Tuesday 14 May 2013

Case study of offender profiling - JOHN DUFFY

Canter applied his criminal consistency theory in order to create an offender profile for the "Railway rapist". 

The offender profile that Canter provided included the following characteristics based on interpersonal consistency:


  • male in his mid-late twenties
  • poor relationship with women but has probably been married
  • considerable sexual experience, potentially with bondage
  • a couple of close male friends
  • experience with police or knowledge of procedures (he combed the victim's pubic hair to remove evidence of his own)
  • probably not physically strong (he used restraints but only enough control to rape)
  • male in his mid-late twenties; potentially semi-skilled work

And these were characteristics based on spatial consistency:

  • knowledge of the railway
  • worked/lived nearby crime scene

These moved John Duffy up the list of suspects to the prime suspect spot due to his extraordinary similarity to the offender profile. 

He was 29 and worked as a travelling carpenter for British rail. He had been married, but was separated. During their time together, Duffy tied his wife up during sex, and the relationship was abusive. He had a criminal record and watched hardcore pornography. He also had two male friends.


(               a)     Describe one case study as an approach to offender profiling (10)

A case study is a piece of research which looks extensively at and documents the development or investigation of one particular event, individual or group. One example of a case study which documents a case of offender profiling is Canter’s case study of John Duffy, the railway rapist.

Canter is a forensic psychologist who devised the criminal consistency hypothesis which is central to the way that many offender profiles are created using the bottom up approach. The criminal consistency hypothesis has two central components: interpersonal consistency, which is the idea that the offender is likely to interact with others in his or her daily life in a similar way to how the victim was treated; and spatial consistency, which refers to how many offenders will commit crimes in places they are familiar with, so it may be en route to their work, or to a friend’s house they visit regularly. In his case study, John Duffy built up the offender profiling upon these principles.

The “railway rapist” was a serial rapist and murderer of several women, who committed these violent sexual acts at railway stations throughout the south east of England during the 1980s. Canter was employed to build up an offender profile in order to significantly narrow down the list of suspects. From the crime scenes, Canter believed that the offender would be in his mid to late twenties, and was likely to have been married though had generally poor relationships with women. The profile also consisted of characteristics such as having an extensive knowledge of the railway systems, a job which involved semi-skilled labour, and previous police contact, judging from the way the bodies were largely clean of any DNA of the offender. Canter also deducted that it’s likely that the offender enjoyed bondage and had considerable sexual experience due to the treatment of the victims, but was likely not to be physically strong.

The offender profile drawn up by Canter was found to be extraordinarily accurate of one man, John Duffy, who admitted to the crimes. He was 29, and had recently separated from his wife. During their marriage, which was abusive, he liked to tie up his wife during sexual intercourse, and he also enjoyed hard-core pornography. Canter had two close male friends, but no female friends. He worked as a travelling carpenter for British rail, and had previous police contact.


Thus, a case study such as Canter’s study of John Duffy, can be used as an effective approach to offender profiling as it gathers in depth data about the crime scene and allows for thorough and extensive profiling to be undertaken. 


12 comments:

  1. could you please write a 10 marker question on john duffy please

    it seems difficult as there is to many info to write about

    thank you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I'll do it tomorrow!

      Delete
    2. I've attached the case study to the post above.

      Delete
  2. This is all brilliant thanks, however I have always wondered how you would answer a question b on creating a profile, as I get question a's but how would you structure question b? Seeing as though the three studies are all by the same person!

    These are the questions I have found in old past papers for this section:

    "Assess the usefulness of qualitative and quantitative data when creating a profile."
    "Assess the reliability of offender profiling."
    "Compare different approaches to creating a profile."

    Thanks :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To be honest, it's a tricky section for part b. My teacher taught us three different studies though, so at least we could compare those. You might want to check out the posts on them (Mokros and Alison for the top down, and Copson for the bottom up - neither are too tricky to learn).

      With the "assess the usefulness" question, I really wasn't sure how to go about that because they all use both qualitative and quantitative. If it came down to it and I had to answer that one, I think I would just go along the lines of giving a description and evaluation of qualitative and quantitative data each with their own paragraphs, then attempt to link each strength and weakness to one of the approaches (case study, top down, bottom up). Maybe a weakness of quantitative for this section would be something about how not everybody acts consistently and individual differences makes approaches which use this type of data invalid?

      Reliability I would again split into either a "good" paragraph and a "bad" paragraphs to look at strengths and weaknesses, or into internal and external reliability. Factors to look at include standardisation (strong for top down) and how much the profiler affects the outcome (bottom up, it's basically all on the profiler which means different profilers may create different profiles, which isn't reliable).

      As for compare different approaches, I'd look at validity of the profiles (support with evidence such as Mokros and Alison vs Canter's case study of John Duffy) and reliability (as above).

      Delete
    2. Oh ok thanks, that has made it a bit easier. Seeing as though creating a profile has come up three times, I am hoping it won't come up again as I don't think I could write enough for 15 marks!

      But I am deffs going to read the other studies you were taught, thanks! :)

      Delete
    3. Just wondering what the qualitative data used in the three studies would be? I have to do the 'assess' question but cant see the qual data here? help please..

      Delete
  3. What other subjects are you studying alongside this course? and what did you get?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi there, I took English Language and Art, and got A*s for my A2s. I'm currently in my second year studying Psychology BSc in the University of Exeter.

      Delete
  4. I'm sorry this exam is absolutely ridiculous, there's around a gajillion studies and we have to know so much detail for each, let alone evaluating all of it. Really put me off psychology.

    Got an A last year and by tomorrow that'll be an F. Thanks for the blog though, I'm hopeless but who knows, I may get an E instead of an F (if I'm lucky)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Herbal remedy to cure Hsv-1&2, Email Robinsonbucler@ gmail com.........

    ReplyDelete