Testing the Effectiveness of Geo- Behavioural Profiling Systems Professor David Canter & Laura Hammond Director, Centre for Investigative Psychology The University of Liverpool,UK
Study of effectiveness of various prioritisation strategies 92 offence series in a London borough. All identified series over four years/
Various Models Illustrated from the crimes of Jack the Ripper
The ‘canonical’ map Nichols 31.8 –3.40 Chapman 8.9 – 6.00 Stride 30.9 – 1.00 Eddowes 30.9 – 1.45 Kelly ?
The ‘canonical’ map
Circle Hypothesis Calculation to Locate Ripper’s Base
Central Circle in Whitechapel
Centre of Gravity of Murder Locations
Two further concepts Criminal Range Decay Functions
Criminal ‘range’
Range of Distances traveled by Arsonists The Distance Decay Function, An example from serial arsonists
Optimal Function of Distance from Offence to ‘Home’
Offence Map: Developing the Search Tool that incorporates various distance functions. 1st Crime 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
The system assigns a priority to each known offender using various criteria. Offender IDAddressProbability MO Match 124Location A Location B Location C Location D Location E Location F Location G Prioritised search area
50% of actual offenders are in the top 5 prioritized just by geographical location. iOPS allows this to be improved by also using M.O. matching. Criteria Distance from centre of circle defined by 2 furthest crimes Distance from centre of gravity (centroid) Optimum negative log decay function Negative log decay function with buffer
(N = 92) ModelMean Rank (S.D)Median Rank Exponential Function - High B-value 8.86 (8.446)4 Logarithmic Function -Low B-value 9.04 (8.402)4.5 Logarithmic Function -High B-value 8.92 (8.350)5 Centre of Gravity 9.21 (8.256)5 Logarithmic Function -Optimal B-value 8.95 (8.349)5 Logarithmic Function with Buffer Zone- Optimal B-value 9.73 (8.674)5.5 Exponential Function - Low B-value (8.411)7 Exponential Function - Optimal B-value (8.461)7 Exponential Function with Buffer Zone- Optimal B-value (8.888)7 Last Offence (8.416)9 First Offence (8.424)10..5 Centre of Minimum Distance (8.066)14 Centre of Circle (7.536)21 Straight Linear Function (.000)21 COMPARISON OF 15 DIFFERENT MODELS
Need for more context specific examination of crime patterns Taking account of Land use Opportunities for crime Guardianship Targeting Transport routes Temporal sequences
Offender 1: 34 CRIMES 1 HOME LOCATION Offender 34 crimes 1 home location
Offender 2: 34 CRIMES 1 HOME LOCATION Offender 34 crimes 1 home location
2 Offenders with different distributions of crimse in relation to Southside Centre in Wandsworth Southside Centre Offender 34 crimes 1 home location Offender 34 crimes 1 home location
EXAMPLES FROM BURLGARIES IN WANDSWORTH PNC data 12 offenders All crime types 1992-present Offender 1: 10 CRIMES 2 HOME LOCATIONS
Offender 8: 24 CRIMES 1 HOME LOCATION
Offender 3: 20 CRIMES 3 HOME LOCATIONS
Offender 2: 21 CRIMES 3 HOME LOCATIONS
Offender 7: 13 CRIMES 2 HOME LOCATIONS
Offender 5: 19 CRIMES 3 HOME LOCATIONS
Offender 11: 48 CRIMES 3 HOME LOCATIONS
Offender 12: 53 CRIMES 2 HOME LOCATIONS