CRAFT RESPONSE—THIS PERSON DIDN’T ASNWER Q2 Based on your present understanding of the field of criminal profiling, do you feel it is more art or science? Why so? Based on the readings from both Curt and Anne Bartol’s book Criminal Behavioral Profiling and that of the article by Alison, West and Goodwill, I honestly feel that the field incorporates a combination of the two for it to be useful. Taking into account of the “art” within of the field, I believe an applied technique would prevail as being more appropriate. In the beginning of Criminal Behavioral Profiling it was mentioned that the first attempts of profiling originated from speculation (Bartol & Bartol, 2012). Many of the speculations were generated based on resources that are primarily used to this day. For example, investigators and analysts alike usually take into account details of a crime scene, the victim(s) profiles, and geographic area and perpetrator profiles. It is the continuous training and technique of applying the training that serves the law enforcement community in its greatest sense. In the online article by Alison, West and Goodwill, it is expressed that the collaboration of different factors eliminates the probability of criminal profiling just being an art or just a science. When looking at a potential offender of a crime, the variables of an individual’s background history. Furthermore, the offender’s psychopathology, personality, criminal history, and offending behavior would and should be explored (Alison, West, & Goodwill, 2004). As advised in the online article, practitioners often work in accordance with a single case methodology (Alison, West, & Goodwill, 2004). When looking at the scientific or clinical aspects of criminal profiling, they merely from the building blocks needed to create a much larger framework. One example of this through the way American psychiatrist, James Brussel, conducted research methods to assist the NYPD with trying to find the Mad Bomer, George Metesky. Brussel came up with predictions about the bombing subject which a great percentage of them was countered by the actual physical and psychological makeup of Metesky. Other predictions by Brussel originated from common sense conclusions (A. P. Association, 2017) and Barnum Statements (statements that are very general in nature and could apply to many different people) (Bartol & Bartol, 2012, p. 9). Eventhough, Metesky was eventually caught years later with the help of Brussel. However, looking back on the course of the investigation and leading up to the apprehension of the Mad Bomber, Brussel made many mistakes that he later whitewashed to defend his reputation. Other investigations which resulted in help of behavioral analyst and other clinical experts in the field have developed to become more sophisticated. However, despite the use of clinical/scientific data, science cannot stand online in profiling because individual perpetrators are almost always going to have a different variable being part of a crime (unless and individual serial killer is present) no hypothesis can be applied because of the large about of different variables to the crime. Overall, experience/the continuing practice coupled with the implementation of analyze data will be the key to making the profiling system better. References 1 Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (2012). Criminal and behavioral profiling. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. 1 Alison, L., West, A., & Goodwill, A. (2004). The academic and the practitioner: Pragmatists’ views of offender profiling. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 10(1-2), 71– 101. doi:10.1037/1076-8971.10.1/2.71 1 Association, A. P. (2017). Psychological sleuths--criminal profiling: The reality behind the myth. Retrieved January 5, 2017, from http://www.apa.org/monitor/julaug04/criminal.aspx LOWEREY RESPONSE Q1 Based on pre-existing knowledge and the knowledge gained in this week’s course readings, this student is of the opinion that criminal profiling generally leans more toward an art than a science. Course text provides that in the U.S. clinical methods are most common in criminal profiling, while other countries such as the UK and Australia use more statistical approaches. “The clinical method simply refers to heavy reliance on experience and training, and it often encourages intuition and subjectivity.” (Bartol & Bartol, 2013, p. 43) Copson, et al. (1997) “argue, profiling…is far from a science in its current development.” (Bartol & Bartol, 2013, p. 45) This student has noted the variable of human error and uniqueness’ as problematic in criminal profiling. When researching case studies of incidents involving criminal profilers, the profilers themselves should be part of the equation. One could theorize that an individual profiler’s own life experiences and persona could affect how they view/interpret a crime scene and put together facts about a case to begin to make assumptions about that case. Certainly there are viewpoints that do support criminal profiling as a science. Allison & Canter (1999) point out that profilers make observations, form a hypothesis and test that hypothesis; thus this follows a scientific method. (Alison, 2004). Arguably, the lack of scientific methodology applied in criminal profiling is due to the limited statistical data available. Alison, et al. points out that the service of criminal profilers are most commonly requested in crimes of low incidence (such as sexual homicide); however, because the type of crimes needing profilers is low-incidence it consequently provides a low amount of data from which to draw relevant statistics (2004). It is important to note that there are divisions of profiling and some of these divisions are more apt to scientific methods than others. The division of geographic profiling is more scientific than art in the view of this student; geographic profiling is most reliant on hard data that can be applied to a physical geographic area, further advanced by the use of geographic information systems. (White, Lester, Gentile, & Rosenbleeth, 2011) Course text provides details on famous cases of profiling throughout history, such as those in “The Mad Bomber”, “The Boston Strangler”, and most recently “The DC Sniper”. In each case the offender details provided by profiler(s) were not of an accuracy rate that would be acceptable in science. Often inaccuracies provided by profilers can hinder a case when given too much weight by investigators, this was proven in the DC Sniper case where the majority of information provided by profilers proved to be incorrect (Bartol & Bartol, 2013, p. 1) It is probable that if a study of professionals considered “profilers” were done, some would say it is an art and some would say science. Cook & Hinman believe that it is combination of art and science. (Cook & Hinman, 1999) Regardless of how a person chooses to classify this profession, the way that certain individuals perfect and work their craft could be considered an “art”. As in any field there are professionals who are naturally pre-disposed to the abilities needed to perform well and improvements come with experience. Q2 Based on pre-existing knowledge and the knowledge gained in this week’s course readings, this student is of the opinion that criminal profiling as a profession should have a certification standard. However, the possible requirements for certification as a “criminal profiler” are widely debatable. Perhaps the biggest issue here is that there is not a set standard agreed upon by current professionals and that the methodology used in the profession varies and is often kept confidential by profilers who do not wish to share their “trade secrets”. Course text points out that this lack of willingness to share methodology by some profilers hinders the ability to testify in court, where certain standards are pre-set to distinguish "witness" status for testimony. (Bartol & Bartol, 2013, p. 4) One must then ask if a certification requirement will improve and/or advance a field. “While it is important to have accreditation and certification of properly trained profilers, there is no evidence that the ICIAF members do better at predicting or estimating criminal behavior than an educated, knowledgeable investigator who did not undergo the training provided by the ICIAF.” (Bartol & Bartol, 2013, p. 45) This statement raises concern that the methods for training in this area are not consistent or developed enough to be effective. When looking at training in a “new” area, it is necessary to consider who can provide that training and specifically what training is needed to meet pre-determined learning objectives. A lack of consistency in the field of profiling makes it difficult to narrow down such details. Cook & Hinman conclude that “we must increase the knowledge base used to understand criminal behavior and refine the techniques used to control it.” (1999, p. 239) Perhaps a more appropriate place to start would be in forming a professional organization, of which a board of peer-respected professionals could be elected from the members to discuss and develop such standards for certification. References Alison, L. W. (2004). The academic and the practitioner: Pragmatist's views of offender profiling. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law , 10 (1-2), 71-101. Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (2013). Criminal & Behavioral profiling. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc. Cook, P. E., & Hinman, D. L. (1999). Criminal Profiling: Science and Art. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice , 15 (3). White, J. H., Lester, D., Gentile, M., & Rosenbleeth, J. (2011). The utilization of forensic science and criminal profiling for capturing serial killers. Forensic Science International , 160-165. ***************************************************** BLAKE RESPONSE “Based on your present understanding of the field of criminal profiling, do you feel it is more art or science? Why so?” Solely having information from this week’s readings, and from my meager understanding of this subject, I would deem criminal profiling largely as a scientific venture, but one that is bettered by an artistic eye. Though profiling is a teachable skill and is often a culmination of many disciplines (Beauregard, 2007, p. 38) - much like art - certain individuals seem to have an innate grasp of the topic. Beauregard even admits that profiling often uses subjective, intuitive opinion based on experience and personal beliefs (p. 38). Imaginative and out of the box thinking can add to scientific evidence and create a more comprehensive profile. Criminal profiling should be, first and foremost, based in scientific evidence, supported reasoning, and facts. Unsupported conjecture much like bias, has no place within this field. Its use is dangerous and woefully irresponsible. Even wording that suggests a finality in one’s findings, can create a sense of false certainty that’s not conducive to this field (Beauregard, 2007). Scientific facts and principles can be considered certain, but the end profile never is until claims can be verified against the actual perpetrator. If 80% of mass murders in any given year were conducted by white males, that doesn’t mean all mass murderers can be profiled as being white or male. External evidence, statistical information, and outlying exceptions must be taken into account. While science plays a crucial role in criminal profiling, disciplines that are not wholly scientific can aid in the betterment of a profile. The best investigators are those who are able to place themselves into the mindset of a criminal – think how they think (Kirk, 1969, p. 161). Successful criminal profilers must know the probabilities, statistics, and scientific realities of the people they analyze, but must also be imaginative enough to take exceptions and individual circumstances into account. Criminal profiling may be based in science but it’s multidisciplinary approach and need for critical thinking makes it susceptible to artistry. In order to better the science of profiling, old theories must be challenged with new ones, and out of the box thinking must be tested. That is not to say that experience or established truths should be shunned or demonized, but the experiences of others and of one’s own self should be constantly scrutinized for scientific accuracy and relevancy. This is, in my opinion, where the artistic stroke will make the most impact – in the growth of criminal profiling. “Should professional certification exist for those who are titled “criminal profiler”? If so, what should the requirements be for the title? If not, why not?” This is heavily dependent on the desired future of criminal profiling. In its current state, this field of study is underdeveloped and underutilized. It’s lacking a structural format that has allowed other fields of study to build and grow. It would seem, that there is also a division within the one group utilizing this tool that has not been mended or catered to efficiently (Beauregard, 2007, p. 37). A lot of thought and resources went into establishing an Intelligence Community that is both cooperative and competent. Their efforts have unfortunately not trickled down to this particular branch. If the IC would like to move forward with profiling, they must instill a structured, academic base to ensure the best quality criminal profilers are taking this field into the future. It’s clear from the readings that criminal profiling is a multidisciplinary approach (Beauregard, 2007). However, the lack of a set curriculum, professional certification, or even available jobs means that this skill is highly unfocused and potentially dangerous. Criminal profiling has the potential for greatness, having been used to capture or find some of the most dangerous criminals on the planet (Beauregard, 2007, p. 32-33). It’s a useful marriage of psychology and science that could potentially aid every branch of the Intelligence Community. The science and art of profiling is by no means perfect, but it is useful and can be incredibly accurate. It’s inconstancy and severe lack of structure has already made it controversial in a court of law (p. Alison et al, 2004, p. 78). Unfortunately, it may continue to fall into the ranks of pseudo-science unless action is taken. A frame work for growth must be built to save this technique in the future. The only way this asset will grow, is by the research and experimentation in the same multi-disciplinary fields. Creating a set curriculum and professional certification would facilitate this expansion. The very existence of the BAU and BSU show that there is a recognized need for criminal profiling but it’s potentially hindered by its lack of development. Furthermore, the creation of a structured certification will ensure the highest degree of training and in turn improve upon the quality of profilers. If a curriculum were devised solely for criminal profiling, it should include general courses in: 2 Psychology – Specifically criminal psychology and non-verbal communication 3 Criminology 4 Forensics and some more specific focused classes such as: 2 History of Criminal Profiling 3 Criminal Statistics 4 Personal Bias and Metacognition – thinking about thinking (Being aware of one’s own thought processes) (Beauregard, 2007, p. 62-63) 5 Interagency Cooperation – This is important for all those involved in the IC. The relationship between agencies can be tumultuous and cooperation is key. This seems to be especially important for criminal profilers as the divide is clearly hindering this discipline. Additionally, field time should be required for at least two years. This would give the prospective profiler the opportunity to shadow someone with experience and gain some real-world experience of their own. The listed examples are just some requirements that could allow for a successful framework for the educational certification of criminal profiling. Such a framework could allow for the improvement of the subject and a cohesive growth. Beauregard, E. (2007). Criminal Profiling: Art or Science? (16th ed). The Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia. 18-36. Kirk, P. (1969) Fire Investigation. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. 161 Alison, L., West, A., & Goodwill, A. (2004). The Academic and the Practitioner Pragmatists’ View of Offender Profiling. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol 10, No ½, 71-101. Doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.10.1/2.71 
Purchase answer to see full attachment