewing crime scene photos, ings or motivations for the crime. physical and psychiatric reports. How- ever, no detailed analysis of this material The Origins of the FBI‘s Criminal has ever been presented. Instead, a sim- Profiling Project ple dichotomy was claimed to emerge from the project by which offenders were The FBI’s initial project on serial classified either as organized or disor- murder began in 1978 (Ressler, Burgess, ganized. The assignment of the offend- & Douglas, 1988). The impetus for the ers to either the organized or project was to conduct personal inter- disorganized category was based on the views with serial murderers about their appearance of the victims’ attire or nu- crimes in order to find out how they were dity, exposure to the victims’ sexual successful at avoiding capture. The FBI parts, insertion of foreign objects in body serial murder project was given added cavities, or evidence of sexual inter- attention in Washington, DC in the early course. 1980s due to public outcry of the murder The FBI posits in the literature that of a six year old boy in Florida by a se- the organized and disorganized scheme rial murdered (Ressler, et al., 1988). was developed to classify a sub-group of Therefore, due to public pressure, the serial murderers, that is, sex-related mur- FBI serial murder project was brought to ders, where motive was often lacking) the forefront and given the necessary US (Ressler, 1988). This also can be inter- Government funding, which eventually preted that where the murderer is emo- lead to a unit being established in Quan- tional and no organization can be tico, Virginia called the Behavioral Sci- deciphered from his actions at the crime 2 Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, Volume 17, Number 1 scene, there is no motive. Because of the The Organized Profiling Typology apparent lack of motive, FBI profilers decided to look for evidence of planning, According to the FBI classification, irrationality, or some form of discord at the organized (nonsocial serial murderers the crime scene to determine whether the are generally assumed to be cunning, and offender was organized or disorganized. spend vast amounts of time planning The organized and disorganized typology murders, whether consciously or not, and is then used to classify the murderer’s this behavior is reflected at their crime personality, depending on the category of scenes. Another assumption is that the the crime scene. serial murderer’s planning is expressed There are weaknesses in the organ- in his preoccupation with, and constant ized and disorganized dichotomy. For need for control (Brown, 1991). FBI pro- example, there is no explanation in the filers claim that crime scenes tend to literature of the differences between the echo this aspect through the condition of organized and disorganized serial mur- the body, the body’s state of dress, selec- derer. Rather the organized and disor- tion of restraints and weapons, body dis- ganized dichotomy seems to describe the posal sites, and method of approach different levels of aggression in serial (Hickey, 1997; Douglas & Burgess, murderers, although no literature source 1986). acknowledges this. The organized serial murderer is de- The difference in organized and disor- scribed as one who is positively antiso- ganized crime scenes are usually ex- cial but often more gregarious, quite plained in the form of a psycho-dynamic normal on the outside, maintaining nor- drive; the dynamic drives are: 10 re- mal relationships. He will be more for- venge, and 2) sadistic (Ressler, 1988; ensically aware, mobile, creative, Lester, 1995). The focus of these drives adaptive; he often has a certain preferred is seen in terms of lasting urges, formed type of victim. Although victims’ bodies through early life experiences. These ex- are normally concealed, he will tease the periences are organized especially police by leaving some bodies open to around conflict. view. The FBI posit that the organized type serial murderer is out to shock and The differences between the two offend the community and taunt the po- types appear to originate from several lice because he fees so much more pow- traditional theories of aggression and erful than them. The offender will likely personality disorders. For example, it is be a police buff and usually collects alleged that the organized offender has items relating to law enforcement the ability to maintain some control over (Hickey, 1997). his aggressive behavior, while the disor- In the FBI study, imprisoned serial ganized offender is unable to maintain murderers classified as organized were control. There is, however, a third type, assumed to have had an angry frame of the mixed offender, which is rarely dis- mind at the time of the murder, but their cussed in the literature. The mixed type behavior was calm and relaxed during was added to accommodate offenders the commission of the crime (Ressler, who did not fit into either the organized 1988). The organized crime scene is de- or disorganized category (Ressler, Doug- scribed as having a “semblance of order las, Burgess, & Burgess, 1992). existing prior to, during, and after the 3 Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, Volume 17, Number 1 murder. It is suggested that the murder is tration, hostility, anger, agitation, and planned, and the offender is likely to excitement, all of which indicate that the used a con or ploy to lure his victims to crime is emotional, and revenge seems to their deaths.