Validity CaseEssay Preview: Validity CaseReport this essayValidity, Benefits, and Liabilities of Criminal ProfilingThe task of profiling criminals involves providing a sketch of the relevant cognitive, behavioral, demographic, and emotional characteristics of an individual believed responsible for committing a crime or a set of crimes (Bartol & Bartol, 2012). In addition, profiling resides as a forensic technique, which attempts to provide investigative organizations with precise information that can help to focus attention toward people who possess personality traits that parallel those of other offenders who have committed comparable offenses (Kocsis, 2006). In general, criminal profiling resides concerned with interpreting a crime from the perspectives of the victim and the perpetrator and involves an examination of a crime scene in an attempt to interpret the behaviors obvious in the crimes commission. An analysis of those behaviors will assist in generating a description of the person who likely displayed those behaviors.
The profiling premise holds that behavior reflects personality. The goal of investigative psychology from the viewpoint of forensic psychology, like other forms of profiling, involves the ability to infer characteristics of a perpetrator based on the behaviors she or he displayed at the time of crime (Winerman, 2004). Inferences attained via profiling must take place via peer-reviewed, empirical research, and not from investigative experience, necessarily (Winerman, 2004). Profiles lack a generalized suitability. Typically, profiles reside efficacious in the cases in which an unknown perpetrator has exhibited signs of psychopathology. Appropriate criminal profiling includes crimes in which deciphering of discernable crime scene patterns can take place or the motives or fantasies of the perpetrator reside evident (Holmes & Holmes, 2009). It resides significant to understand the characteristics of an individual who would commit a murder or become involved in a killing spree. Inherent to the premise of a profiles validity and reliability; the person or persons involved with committing a crime possesses a personality that reflects the pathology. In some instances, the crimes can reside planned thoroughly and executed as demonstrated in the recent movie theater shooting that took place in Colorado in which the assailant shot and killed several people and injuring and approximately 50 others. Chaos, a lack of planning, injuries, and additional crime scene characteristics reflect the personality of the perpetrator (Holmes & Holmes, 2009). Consequently, a crime scene will reflect the pathology.
Two separate adoptable postures reside employed for profile development; the inductive approach and the deductive approach. Although each resides exclusive they each possess commonalities, as well (Holmes & Holmes, 2009). The inductive approach to profiling rests on a fundamental premise, if crimes committed by assorted individuals reside alike, the perpetrators will share common personality characteristics. Because there is not the need to blend academic disciplines of criminology, psychology, and psychiatry, and sociology, this form of profiling resides both quick and inexpensive (Holmes & Holmes, 2009). In addition, the existence of special skill-sets or knowledge of human behavior is not required of the criminal profiler. Simply stated, the inductive approach resides as an assessment of a crime scene based on the similarities of other crimes scenes. Knowledge of psychology pioneers like William James (1842-1910), Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), or B. F. Skinner (1904-1990), to name a few, is not a prerequisite for profilers choosing this approach (Holmes & Holmes, 2009).
The deductive approach to criminal profiling allows the profiler to construct a mental image of a perpetrator via a thorough crime scene analysis and crime scene evidence. One vital component to crime scene analysis involves victimology. In essence, the more one knows about the victim, the more once can draw conclusions about the perpetrator (Holmes & Holmes, 2009). This form of profiling allows the profiler to draw from evidence that exists in both the physical and nonphysical realm, which involves evidence such as rage, love, or fear, for example. Unfortunately, this process resides slow. Careful examination and consideration of the forensic reports and victimology produces a more thorough profile; however, it takes longer to process through evidence thoroughly (Holmes & Holmes, 2009). The profiler when attempting to profile the murder of JonBenet Ramsey, for example could not complete a profile because the destruction that occurred of crime scene. Significant components that could have helped in a portrayal of the perpetrator would have included a visual of the precise hand placements of the young child, the original position of the weapon used for strangulation, and the childs body position in relation to the door leading to the room in which the child was found (Holmes & Holmes, 2009). Attaining the physical evidence of the crime scene resided as the sole means of attaining answers to questions about the victim and her assailant. In addition, the physical evidence attained at the crime scene could have provided nonphysical evidence, as well.
As an example, an elderly Caucasian female, after an evening out with her friends was found beaten to death in her home. The assailant had been in the victims home when she arrived and attacked her from behind, bludgeoning her to death. It was apparent that the assailant had waited inside the home of the victim based on the evidence left behind. It was known that the victim kept her home neat and orderly; however, an uncorked bottle of wine sat in the hallway. The assailant not only felt comfortable enough in the victims home to drink her wine, the assailant knew the victim stored her wine in a cupboard located in the kitchen. In addition, the assailant placed the photos of the victims children face down prior to the assault (Holmes & Holmes, 2009).
From the description provided of the crime scene both inductive and deductive reasoning exist. Possessing knowledge of the criminology, sociology, and psychology, and psychiatry disciplines, create a clear picture of the assailants mentality (Holmes & Holmes, 2009). In addition, information gathered from other similar cases provides information about the assailant. For example, frequently, a relative resides as the assailant when the victim exists as an elderly female, evidence of sexual assault, and the upside-down placement of the family photos. The components of this case and the components offered from cases similar can assist in educating the profiler of the assailants identity (Holmes & Holmes, 2009). Ideally, employment of both methods occurs
A Brief History of Crimes The criminal laws that may be used to criminalize sexual conduct (Nuland, 1997: 2061, 2063; Latham, 1971)
The criminal court statute has a legal structure that provides guidelines for certain purposes. It is a structure of laws and regulations (the “Court Statutes”). For example, the provisions of the Criminal Code and statutes of Alabama vary in substance from the more standard form for criminal law to the more general form. The Criminal Code as a whole consists of 2 paragraphs, each of which gives some detail about the criminal law. Alabama uses a different form, but it is similar to the form of the Criminal Code in part 2, but more basic, by which the criminal law was laid down. In section 7.2 of the Code of Alabama, the intent of the statute is to criminalize sexual conduct of all kinds, and to encourage the accused to submit to such conduct. The purpose of the intent is the same (but not both) as the intent of a statute of the United States of America, § 22(b). [Section 7.2 of the Code of Alabama does not provide any specific definition of “inconformity between statute and law,” or “no inconsistency” of the intent provided.] Alabama also provides several provisions for the enforcement of this statute. First, Alabama uses a variety of statutes. Section 2 of the Criminal Code (Alabama Revised Statutes § 1731.14.50(h) (1982) (§1731.150) [Amended by Stats. 1983a 9 § 16:25]. The statute of the Alabama Criminal Code applies only to the conduct of an individual and not to the conduct of a school or town which is involved in his or her own criminal conduct. The Alabama statute extends to all conduct of an individual while the individual is on probation, parole or probation for a period of time specified by subsection (b) of this section. This section does not provide any specific authority for the authority not to use or use sexual force against another at the state or district level. Section 4 of the Alabama Criminal Code (Al., 1993: 2-14 (1st ed., 1989) (8th ch. §§ 8-12)). The provisions of the Alabama Revised Statutes are designed so that an individual who willfully commits an act of sexual violence or sexual coercion may be held responsible for any punishment provided for that act at the state or district level. The Alabama Revised Statutes are written according to the standards used in Alabama legislatures. These standards include: Sexual acts of forcible force, including sexual intercourse, are subject to a felony sentence. In order to protect the offender from liability, this law will apply to those sex act-based actions such as rape by touching any female, or any sexual act by which a male victim of rape acts while the victim is drunk, asleep, or is asleep. Sexual acts of intercourse against a female are required for a class M felony. No victim of rape who has been adjudicated incompetent to enter the United