|
Behavioral
scientists, specifically, police psychologists,
play an integral role in law enforcement today.
Large metropolitan law enforcement agencies
such as the Dallas, Boston, San Diego and Los
Angeles Police Departments, employ behavioral
scientists in the capacity of police psychologists,
organizational development and human factors/human
performance consultants (Davis, 1995; Reiser,
1972a). Many behavioral scientists who possess
specialized training beyond traditional clinical
training, can effectively assist law enforcement
management and related personnel to enhance
their day-to-day operations and the performance
of departments and staff.
The ways in which police psychologists or behavioral
scientists are used in modern law enforcement
departments today are diverse. For example,
police psychologists are typically involved
with individual and group consultation, officer
candidate assessment and evaluation, police
officer selection, hostage negotiation, stress
management, counseling of police officers and
their families (Davis, 1993; Depue, 1979; Reiser,
1972b). Additionally, other duties include police
management and supervisory training, police
academy teaching and instruction, research and
development, police or community critical incident
debriefing, urban crime prevention programs,
advanced officer training, diagnosing and solving
organizational, managerial or supervisory problems,
the implementation of human resource development
programs, employee assistance programs (EAP'S),
and "burn-out" prevention programs.
Taken together, these efforts are ultimately
directed at planning for the departments' overall
future growth and, for the wellness of its personnel
who operate within it (Hargrave & Berner,
1984).
Typically, police psychologists work for departments
in one of two ways - they provide services,
consultation and training as an "in-house"
service (i.e., as an actual department staff
member) or they serve as an outside consultant
who provides services under contract department
wide. There are advantages as well as limitations
to both, however, both arrangements have merit,
and should be set up according to agency size,
number of personnel, specialized needs, and
budgets of each department and division in mind.
Regardless of the arrangement, the police psychologist
should generally be connected to the highest
level of the department's administrative and
managerial structure. When possible, the psychologist
should work in close proximity to the Chief
of Police for the purposes of "direct line"
consultation and communication (Lefkowitz, 1977).
The issue of confidentiality
is very important for the police psychologist
who works with sworn or support personnel, especially
when services such as psychotherapy, counseling,
assessment, fitness-for-duty evaluation, and
research are conducted (Davis, 1993). Depending
on the issue or referral question, confidentiality
can be complete, limited, restricted, or open
and up-front. This is addressed with the officer
or employee seeking or being referred for psychological
services once contact with a supervisor or commanding
officer is made. A non-restrictive disclosure
or breach of confidentiality occurs when a question
of officer dangerousness or an issue involving
fitness-for-duty is of major concern (Davis,
1995; Somodeville, 1978; Reiser, 1972).
Victimization, misuse or abuse of police powers
and officer misconduct are areas typically open
and "up-front" in terms of disclosure
that are not protected by confidentiality. Areas
involving complete confidentiality include the
direct counseling and treatment of officers,
their families, and various civilian personnel
job-related problems. Special consideration
is given when there is a question of privileged
communication between the police psychologist,
employee, and a third party (i.e., supervisor
or family member) (Davis, 1993).
Ideally, when the police psychologist is a contract
provider, their office is located physically
outside of the department to facilitate privacy
and confidentiality. If the police psychologist
is an "in-house" service provider,
department representative or an extension of
the department, their office should be secluded
enough to promote utilization of services, confidentiality,
and employee receptability (Somodeville, 1978;
Reiser, 1972).
In a unique "forensic"
role utilized by some departments, the expertise
of the police psychologist plays an important
part as an objective scientist in major case
consultation or when a crime investigation is
underway. This may especially be the case when
the crime committed by the perpetrator or offender
is a "stranger to stranger" crime
or in cases where the crime seemed senseless,
sexually sadistic and motiveless or when the
perpetrator is unknown and cannot be identified
(Davis, 1995).
Requests for psychological assistance may come
from specific investigative units within the
department such as the homicide unit, sex crimes
unit or "violent crimes committed against
persons" division for the purposes of "criminal
investigative analysis" or "criminal
psychological personality profiling." Crime
scene analysis, criminal investigative analysis
or what is often referred to as "profiling"
involves carefully detailing the crime scene
area identified by officers, detectives, coroners,
medical examiners, criminalists, forensic scientists,
and evidence technicians (Davis, 1993; Geberth,
1981). Along with talking to forensic crime
scene photographers and examining crime scene
or victim photographs, the police psychologist
(especially when trained in the forensic sciences)
can give many investigators sound objective
scientific support when evaluating and examining
the critical elements connecting physical, mental
or circumstantial evidence during intense crime
scene analysis. A "profile" generated
at times can yield important psychological,
forensic, and behavioral data or associated
variables as to the offender's "modus operandi"
or M.O. (method of operation) and so-called,
individual "signature." This relates
to antecedent criminal behavior or how the individual
organized and planned the crime, carried it
out, staged it, and selected the victim in some
cases (Davis, 1993; Geberth, 1981). Typically,
the criminal does not commit certain types of
crimes such as sexually motivated homicide overnight.
These types of crimes evolve over time and can
involve an organized offender type that plans
a very methodical approach to victim selection
and abduction such as in the Ted Bundy case.
Conversely, a disorganized offender type can
carry out the same or similar crime without
such meticulous and methodical approaches to
detail and victim selection such as in the Richard
Chase case (Davis, 1995). To complicate matters
even more, the offender can possess both organized
and disorganized approaches to committing violent
crimes suggesting and presenting a mixed offender
type to investigators or profilers. It must
be recognized even by the most experienced investigator
that a criminal's "M.O." can change
from one crime to the next; however, the same
criminal's "signature" will remain
unchanged and always consistent (Davis, 1994;
Geberth, 1981; Cooke, 1980). Additionally, in
terms of a homicide case, the crime scene can
yield significant clues regarding pre-crime
and post-crime scene behavior. It is important
to consider whether the perpetrator was an "organized,"
"mixed" or otherwise "disorganized"
type offender and whether injuries or sexual
and physical assaults sustained to the victim's
body were inflicted at times suggesting ante
mortem (when the victim was alive) or post mortem
intervals (after the death of the victim).
The crime scene, along with additional inspection
at the "morgue scene," (typically
held at the Coroner or Medical Examiner's office),
can render information regarding the degree
and type of violence exerted by the criminal
toward the victim. This is especially important
when examining the various types of trauma inflicted
such as blunt force, sharp force, asphyxia,
"tight" contact or close range gun
shot wounds (Davis, 1994; Geberth, 1981). Many
crimes have motives; however, some crimes appear
to be senseless or even motiveless. Evidence
of sadistic torture, trauma to the face or personal
areas, binding of the victims hands and feet
(ligature), the type of binding utilized (duct
tape, rope, wire, electrical cord), the disposition
of the body when found, location of the body
when found (i.e., open area or secluded area,
hidden or covered, buried or dumped in a culvert
or alongside a highway or back road), and, perhaps,
the specialized positioning of the body (undressed,
dressed, provocative pose or otherwise) can
often reveal the killer's organization (or lack
of), planning and thought processes before,
during, and after the act of violence was committed.
The connecting elements of the crime, the "signature"
and "profile" of the individual who
carried out the heinous act of violence, no
matter how organized, disorganized, sexually
sadistic or ritualistic, will in most cases,
typically surface (Davis, 1994; Cooke, 1980).
In addition to providing and supporting investigators
with valuable antecedent criminal profile information
and data, the police psychologist can be a valuable
asset to the department directly when the community
or even police personnel have witnessed an act
of violence, a crime, or a tragedy so bizarre,
unusual, brutal or heinous that critical incident
debriefing or consultation and subsequent counseling
for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) occurs.
An example would be the unforgettable massacre
and mass homicide of 2l innocent and unsuspecting
men, women, and children (the youngest victim
was eight months old) involving James Oliver
Huberty that occurred at McDonald's Restaurant
in San Ysidro in July of 1984. We must not forget
the mass homicide of 23 victims at Luby's Cafeteria
in Killean, Texas by solo gunman George "Jo
Jo" Hennard (Hennard's murderous action
remains the largest single incident of mass
homicide witnessed in this country
to date). Consider the brutal serial homicides
in 1990 that effectively terrified the residential
suburbs of Clairemont and University City areas
of San Diego which took the lives of six women,
one of which was this author's former student
(Davis, 1995). The San Diego Police Department
and Homicide Division received thousands of
calls and over 1, 100 leads or tips from the
public regarding the six San Diego murder cases.
Top police administrators and supervisors subsequently
assigned 44 investigators to the case which
eventually turned out to be the largest serial
murder "man hunt" in the San Diego
Police Department history. The FBI was also
involved in this case from a forensic and profiling
standpoint.
In times of public "outcry" or citizen
unrest, a police psychologist can be of valuable
assistance. Supporting the Chief of Police or
Sheriff as an organizational and human factors
advisor, the psychologist or behavioral scientist
can effectively establish or chair a "task
force" to evaluate specific problems facing
police and the community (Davis, 1993; Lefkowitz,
1977; Reiser, 1972).
In general, by integrating the expertise and
support of behavioral scientists or police psychologists
into the structure and daily operation of the
police department, management and supervisory
personnel can ensure the maintenance of productive
functioning as well as the quality of the day-by-day
performances of their sworn and non-sworn personnel.
The utilization of police psychologists has
proven to be an extremely valuable asset and
is cost effective (Davis, 1993). The overall
wellness, mental health and efficiency of the
entire organization can be altered in the long
run (Reiser, 1972b). The time has come where
law enforcement departments can no longer afford
not to borrow from the expertise of the behavioral
and forensic sciences (Davis, 1993).
References
Cooke, G. (1980). The role
of the forensic psychologist. Springfield,
Il.: C.C. Thomas Publishers.
Depue, R. (1979). Turning
inward: The police counselor. FBI Law Enforcement
Bulletin, 8-12.
Davis, J. A. (1995). The
police psychologist in today's law enforcement.
The Police Chief Magazine. International Association
of the Chiefs of Police (IACP). Alexandria,
Virginia, Vol. LX11, 11, 36-38.
Davis, J. A. (1994). The
art and science of psychological-criminal
profiling: Selected readings in forensic profile
analysis, Course Workshop Training Manual,
San Diego, California.
Davis, J. A. (1993). The
use of behavioral scientists in law enforcement.
The Law Enforcement Quarterly, San Diego,
California.
Geberth, V. (1981). Psychological
profiling, Law and Order. 46-52.
Hargrave, G. E., & Berner,
J. G. (1984). POST psychological screening
manual. Sacramento,
California. California Commission
on Police Officers Standards and Training.
Lefkowitz, J. (1977). Industrial-organizational
psychology and the police. American Psychologist,
32, 346-364.
Reiser, M. (1972a). The police
department psychologist. Springfield, Il.:
C. C. Thomas Publishers.
Reiser, M. (1972b). Practical
psychology for police officers. Springfield.
Il.: C. C. Thomas Publishers.
Somodeville, S. (1978). The
psychologist's role in the police department.
The Police Chief, 21-23.
©1998 by
The American Academy of Experts in Traumatic
Stress, Inc. |
