Criminal Psychology Goes Overseas

While researching for this blog, I was only vaguely aware of the crime rates in Nigeria. Upon needing to find pictures to include, I was shocked to find an abundance of pictures both horrific and shocking, ones I chose not to include in this blog. Some included images of mass graves, murdered people in the streets, and even one of what looked to be over 200 burned corpses. It was then that I realized just how bad it was. A few facts according to DK World Reports: Nigeria has one of the highest crime rates in the world; murder frequently accompanies even minor burglaries; and police in some states have the power to legally shoot violent criminals on sight. Tunde Ogunesan of the Tribune claims that “the security situation is giving everybody sleepless nights” and that the threat is rising from simple robberies to recent bombings.

In addition to the high crime rate, there is also severe corruption within the government and community, making Nigeria’s criminal justice system a complete failure in some states. In 2008, Aster van Kregten, Amnesty International’s Nigerian researcher claimed that the problems in the criminal justice system were “so blatant and egregious that the Nigerian government has had no choice but to recognize them- and has pledged many times that it will reform the system.” As of 2011, that’s what they’ve taken big steps to do. At a two day seminar held at the University of Ibadan (the first institution in both Nigeria and Africa to introduce a Masters degree course in legal criminology and security psychology, including various specialization courses regarding many aspects of the criminal justice system), a resolution was made by a collaboration of the University’s Department of Psychology and several global participants. As stated in Gbooza!, an online Nigerian social news network, “For Nigeria to have a breakthrough in security, legal, criminological and security psychology, the country’s law enforcement agencies must recognize the need to apply sociological and psychological methodologies in the judicial system.” Many of the topics presented at the workshop included bringing together experts from all areas of the law to draw up a plan; making it “imperative” to bring in psychologists before cross-examinations; and implementing forensic and criminal psychology in order to be more knowledgeable about the types of crimes and criminals they would be dealing with in the future.

The topic of victim compensation was also discussed. Dr. Rasheed Okunola said that “the Nigerian criminal justice system has failed to adequately compensate criminal victims” and that the punishments that are dealt do not always “erase” the psychological trauma, such as with rape victims. Because of the fear that many criminals end up walking the streets freely, many rape victims choose to live with the trauma over dealing with embarrassment or even ending up dead. Unlike other countries, the United States in particular, Nigeria doesn’t have victim associations and support groups to help deal with the coping process. Introducing this tool in particular would help greatly in that victims would feel comfort in knowing that they aren’t alone and that they are protected, resulting in more admissions, raising the chances of arrest.

However, Nigeria’s prison system has also been deemed “utterly failing” and “appalling” by Amnesty International. Not only are human rights being greatly violated, but a large amount of those incarcerated have not even been convicted. Torture has been said to be a tactic for getting “confessions” and the condition of the prisons themselves are ghastly- both “seriously damaging the mental and physical health of thousands.” Unfortunately for a country such as Nigeria, the prison system and corruption within won’t be improving overnight. So I, much like the participants in this year’s workshop, feel that we must improve what happens on the outside of prison walls by bringing in as many sources such as aforementioned criminologists, psychologists (criminal and forensic), and sociologists to break down the crime of the country and learn to deal with it in a way that makes the people again feel confident and secure in their own state. By implementing law enforcement and psychological strategies used all over the world, Nigerians will hopefully one day be able to sleep soundly once again.



References:

http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/nigeria-criminal-justice-system-utterly-failing-nigerian-people-majority

http://www.ft.com/dkreports/nigeria2

http://www.gbooza.com/group/nigeriapolitics/forum/topics/justice-system-experts-advocate-involvement-of-psychologists-crim#axzz1gWjY72bJ

http://tribune.com.ng/index.php/features/31018-when-experts-gathered-to-proffer-solution-to-criminal-justice-system-in-nigeria

Criminal Profiling: Art or Science?

As James Reese, an original FBI criminal personality profiler and one of the founders of the National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime, said, "There are certain clues at a crime scene which by their very nature do not lend themselves to being collected or examined. How's one collect love, rage, hatred, fear...? These are things that we're trained to look for." Over the years, through a great amount of research and reading, I believe this describes a large part of the work that criminal profilers do. Profilers are considered to be advisors in a case, while it's still detectives and law enforcement solving crimes. With a combination of law enforcement's facts and scientific evidence and a profiler's outside examination of offender personalities and behavior analysis, it's the teamwork of these two forces that inevitably solves crimes.

So what does criminal profiling consist of? According to a great deal of professionals, what is seen on TV and read in books can be misleading. Profilers are not born with a gift, but rather have acquired a great skill, according to Brent Turvey, author of Criminal Profiling: An Introduction to Behavioral Evidence Analysis. Turvey favors the "deductive method" of criminal profiling- possessing an open mind, questioning everything, and emphasizing a profiler's "objectivity, self-knowledge (to overcome transference distortions), and critical thinking skills- plus an ability to try to understand the needs being satisfied by each behavior of the offender as well as the offender's patterns." It's the two latter skills that I find most important. A good profiler must be able to take the information given to them by law enforcement and medical examiners and be able to analyze it critically, while being able to keep an open mind to all possibilities from all sources. In addition, it's the profiler's duty to pay close attention to the behavior and actions of the offender in order to rule out or narrow down suspected parties.

Criminal profiling gained momentum in 1974 with the forming of the FBI Behavioral Science Unit (BSU), now more famous because of shows such as Criminal Minds, although the unit is referred to as the Behavioral Analysis Unit, which also exists. Famous profilers John Douglas and Robert Ressler interviewed 36 serial murderers to develop concrete theories and categories regarding types of offenders. From their research, they were able to develop the organized/disorganized criminal profile. Organized crimes are premeditated and carefully carried out, so there is generally very little evidence to be found. The criminals are usually antisocial, but still know the difference between right and wrong, show no remorse, and are clearly not insane. On the other end of the spectrum, disorganized crimes are rarely planned and are sloppy, with evidence left behind such as blood and fingerprints. These perpetrators tend to be young, inexperienced and may be under the influence of drugs, alcohol, or mental illness.

Over the past 25 years, the BSU has further developed the way profiles are obtained and analyzed, by refining the organized/disorganized theory and developing other classification processes. According to retired FBI agent Gregg McCrary, "The basic premise is that behavior reflects personality." To analyze a suspect's behavior through actions during a crime, profilers are able to combine it with the known facts and evidence of a case to determine a suspect's personality, and, in the best case scenario, be able to provide law enforcement with a successful criminal profile. Although profilers rarely give authorities a specific name, sometimes the profile is all that is needed to narrow down the suspect list to one. A good example of questions the FBI may ask in order to gain insight into a suspect's behavior, in this case a murderer, are:
• Antecedent- What fantasy or plan, or both, did the murderer have in place before the act? What triggered the murderer to act some days and not others?
• Method and manner- What type of victim or victims did the murderer select? What was the method and manner of murder: shooting, stabbing, strangulation or something else?
• Body disposal- Did the murder and body disposal take place all at one scene, or multiple scenes?
• Postoffense behavior- Is the murderer trying to inject himself into the investigation by reacting to media reports or contacting investigators?
It's questions like these that can expose certain attributes of an offender, such as over- or lack of confidence, personal relationships with the victim, organized/disorganized tendencies, and victimology.

So is criminal profiling an art or just science…. or both? Dr. David Canter, founder of the field of investigative psychology, believes that profiling shouldn’t simply be based on investigative experience and theories, but rather should include “empirical, peer-reviewed research.” It's important to take into account ALL evidence- not just the facts or solely profiling experience. Dr. Richard Kocsis, forensic psychologist, agrees with Canter in that research should be a strong part of profiling, but that there is also a “skill element involved.” When asked the same question I posted above, he simply answered, “Realistically, I think it is probably a bit of both.” This is where teamwork between agencies comes into play. In the past, there have been disputes regarding jurisdiction, politics, skill level, etc. It's important that agencies realize that when working a case, there is a shared goal and that differences must be put aside in order to achieve it. There will always be tension, but in recent years, law enforcement and psychologists have found common ground and it has proved successful. With two different points of view and multiple skill levels, cases are observed more closely and members of the case can collaborate to exchange information either side may have missed- whether it be cold hard facts or a distinct profile aspect. I guess you could say that we should have followed Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s lead with the successful collaboration of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John H. Watson long ago.

To quote Brent Turvey, “Many dangerously unqualified, unscrupulous individuals [are in] the practice of creating criminal profiles.” When writing his book mentioned earlier, his goal was to show people the effort it takes to become a successful profiler; to show that it takes logical reasoning, methodology, training, experience, and an open mind to all evidence. His research may provide a solid foundation to aspiring criminal profilers of the future, but it certainly wasn’t something John Douglas ever needed. Douglas has become one of the most successful and notable criminal profilers of our time- dealing with infamous criminals such as David Berkowitz, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, and Charles Manson. From the minute I picked up his book Mindhunter, I became thoroughly intrigued by his stories of cases and life experiences. I wasn’t even surprised when I discovered that the character Jack Crawford in Silence of the Lambs was based directly on Douglas. Even after leaving the psychology career path, I have continued to read his books and study his methods, in hopes they will one day come in handy in the criminal investigations field.


Douglas proves that not only can profiling as an art and skill be perfected, but that teamwork within and among agencies is important. He has become an icon and mentor to many criminal profilers from all levels of the government. After retiring from the FBI in 1995, he has continued as a consultant in many cases, most notably the JonBenet Ramsey case. In my eyes, I believe that he will always be considered a pioneer of criminal profiling and someone who can prove to non-believers that profiling should always be considered an option- it just has to be done by the right person.

So what is profiling? John Douglas states it plainly, “…I'll tell you what it's not. It's not magic or telepathy. I'm not ‘The Profiler’ you see on TV. I don't go into a trance and ‘see’ the crime. I apply behavioral patterns to crimes by looking at the crime scene evidence, police reports, victim statements and autopsy results.” I believe that statement should be the foundation that all profilers of the future build from.




References:
Fintzy, R. T. (2000, September 1). [Review of the book Criminal profiling: An introduction to behavioral evidence analysis, by B. Turvey]. Am J Psychiatry 2000;157: 1532-1534.

Winerman, L. (2004). Criminal profiling: The reality behind the myth. The Monitor, 35(7), 66. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/monitor/julaug04/criminal.aspx.

http://www.johndouglasmindhunter.com

Right Under Their Noses...

In my last post I described situations and incidences where criminals used psychology against us. Today I tell a story where psychology was used on both sides of the law.

On the evening of September 6, 2011, three-year-old Kienan Hebert’s parents put him down for the night, unaware in the morning he would be gone. Initially authorities believed that he may have wandered off in his sleep and began searching the woods nearby their British Columbia home.

His disappearance followed a failed abduction within the community the same night. After discovering the theory of him wandering proved false, investigators deemed it a kidnapping and began looking for suspects. The first and only suspect’s name was Randall Hopley, a 46-year-old known criminal (including a charge of sexual assault and attempted child molestation) in the same community. The search continued in the nearby woods and an Amber Alert was put out, as was a manhunt for Hopley, now considered a fugitive. After discovering the seriousness of their son’s situation, Kienan’s parents made a statement to the press, pleading for the return of their son:

Please, bring Kienan to a safe place right now, okay, like a gas station or a store parking lot where he's visibly seen and you can drop him off… We just want him safe. Kienan’s only 3 years old right now and as you know and we know Kienan can’t speak, so he can’t tell us who you are, right? This is your chance, right now, to get away. All we want is Kienan to come back with us and to be safe in our arms again.

Link to the press conference video/article:
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110909/amber-alert-bc-boy-110909/

The community-wide search continued and on September 11, Kienan was found on his living room recliner at 3:00 am with no injuries or suspected sexual abuse. It was at this point that criminal psychology came into play and speculation and questions began:

• “How could his audacious abductor get access to a sealed crime scene undetected?” (www.calgaryherald.com);
• “It’s higher risk to bring the child back than it was to take the child in the first place” (www.thestar.com); and
• Kienan’s return followed his parent’s requests very closely. Although denying them the return in a “neutral place,” like said gas station, he was returned to his home.

Immediately, Ernie Allen, a child abduction expert, claimed that Kienan’s reappearing “makes his case almost unique” and that he was “not aware of that happening before.” According to local abduction experts and psychologists, there were three reasons as to why Kienan would have been returned in that fashion. First, they believed that the Amber Alerts and constant media attention the case was receiving were intimidating, causing the abductor to return the boy out of fright. Second, Allen considered the possibility that the parents’ emotional plea may have had an effect on the abductor’s conscience. Finally, according to Stephen Porter, Director of the Centre for the Advancement of Psychological Science and Law at the University of British Columbia Okanagan, the abductor may have acted so boldly in order to show his power and control over the situation, as well as his “superiority over the police and parents”- a theory considered “darker” and “sadistic.” Porter told The Star that in order to take such a risk, the motivation behind it would have to be very powerful. Also, if he was simply going to escape, he would have left Kienan at one of the mentioned “neutral places.” Of course, as excited the community was that Kienan was home safe, the feeling slowly turned to nervousness and fright, knowing that the abductor was still a threat out wandering the streets. People also began to question whether or not the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) had knowingly and secretly facilitated the window of opportunity for the abductor to return the boy unharmed and unnoticed, with the intent on capturing him at a later time. This has been described as a good and bad thing: on one side, they purposely put the community at risk, but on the other hand they were guaranteeing the safe return of Kienan. It has been concluded that the RCMP most likely weighed the risks and decided that the return of Kienan unharmed and alive was more important.

As I write this, the original person of interest, Randall Hopley, has been arrested and charged with breaking and entering, abduction of a child, and kidnapping, and will be psychologically evaluated before his next court appearance on November 9, 2011.

So what do I think of it all? Do I believe that Hopley returned Kienan on his own accord, proving his power and confidence, or succumbing to his conscience, or were the RCMP playing a part as well? I believe there are possibilities with every option. I think each theory has good reasoning, but I do also think that The Calgary Herald made the best case, siding with “basic criminal psychology.” The author (unknown) stated that it was a matter of the abductor’s ego that would probably be the main driving force. If he were to leave Kienan in a remote area, the action would do nothing to boost his ego, while taking the huge risk of re-entering the Hebert home to return the child would give him that boost, and enhance his sense of pride. In my experience, humans love being reassured of themselves, love being confident, so this theory wouldn’t come as a surprise. Hopley has yet to say much to anyone, only a few words and nods to his lawyer, so we may never know his true intentions that morning. As this case continues in court, I will definitely follow it, eager to see the outcome, starting with the results of his psych evaluation. Will he even be fit to stand trial? With new information and theories arising every few days, it is assured to be an interesting trial, but one thing is for sure: September 11, 2011 wasn’t just a day of remembrance in the United States, it was also a day of rejoice for one small Canadian community.

References:

http://www2.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/theeditorialpage/story.html?id=68347d29-a1ae-4b9c-a92d-3a8671a13305

http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110910/bc_amber_alert_update_abduction_attempt_110910?hub=BritishColumbiaHome

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1052250--kienan-s-return-unusual-and-unprecedented-expert-says

A PSYCHOLOGICAL GAME

We are ALL human. With that said, it should be obvious that the “good guys” are just as susceptible to psychological deception as the “bad guys.” These mind games, or coercive persuasion as it has been referred to in academia, can be found on both sides of the law. According the American Heritage Dictionary, “coercion” is defined as:

1. To force to act or think in a certain manner;
2. To dominate, restrain, or control by force; and
3. To bring about by force.

Those three definitions are a majority of the attributes that explain those that are "coercive" and "manipulative." In addition, Dr. Margaret Singer of UC Berkeley believes that there are seven main tactics that one would use to get the upper psychological hand, including tactics four and five- making the person “re-evaluate the most central aspects of his or her experience of self” and “creat[ing] a sense of powerlessness.” It may just be that I’m a crime buff, but when I hear these two tactics in particular, I think of movies such as Saw and novels such as And Then There Were None, by none other than Agatha Christie. I am aware that these are fiction, but they are also prime examples of criminals using psychology against everyday people: both involve a subject attempting to turn unaware individuals against each other in a high-stress situation, seeing how they will react upon discovering the identities (and crimes) of the others. It has become a game of every mind versus the other, as well as their own… and if you’ve seen the movie and/or read the book, you know how it all turns out. Dr. Singer explains the reason for the behavior in situations such as these fictional examples, as well as behavior displayed in situations such as the well-known Stanford Prison Experiment:

These tactics of psychological force are applied to such a severe degree that the individual's capacity to make informed or free choices becomes inhibited. The victims become unable to make the normal, wise or balanced decisions which they most likely or normally would have made, had they not been unknowingly manipulated by these coordinated technical processes. The cumulative effect of these processes can be an even more effective form of undue influence than pain, torture, drugs or the use of physical force and physical and legal threats.

In the works of fiction, the characters usually meet their wit’s end and usually end up killing another or being killed. In the Stanford Prison Experiment, the “inmates” and “prison guards” were forced into new positions of being either authoritative or submissive. For many, it was too much to handle and violence ensued. Stanford was just an experiment and the aforementioned situations were just fiction. What would happen if a criminal used psychological tactics against us in real life? We know of instances when they have been used against victims, but how would law enforcement handle being psychologically attacked?

A good group of detectives you could ask would be those who worked the unsolved case of the Zodiac Killer in the late 1960s. The unknown killer isn’t remembered for his high number of kills (only 5 have been confirmed), but rather the way he taunted police, threatened children, and continuously contacted the media and authorities regarding his crime spree. To keep it modern, I guess you could compare him to the Joker in the Dark Knight. According to Michael Taylor of SFGate.com, in order to keep San Francisco law enforcement on their toes, the Zodiac would write to the newspapers “bragging about how clever he was” and threatened to “blow up school buses or shoot children as they got off the bus.”

To this day, Zodiac “experts” are still trying to uncover the identity of the killer, as well as use criminal psychology and profiling to discover what kind of man he was and what caused his actions. Many believe he had a bad upbringing, while others chalk it up to a mental disorder such as Multiple Personality Disorder (Taylor, 2007). This is a perfect example to showcase the fact that the police and authorities aren’t the only ones capable of psychological games. The faceless killer managed to outsmart the police, frighten an entire city, and vanish forever. It will forever haunt those involved, knowing that the Zodiac Killer could still be out there, but what about the present and future? Will there be another case such as this, with criminals getting smarter, and taking notes of past criminals? We can only hope that if it should happen, modern technology and advanced psychological knowledge will be on our side.



References:

Taylor, M. (2007, March 01). Undying legend of a killer. Retrieved from http://articles.sfgate.com/2007-03-01/news/17234971_1_zodiac-case-arthur-leigh-allen-serial

http://www.factnet.org/coercivemindcontrol.html

YOU MEAN THE SHOW?

Criminal minds. I’m sure the first thing many people think of when they hear those words is the popular show on CBS. I am a fan, but was a fan of understanding the mind of a criminal and cracking the case well before the show aired.

For as long as I can remember, I’ve been fascinated with figuring out the state of mind and motivation behind the actions of criminals, from something simple as purse snatching to the extremes of rape and/or murder. As Clive R. Hollin stated in his book (listed below):

Is a crime committed because the criminal is a rational being, able to make the decision to offend as an act of freewill? Does the crime occur because environmental influences—parents, peer group, culture, and so on—determined the act would invariably happen? Or is the real clue to be found in the genes: are criminals born, not made? The issue goes yet further; if crime is an act of free will, or determined by environmental conditions, or by biological influence, then the solutions to crime demanded by these different perspectives will be very different.

To understand how an offender thinks, acts, and reacts, members of law enforcement can learn what makes them tick, therefore gaining the upper hand. According to a 1981 FBI stat report, 88 out of 192 cases were solved with the help of criminal profiling, 17% of which were solved using profiling alone- a stat 30 years old, and we’ve only improved. Being able to predict a criminal’s next move can only help the future of law enforcement, but there will always be skeptics of psychological methods versus science- a topic to be discussed later.

Of course, we can't have criminal psychology without psychology on its own. Psychology, or "a study of the soul," according to Webster's Dictionary, is said to date back to Plato's philosophical ideas in 387 B.C. From there, understanding the human mind became a fascination. In 1879, Wilhelm Wundt established the first psychology laboratory in Germany. In 1900 Sigmund Freud published the infamous The Interpretation of Dreams, the groundbreaking book on psychoanalysis. A famous experiment in 1905 by Ivan Petrovich Pavlov showed us that dogs could be conditioned to salivate when hearing a specific tone. The list goes on when it comes to psychological breakthroughs throughout history. One in particular can relate to criminal psychology in a big way: jump ahead to 1954- Abraham Maslow published Motivation and Personality, in it containing his famous "Hierarchy of Needs"(Myers, 2004). This pyramid broke down human needs into five sections for every aspect of our life and what makes us thrive. It's the things included in this pyramid that make motivation for crime easier to identify. When a person is in dire need of fulfilling one of these needs, whether it be something as simple as food or something more complex, such as self-esteem, they may feel it necessary to commit crimes against others in order to achieve it.

Although the topic of criminal psychology only recently became popular with the public within the last decade or so, due to television and film, professionals have been using it to their advantage for hundreds of years. From understanding a crime scene to using it in an interrogation room, psychology has been used by law enforcement in many ways and in many countries. Just look at any general psychology timeline and you'll see that many of the discoveries and tactics that are so vital to us as Americans began in other countries such as Germany, Austria, and France. And who could forget a psychologist's best friend- the Rorschach inkblot test- introduced by a Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach. You can see that psychology is a global tool, and something that's still expanding and improving to this day.

Criminal psychology can be viewed as a very broad and ever-changing subject- everything from Sigmund Freud’s 1890s theory of the human psyche to modern psychological warfare. There are even times when a criminal uses psychology against us, turning the aspect of criminal psychology into a two-sided issue. With that said, I don’t believe any one person is affected by criminal psychology, only that it affects us more as a society and criminal justice system as a whole. Psychology is a very effective tool if used properly... for either good or evil.






References:

Hollin, C. R. Psychology and crime: an introduction to criminological psychology. London: 1989. 3-4.

Myers, A. G. (2004). Psychology. (7 ed.). New York City: Worth Publishers.

www.fbi.gov