Offender Profiling involves gathering information from crime scenes, autopsy reports, victim statements, witnesses, offender's physical descriptions, race, age, sex and criminal records and used to formulate a profile of the kind of individual likely to commit a crime.
Offender Profiling does not point to specific offenders. It does not determine whether a given defendant committed a specific act. Offender profiling only provides an indication of the type of person likely to have committed a type of crime. It does not point to a specific individual. Torres, A. N., BoccaccinI, M. T., & Miller, H. A. (2006).
Profile evidence is generally not admissible in court proceedings to prove guilt, although it is sometimes admitted for narrower purposes such as proving innocence. Kirkpatrick, L. (1998).
There are three main rules governing the admissibility of scientific evidence in court: The Frye Test Standard, The Federal Rules of Evidence and The Daubert Decision.
The Frye Test Standard ensures that there exists a minimal reserve of experts who can examine the validity of any scientific evidence. It protects prosecution and defense by assuring that a experts exist who can critically examine the validity of a scientific determination in a particular case. Ebisike, N. (2007).
Federal Rule 702 states that:
If scientific,
…show more content…
While many states are in favor of the Frye test, many trial judges largely accept and prefer the Frye test. Several research studies have been in favor of this argument: 724 Dahir et aI, for instance, carried out a study of 325 state trial judges (from the 50 states and the District of Columbia) and found out that there is "a strong tendency for judges to continue to rely on more traditional standards such as general acceptance and qualifications of the expert when assessing psychological syndrome and profile evidence. Ebisike, N.
Victoria and New South Wales (NSW) take a similar approach in relation to tendency and coincidence evidence (‘the Evidence’). However, until the case of KJM (No 2) , they took different approaches in reviewing rulings of the Evidence .
Abstract; This paper explors the effects DNA fingerprinting has had on the trial courts and legal institutions. Judge Joseph Harris states that it is the "single greatest advance in the search for truth since the advent of the cross examination (Gest, 1988)." And I tend to agree with Judge Joseph's assertion, but with the invention and implementation of DNA profiling and technology has come numerous problems. This paper will explore: how DNA evidence was introduced into the trial courts, the effects of DNA evidence on the jury system and the future of DNA evidence in the trial courts.
police then look for a suspect who might possibly have committed it. Profiling means that a suspect is discovered and the police then look for a crime for the person to have possibly committed” (Tator & Henry, 2003, p3).
Therefore, the criminal justice system relies on other nonscientific means that are not accepted or clear. Many of forensic methods have implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or anything to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011). Defense experts are required to help the defense attorneys defend and breakdown all of the doubts in the prosecutors scientific findings in criminal cases. Scientific information is integral in a criminal prosecution, and a defense attorney needs to have an expert to assist he/she in discrediting the prosecution (Giannelli,
evidentiary fact in science, just like all other facts of biology, physics, chemistry, etc. It
Otto, A. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1994). The Biasing Impact Of Pretrial Publicity On Juror Judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 18(4), 453-469.
Palermo explains the “…means of impeding the presentation of sloppy scientific evidence is found Federal Rule of Evidence 403 that gives judges the discretion to admit or to exclude from trial evidence, including scientific, deemed to prejudicial, confusing, or misleading to jurors” (2006). The article then explains that the technical terms used in the trial court while presenting the DNA analyses, is many times too complex for the individuals sitting on the jury. Ultimately, these same jurors are still inclined to reject or accept the facts presented even if they don’t understand the information presented. Palermo also commented on the necessity for better training on the individuals that come in close contact with the collection of DNA evidence, because it’s imperative, as is the training of DNA analysts and others involved with the handling of evidence. The collection of evidence plays a viable role in the process of DNA examination because if evidence isn’t collected properly the evidence could easily be contaminated with other elements from the crime scene.
Racial profiling is accusing someone because of their race and criminal profiling uses race, but it is not the deciding factor. When there is an investigation and there is a witness saying he was attacked by a white fat guy with brown hair investigators are not looking for a black guy to just pin it on. In 2000 a Bradford police officer was questioned in court about his profile. The defense was saying that he targeted his client because of race. The officer gave the profile he came up with of the house; high electric consumption, large heat loss, vacated appearance, and the culprits were all of the same race. He had profiled the house to be a grow house. The judge accepted the criminal profile and believed that the arrest was not racially motivated (Criminal Profiling versus Racial Profiling). This shows that criminal profiles are useable in court and an explanation for an arrest. The profile is proof that while race may be a factor there is more to the profile than that. Police work in an ethnically diverse departments and communities and if they aren’t comfortable with it, maybe reconsider that career choice. Law enforcement needs to know when to use race as part of the profile and when the profile is useable without having race
The process of using behavioral evidence left at a crime scene to make inferences about the offender, including inferences about personality characteristics and psychopathology is called criminal profiling. Around the country, several agencies rely on the minds of criminal psychologists to lead them in the right direction to finding the correct offender. Criminal profiling provides investigators with knowledge of the appearance and behavior of a potential criminal.
Evidence collection is a crucial part of forensics. Its reliability can be compromised by input bias from law
The usefulness of profiling has been called into question many times. There are those who fall on both ends of the spectrum. Some feel that profiling is as infallible as a fingerprint, and others think it’s as reliable as a sideshow gypsy. Studies have been done that support both positions. The truth, of course, lies somewhere in the middle: Profiling may be a useful tool when applied appropriately, but it should not be used to the exclusion of good suspects or information. It is an addendum to the investigator’s...
Petherick, W., Kennedy, D., Homant, R. (2005). Serial crime : Theoretical and practical issues in behavioral profiling. Burlington, MA, USA: Academic Press
In this position paper I have chosen Bloodsworth v. State ~ 76 Md.App. 23, 543 A.2d 382 case to discuss on whether or not the forensic evidence that was submitted for this case should have been admissible or not. To understand whether or not the evidence should be admissible or not we first have to know what the case is about.
Long-drawn out trials that go on for years cause psychological stress, tension in the family of those involved in the case, and these trials make a huge dent in the money supply of the court system in the government. Each day members of the jury have to be accounted for and must receive money for their services. Using a judge is both cost-effective and smart. Additionally, judges usually don’t take as long to make decisions in court as they are both efficient in what they do and are well-informed of the subject, the particular person on trial, and they have the know-how to execute the correct sentence. “In 2010, 2,352 federal criminal defendants had a jury trial and 88% of these criminal jury trials ended in a conviction.” (Document A) Now on the one hand some...
Derived from the Latin word ‘filum’, ‘to profile’ means ‘to thread’ or ‘to shape’. Profiling broadly means identifying social, emotional, and physical characteristics of an offender based on the data gathered at the crime-scene. This method of criminal identification is based on criminology, psychology, behavioural studies and forensic sciences. Previously used in investigating for serial crimes, criminal profiling techniques are nowadays used by crime-scene investigators to identify possible personal traits, characteristics, social life aspects and occupational background of offenders and thus to narrow down the list of suspects even in less complicated cases like arson, murder, rape, and cyber crime in order to save time and resources.