Confessions of sex offenders: extracting offender and victim profiles for investigative interviewing
| Date | 06 February 2017 |
| Pages | 13-28 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JCP-10-2016-0031 |
| Published date | 06 February 2017 |
| Author | Eric Beauregard,Irina Busina,Jay Healey |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Criminology & forensic psychology,Criminal psychology,Sociology,Sociology of crime & law,Deviant behaviour,Public policy & environmental management,Policing,Criminal justice |
Confessions of sex offenders: extracting
offender and victim profiles for
investigative interviewing
Eric Beauregard, Irina Busina and Jay Healey
Abstract
Purpose –Although offender profiling has been cited as an effective tool to interview suspects, empirical
profiling methods have completely excluded interviewing suggestions when testing the validity of this
technique. The purpose of this paper is to explore the utility of empirically derived profiles of offender- and
victim-related sexual assault case characteristics (n ¼624) in the preparation of the interrogation strategies in
sexual assault investigations.
Design/methodology/approach –Latent class analysis was used to extract profiles of offender- and
victim-related sexual assault case characteristics in a sample of 624 incarcerated sex offenders. Moreover,
relationships between offender and victim profiles were conducted using χ
2
analyses.
Findings –Findings show that specific offender-victim profiles are related to greater likelihood of confession
during the interrogation. Possible interrogation strategies for each profile are suggested and implications for
the practice of interviewing suspects are discussed.
Originality/value –The study is the first to examine both victim and offender profiles in order to assess the
significant victim-offender profile combinations and their associated probabilities of resulting in confession.
Keywords Confession, Latent class analysis, Offender profiling, Interrogation, Investigative interviewing,
Sex offender
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The resolution of a sexual assault case largely relies on the offender’s story against the victim’s
account of the crime (Kebbell et al., 2006). Furthermore, contrary to popular belief, physical
evidence is not a consistently reliable source of corroboration for the victim’s story and is subject
to considerable time constraints (Beauregard and Martineau, 2014). Therefore, confession by
the offender may be the only reliable way to prove an offender’s guilt. Researchers estimate that
between 42 and 76 per cent of offenders confess to having committed the crime when they are
brought in for an interrogation (Moston et al., 1992; Baldwin, 1993; Bull, 2006). Interestingly,
research has also demonstrated that sex offenders may be the least likely candidates for a
confession, in comparison to other types of offenders, due to the social stigma and shame that
this type of crime is typically associated with (St-Yves and Deslauriers-Varin, 2009). Despite
offenders’initial reluctance to confess to a crime, it has been shown that they are likely to change
their mind about confessing when they are exposed to certain types of interrogation strategies,
and this decision-making process is crime specific (Sigurdsson and Gudjonsson, 1994).
Therefore, in the context of sexual assault, it is important to explore what crime-specific factors
could facilitate sex offenders’decision to confess to the police.
Current investigative aids such as criminal profiling provide some suggestions on how police
officerscould match particular interviewing strategiesto specific profiles of sexoffenders. However,
this investigative tool has been criticized extensively for relying on subjective investigative
experience rather than empirical validation (Snook et al., 2008). On the other hand, empirical
Received 6 October 2016
Revised 20 October 2016
Accepted 20 October 2016
Eric Beauregard is a Professor
at the School of Criminology
and Director, Centre for
Research on Sexual Violence,
Simon Fraser University,
Burnaby, Canada.
Irina Busina is based at the
School of Criminology, Simon
Fraser University, Burnaby,
Canada.
Jay Healey is based at
Saint Mary’s University,
Halifax, Canada.
DOI 10.1108/JCP-10-2016-0031 VOL. 7 NO. 1 2017, pp. 13-28, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 2009-3829
j
JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY
j
PAG E 13
profiling methods have completely excluded interviewing suggestions when testing the validity of
this technique. Hence, the aim of this study is to explore the utility of empirically derived profilesof
offender- and victim-related case characteristics in the preparationof the interrogation strategiesin
sexual assault investigations. Suggestions for specific interrogation strategies matched to each
combination of offender- and victim-related case characteristics are also discussed.
Profiling sex offenders
According to Napier (2010), the proper foundation for a sex crime investigation must begin with a
thorough analysis of the crime scene data and behaviourally oriented interview, where a
description of the offender’s actions (e.g. method of approach, control of the victim, use of
physical force, victim resistance, offender’s reaction to victim resistance, type and sequence of
sexual acts) is sought from the victim. The second most important inquiry in a sex crime
investigation is assessing victimology (Napier, 2010). Obtaining information about the victim’s
alcohol or drug use, security consciousness, sexual practices, and assertiveness may assist in
the construction of the offender profile because it allows investigators to better understand victim
selection and possibly the offender’s motivation for the crime (Napier, 2010).
Sex offenders’typologies, such as Groth et al. (1977) and Lanning’s (1995) classifications for rapists
and child molesters, respectively, were expanded uponand adapted for investigative purposes by
FBI researchers (Robertiello and Terry, 2007). These sex off ender classification schemes, aside from
providinga portrait of thelikely perpetrator,are importantto the preparationof offender interviewand
interrogation because itallows the investigatingofficers to anticipateoffenders’emotional strengths
and weaknesses and justifications for their behaviour (Napier, 2010). Also, using crime scene
behaviours and offender characteristics may help the investigating officers to identify who should
conduct the interview, where the interview should be conducted, what type of environment is best
suited for a particular interviewee, and what emotional appeals are most likely to be effective.
Current research demonstrates that objective physical evidence is not reliable proof of an
offender’s guilt in sexual assault investigations (Horvath and Meesig, 1996). Ultimately, this
means that in the absence of objective proof or corroborating witness statements, the resolution
in a sexual assault case relies on the word of the victim against that of the offender. In cases like
this, an offender’s confession may be the best, and sometimes only, proof of guilt. However,
most research on confession has paid attention to factors that either constitute personal
vulnerabilities, which may lead an innocent person to confess, or on contextual factors of the
interrogation itself (e.g. interrogation styles, availability of evidence, availability of counsel, etc.).
The lack of understanding of what factors lead to confession beyond individual vulnerabilities and
the context of interrogation necessitates research that concentrates on what works in terms of
influencing a suspect’s decision to admit their guilt.
Interestingly, recent research on suspect confession found that the decision to admit or deny
involvement in a crime might be influenced by the interplay of factors that precede the actual
interrogation (Deslauriers-Varin et al., 2011a). More importantly, this research highlights the fact
that these “pre-interrogation”factors allow a suspect to follow through with his initial decision to
confess or not, even after being exposed to the context of the interrogation (Deslauriers-Varin
et al., 2011a, b). Therefore, law enforcement officials should take into consideration the context of
the crime, as well as the individual characteristics of the offender, when preparing to interrogate a
suspect. These results have important implications for offender profiling and the possibility of
linking suspect profiles to specific interviewing strategies, in order to improve the probability of
obtaining a confession.
Therefore, the purpose of this study is to: create suspect profiles that are based on sex offender
characteristics relevant to sexual assault investigation, and empirically linked to sex offender
confession; create victim profiles based on factors that are relevant to profiling offenders’victim
selection strategy, and that are empirically linked to sex offenders’decisions to confess or not
during interrogation; examine both victim and offender profiles in order to assess the significant
victim-offender profile combinations and their associated probabilities of resulting in confession;
and suggest possible interrogation strategies for various offender-victimology profile
combinations that may have practical implications for sexual assault investigations.
PAG E 14
j
JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2017
To continue reading
Request your trial