Behavioural linking of stranger rapes

Abstract

A sample of serial stranger rape cases (n = 43)

Internet Facilitated Rape: A Multivariate Model of Offense Behavior

“…Whilst these behavioral classification models differ slightly in their general themes and their labels, when taken together, research endorses three main themes: violence, interpersonal involvement and criminal sophistication (e.g. Corovic et al, 2012;Park et al, 2008;Santtila et al, 2005). The present study looked to investigate the offense behaviors displayed within IFR cases, first by examining behaviors across the platforms offenders used to solicit their victims, second, by comparing IFR and non-IFR cases, and finally by examining the underlying structure of IFR offense behavior using an SSA.…”

“…Within this exploratory study, the results may provide the first steps in further understanding IFR crime scene behaviors. The ability to link crime reduces the number of suspects, whilst also accumulating evidence concerning the offender, leading to more efficient and productive investigation strategies (Santtila et al, 2005). To further this research a sample consisting of serial sex offenders that commit both IFR and non-IFR could be examined to investigate the behavioral consistency across offenses, in terms of discrete behaviors and thematic classifications.…”

To link or not to link: a test of the case linkage principles using serial car theft data

“…An abundance of research evidence from the personality arena, therefore, addresses the existence of behavioural consistency. Indeed, much research now exists showing cross-situational consistency in both non-criminal (Funder & Colvin, 1991;Furr & Funder, 2004;Shoda, Mischel, & Wright, 1993, 1994Wright & Mischel, 1987) and criminal behaviour, including stranger sexual crimes against both adults and children (Beutler, Hinton, Crago, & Collier, 1995;Canter et al, 1991, cited in Woodhams & Toye, 2007Grubin, Kelly, & Ayis, 1997;Grubin, Kelly, & Brunsdon, 2001;Knight, Warren, Reboussin, & Soley, 1998;Santtila, Junkkila, & Sandnabba, 2005), homicide (Salfati & Bateman, 2005), arson (Santtila, Fritzon, & Tamelander, 2005), residential and commercial burglary (Bennell & Canter, 2002;Bennell & Jones, 2005;Green, Booth, & Biderman, 1976;Yokota & Canter, 2004), and commercial robbery (Woodhams & Toye, 2007).…”

Serial and single‐victim rapists: differences in crime‐scene violence, interpersonal involvement, and criminal sophistication

“…Warren et al, 1991); and choosing two cases per series randomly (e.g. Santtilla, Junkkila, & Sandnabba, 2005). Among the various ways of selecting offenses committed by serial offenders, we chose cases randomly in order to minimize any potential bias that might result from selecting cases based on the order or sequence of the offense in the series.…”