Delaney 1
Rob Delaney
English 102
Professor Green
Research Paper-Argumentative
March 3, 2008
Validities and Abilities in Criminal Profiling
“Society prepares for the crime, the criminal commits it” (Buckle). Over the centuries criminal investigation has arguably evolved more than any other branch of the criminal justice system. Investigation has added many tools to its arsenal, fingerprinting, DNA analysis, and now criminal profiling; all of these utilities have proven invaluable to the arrest and conviction of many criminals, but why is criminal profiling being criticized? Criminal profiling or forensic psychology has become a hot topic in not just criminal investigations, but also in pop culture.
Evidence of this popularity is evident in productions such as Silence of the Lambs, Copycat, & even The X-Files. Forensic psychology is easily defined as the intersection between psychology and the criminal justice system. Criminal profiling programs are far more complex than one would gather from Hollywood, but to an extent, all criminal profiling programs owe their existence to fictional literature. From these classical works, it is usually a rookie investigator that uses something more than the tangible evidence to apprehend the offender, nothing like the rigorous training that FBI profilers go through. While Hollywood may not be entirely accurate in their imitations of FBI profilers, there is one common thread; members of the FBI’s
Behavioral Analysis Unit (BAU) are considerably intuitive, and excellent at empathizing with those that they are profiling.

Delaney 2
Brent Snook headed a recent experiment to detect the effectiveness of criminal profiling.
In his conclusion Snook stated that criminal profiling shows no signs of reliability, validity, or becoming a useful tool to the criminal justice system; all that follows will refute such a claim.
Through case studies and experiments it will been shown that programs such as the Violent
Criminal Apprehension Program (VICAP), as well as others, which make use of forensic psychology have proven their effectiveness in the criminal justice system. Forensic psychologists have over the decades managed to fabricate accurate profiles of a large portion of violent criminals. When discussing criminal profiling, it is important to note that not all profiles directly lead to an arrest and a conviction, but in the cases that trouble investigators the most, it is the forensic psychologists and their profiles which are in fact the direct cause of an arrest as well as a conviction.
Science can be defined as a systematically organized body of knowledge about a particular subject, in this case forensic psychology (Webster, 71). Often, when critics approach the topic of the science of criminal profiling they will correct the question by labeling criminal profiling an art; such is the approach by the academic study conducted by Brent Snook and his colleagues. In their research Snook and his colleagues organized an experiment to test the accuracy of current criminal profilers versus other groups such as psychics, police officers, and chemistry students (Snook. 434). This organization has received flak from its date of publication due to the fact that there is not a stereotypical forensic psychologist, and often times they are actually former members of one of these groups. Many critics of Snook and his colleague’s research have accused the authors of using a flawed question with flawed experiment. Snook and his colleague’s conclusions are not definitively in favor of any one group being more statistically accurate than another when creating a profile. Of course, with accusations of a

Delaney 3 flawed experiment surrounding the results of Snook and his colleagues it is only natural to be skeptical of the findings. In most studies conducted to determine the effectiveness of forensic psychology the results are roughly in favor of current profilers being the most accurate followed by the chemistry students; the rational for this is that the students are the most analytical in their thinking, but as stated many criminal profilers are of a chemistry background. Though the organization and purpose of study conducted by Snook and his colleagues has been criticized many critics agree that the skills attributed to each of these groups are an interesting and supportable notion (Bennell 445). The study stated that psychics would relate the evidence abstractly, often describing the emotional state and motivation of the offender (Snook. 440).
Police officers were included in the experiment for one main reason. The FBI prefers its forensic psychologists to have policing experience. The prerequisite of police experience is not often criticized as the interpretation of evidence is vital to criminal profiling.
According to Snook and his colleagues, despite the rapid growth and relative dependency placed on criminal profiling there is a lack of compelling evidence that such programs technically “work,” stating that there is a lack of empirical evidence to validate such an argument
(Snook. 437). Snook and his colleagues describe what they mean by a lack of substantiating evidence that criminal profiling works by stating that such programs have not shown to be
“reliable, valid, or a useful tool for assisting with the identification and apprehension of criminals” (Snook. 437-438). According to Snook, the programs that fall under the classification of forensic psychology are in fact void of such usefulness that agencies worldwide (notably in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and other western nations) have sought to spend enumerate resources on programs of VICAP & the BAU’s capabilities. The lack of accuracy that Snook and his colleagues describe is difficult to find; although, criminal profiling is by no

Delaney 4 means an exact science, it has been involved in countless high profile cases over the decades. In fact, the claims made by Snook and his colleagues have been specifically called out by many other accredited studies; these studies have found major flaws in the structure of Snook and his colleagues experiments as well as selective representation of their findings. The FBI has successfully utilized criminal profiling in cases such as Timothy McVeigh, The Mad Bomber,
David Meierhofer, the Unabomber, and the Beltway Sniper. These are all cases in which a profile was the direct cause of an arrest, as well as an instrumental part of a court room conviction (Heath).
Method of Profiling
Forensic psychology resembles criminology closely. In both sciences, theories have been developed, modified, and added for decades. Criminology holds hundreds of theories in which criminality is explained. While forensic psychology may not currently hold hundreds of methods of profiling, there is one influential model of criminal profiling, the Turvey Model. In his book,
Scotia Hicks details the Turvey Model. Hicks argues that all criminal profiling that takes place is a variant of the Turvey Model (Hicks. 46).
There is a great deal of interest present in how a criminal profile is formed. Developed by Brent Turvey, the Turvey model utilizes a deductive approach when creating a profile through the reliance of physical and behavioral evidence (Hicks. 42). In a nutshell the Turvey model is a four step process in which the profiler(s) first analyze the forensic and behavioral evidence of the crime scene (Hicks. 42). This analysis of the forensic and behavioral aspects of the crime includes all of the traditional evidence associated with a criminal investigation (victim and witness statements, crime scene photographs, blood splatter analysis, and any other relevant evidence) (Hicks. 42). The second step in the Turvey Model utilizes the study of Victimology.

Delaney 5
The study of Victimology objectively analyzes the victim(s) and their surroundings in order to determine if there was a specific reason for the victimization (Hicks. 42). Next, crime scene characteristics are established, which explains the sequence of events during the crime (Hicks.
43). Once all of these steps have been completed the profiler begins the deductive process of creating the criminal profile (Hicks. 43).
The Turvey Model has adapted during its existence, but the strength of the Turvey Model is that it provides a plan of attack so to speak for every step of the criminal investigation, including the criminal trial (Hicks. 44). “These programs aren’t intended to apprehend a
‘shoplifting group’ or criminals of that tier; they are designed to apprehend the violent criminals”
(Brooks). The Turvey Model has successfully been applied to every class of violent crime, be it in the criminal investigation stages, or the criminal trial (Hicks. 54). The academic community is somewhat split in knighting the Turvey Model a scientific model, the reasoning being that it relies on expertise and not science (Hicks. 60). This argument, often countered by the fact that through interviews with violent offenders the Turvey Model has evolved to a point where many inferences once made about an offender are now supported by statistical evidence (Hicks. 62).
The Turvey Model acts as the method of creating a profile in all cases that follow.
Mad Bomber
In 1956, the city of New York was hit by the “dastardly deeds” of a man known as the
Mad Bomber. Over the course of 17 years the Mad Bomber had set off in excess of 50 homemade bombs eluding police, mailing letters to police and newspapers and businesses, as well as leaving forensic evidence all the while (Hicks. 8). Under immense pressure to solve the case, the captain of the New York Bureau of Missing Persons arranged a consult between the lead inspector of the case, Inspector Finney, and James A. Brussel, a psychiatrist. Prior to

Delaney 6 consulting with Brussel the only lead that Inspector Finney had on the Mad Bomber was that he was a former employee at Con Edison, which had yielded no suspects. After reviewing evidence available from the cases Brussel described the Mad Bomber as follows—“a paranoid, symmetrically built, middle-aged man. He would be a skilled mechanic of Slavic decent and would live either alone or with an older female relative. He would have a chronic illness (heart disease, cancer, or tuberculosis), which he would believe he had contracted on the job at Con
Edison. If forensic psychology was truly to be labeled an art then it would be the equivalent of the Parthenon, but I doubt if even the Parthenon was the cause of apprehending a domestic terrorist. The profile created by Brussel is the direct cause of the conviction in this case,
Brussel’s profile had given the investigators a second wind as well as a new avenue to explore, one that they would wish that they had explored sooner. Brussel predicted that the offender would be a high school graduate, a loner, a regular churchgoer, and impeccably neat. ‘When you catch him, he’ll be wearing a double-breasted suit…buttoned’ (Hicks. 9).” In addition to his profile, Brussel made the following suggestion to Inspector Finney
By putting these theories of mine in the papers, you might prod the Bomber out of hiding… It’ll challenge him… He’ll say to himself “Here’s some psychiatrist who thinks… he can outfox me…” and then maybe he’ll write to some newspaper and tell how wrong I am. He might give… other clues (Brussel, 1968. 45).
Not long thereafter, Brussel’s profile was published in
The New York Times prompting multiple letters and phone calls directed at Brussel; meanwhile, the profile by Brussel prompted Finney to review Con Edison’s records revealing a case in which a man, George Metesky, who was injured on the job, and furthermore had blamed the incident on his employer, calling it a “dastardly deed,” the same phrase used in many of the Mad Bomber’s letters (Hicks. 9). The similarities

Delaney 7
Finney encountered prompted the police to investigate, and ultimately arrest Metesky for the
Bombings. Brussel exemplified the effectiveness of forensic psychology, not only did his profile aid in locating a suspect, but it also allowed investigators to for the first time successfully collaborate all available evidence in order to apprehend the criminal. George Metesky was a 54year old man of Polish descent, living with two older sisters; he was “well-proportioned,” at 5 feet 9 inches and 170 pounds (Brussel, 1968. 67). Metesky was characterized by his neighbors as aloof and unfriendly; his former employer described him as meticulous in his work—he was a trained electrician. Metesky rarely missed Mass at St. Patrick’s Cathedral, and he had tuberculosis, an affliction which he blamed on an accident for which Con Edison was at fault
(Hicks. 10). Additionally, when Metesky was finally arrested he was wearing a blue pin-striped double-breasted suit, it was buttoned (Brussel, 1968. 69). While Brussel later admitted that not all of his profiles were as valuable as his profile of George Metesky, Brussel was able to show that criminal profiling does not rely on weak standards of proof, but the actual evidence, showing that such techniques do in fact “work.” Following the Mad Bomber case, Brussel was frequently contacted by the FBI as well as other agencies to offer consult, tutor agents in profiling techniques, and even assist in the establishment of the FBIs own Investigative Support Unit, the precursor to the Behavioral Analysis Unit.
“Reliable, valid, or a useful tool assisting with the identification and apprehension of criminals” is one way to define the work of Brussel in the Mad Bomber case, another way to describe it would be to say that the profile by Brussel was the direct factor leading to the arrest in a case that law enforcement could not solve with 17 years worth of bombings and evidence.
Snook and his colleagues selectively elected to ignore what they would refer to as empirical evidence, or scientific proof of the effectiveness of criminal profiling. Snook and his colleagues

Delaney 8 have received criticism from many academic journals for selective representation of data similar to the Mad Bomber case. There are many professions classified under the scientific field that operate similarly to forensic psychology, for instance psychiatrists, psychologists, criminologists, and psychologists. All professions that deal with human beings in relation to their actions are not concrete in their operations. Psychiatrists are officially labeled a doctor, but you will not see a psychiatrist pull a chart out and find a break, they instead operate on the same grounds that
Snook and his colleagues find as weak and unreliable, yet the people in these professions are who we count on for results when all else fails.
Jaeger Case
Howard D. Teten is considered the FBIs father of profiling. Having been tutored in a sense by Brussel, Teten is responsible for an undisclosed number of profiles that directly lead to arrests in criminal investigations (Hicks. 10). Teten joined the FBI in 1962, teaching a course in applied criminology he offered consult and conclusions in cases presented to him in class.
Teten’s “rap sessions” in which he provided consult on actual cases often times were instrumental during the investigation and trial phases of the case in question. Realizing the potential contribution Teten had to make, the FBI had him assist in the construction of the
Investigative Support Unit’s training (Hicks. 11). Teten is considered a forefather of criminal profiling; the success he experienced is not likely to be matched by any single profiler.
In the case of Susan Jaeger, 1973, Teten’s profiling methods were tested in a kidnapping.
Jaeger was a seven-year old kidnapped while on a camping trip with her family. When presented with the available evidence on the case Teten profiled the offender a young, white male resident in the Bozeman, Montana, area (Hicks. 11). While this may not be the dramatic profile most would expect during a case, this case is an important milestone in that it represents the one of the

Delaney 9 first major cases in which investigators worked hand in hand with criminal profilers. The FBI already had a potential suspect in David Meierhofer, but there was not sufficient evidence to pursue this lead early in the investigation, even with the profile matching his description. Early in the following year a woman closely associated with Meierhofer was reported missing as well, but still there was not enough for investigators to support a warrant (Hicks. 11). Though investigators could not support a warrant Teten was able to expand his profile; Teten determined, based on the evidence that the offender would be the type of person to enjoy reliving his crimes and may telephone the families of his victims; Teten recommended that the Jaeger family keep a recorder near their phone on the anniversary of the kidnapping (Hicks. 12). On the anniversary of the kidnapping the Jaeger residence received a call from the kidnapper, FBI analysis identified the voice as Meierhofer; however, this still did not manufacture a warrant (Hicks. 12).
Predicting what an offender will be wearing when they are arrested is good, but predicting a phone number they will call, well that’s enough to impress Miss. Cleo. In the final revision of his profile, Teten stated that Meirehofer was likely “woman-dominated,” recommending that the mother visit the residence of the suspected kidnapper and confront Meierhofer; Jaeger did so, prompting another call to her residence shortly after, this time granting a warrant (Hicks. 12).
When police searched Meierhofer’s residence they discovered the remains of both victims.
While only three of the groups presented by Snook were present in the case of Susan
Jaeger it is clear that the criminal profiler did significantly outperform the groups relevant in the investigation (detectives & police). In fact, following this case, a research database was added to the newly formed Behavioral Science Unit. Teten is recorded as firing back at such research performed by groups such as Snook—“By and large, academics study crime from afar. They

Delaney 10 generally focus on theories and would not think of asking criminals how they did their crimes”
(Hicks. 12).
A Different Take
In a separate study performed by Richard Kocsis and his colleagues, the validities of criminal profiling were further tested, with the findings that professional profilers outperformed other groups present (Kocsis. 472.). Kocsis and his colleagues allowed for written profiles from the groups in their experiment, the profiles were to be constructed individually (comparable groups present in the study by Snook). In his conclusion Kocsis states that on average the professional profilers had constructed the lengthiest profiles providing detailed analysis of the offender in addition to offering more predictions (Bennell. 351). Kocsis and his colleagues provided limited commentary as to why the profilers provided more in-depth profiles, but in their results they had concluded that profilers had managed to outperform the other groups. The study conducted by Kocsis and his colleagues is not without flaw; the study limited interaction between participants. In these academic studies it is difficult to assess what the true intent of discovery is. If the goal was to determine the effectiveness of forensic psychology, then why not study criminal profiling with similar techniques used when other tools of policing are tested. For instance, the Kansas City Preventative Patrol Experiment and the Minneapolis Experiment were both studies conducted in the field by select precincts to test the effectiveness of various policing methods and techniques, so why not test forensic psychology in the field instead of the lab
(Henson)? Additionally, in both the Kansas City and Minneapolis experiment researchers were able to repeat the experiment with comparable results, unlike in the criminal profiling experiments where researchers are seemingly more focused on whether or not forensic psychology works on paper, never mind the reality that criminal profilers have thus far proven to

Delaney 11 hold the ability to solve cases which present the greatest challenges to law enforcement and investigators.
Empirical Evidence
Research technique in the area of forensic psychology has more than arguably proven frail. While Kocsis and his colleagues managed to in moderate regard duplicate the accuracy of criminal profilers in case studies the same respect is not granted to Snook and his colleagues.
While it is a sustainable argument that both studies were weakly structured, the claims made by
Snook and his colleagues are of primary concern. Snook and his colleagues repeatedly argued that criminal profiling relies on weak standards of proof and has shown no evidence of reliability, validity, or usefulness in the real world (Snook. 437-438). The claims proposed by
Snook and his colleague’s boarder on the statement that forensic psychology has shown no effectiveness during investigation, and little promise in the court room. This claim by Snook and his colleague’s is what they label a lack of empirical evidence. In addition to citing several cases in which forensic psychology was a primary factor during a criminal investigation, this essay has shown a pair of cases in which forensic psychology was both the direct cause of an arrest and a partner with investigators during a criminal case. It is unreasonable for Snook and his colleague’s to argue such ineffectiveness in the area of criminal profiling when the technique has proven successful in apprehending some of the most notorious violent criminals in recent
American history. Not only have individual profilers managed to validate the science of criminal profiling, but the FBI and other agencies around the world have shown foresight in that they are buying stock in programs such as the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program, and specialized units of the Behavioral Analysis Unit’s capabilities. James Brussel exemplified every possible meaning of the words valid, reliable, and useful in the case of New York’s Mad Bomber. It is

Delaney 12 interesting that Snook and his colleague’s would designate forensic psychology an avenue void of any effectiveness with the precedent of this case, it is additionally difficult to subscribe to the findings of Snook and his colleague’s with the resemblance between the case of the Mad Bomber and the Unabomber. In both cases investigators had proven unable to solve the case or even locate a prosecutable suspect, but once investigators sought consult from a forensic psychologist the investigation was given a second wind in which it would be solved.
Forensic psychology has demonstrated effectiveness, reliability, validity, and great potential in a select pair of cases represented within this essay. Both cases represented in this essay had specific designs to achieve; first, the case of the Mad Bomber was included in order to substantiate that forensic psychology does not as Snook and his colleagues claim rely on weak standards of proof, but instead accumulations of evidence that law enforcement and investigators alone cannot link together. Furthermore, the Mad Bomber case had no supportable suspect for a stretch of 17 years; that is, both law enforcement and investigators had proven unable to apprehend the Mad Bomber without the intervention of a criminal profiler. The Jaeger case was included in this essay to illustrate the effects of a joint effort in a criminal investigation between criminal profilers and investigators.
The Jaeger case represents the potential of what is fast becoming a reality in the criminal justice system, the express ability of an investigator to consult of profiler or a profiling database in order to better understand the evidence in addition to providing characteristics of likely suspects. While the profile in the Jaeger case may not have detailed every aspect of the offender it was not asked to, it was a joint effort in which both investigation and profiling played equal roles in apprehending the suspect, an effective combination.

Delaney 13
While through this essay it may not have been placid that forensic psychology is the trump card of the criminal justice system it has been proven through case study that forensic psychology is the cutting edge of criminal investigation. Once, it was a laughable claim that the world would be interconnected through a device available to the average individual, the result— nearly every citizen in industrialized society holding the ability to in real-time converse with citizens of other nations. The skepticism that accompanies an innovative idea has proven to be a strong voice, but the skepticism that Snook and his colleague’s flood the science of forensic psychology with is unfounded, the technique alone has apprehended countless offenders, even if it does not show such effectiveness in the lab. “By and large, academics study crime from afar.
They generally focus on theories and would not think of asking criminals how they did their crimes” (Hicks. 12). While forensic psychology may not have radiated successfulness in the study performed by Snook and his colleagues, it appears that the FBI and agencies worldwide are more concerned with the reliability, validity, effectiveness, and usefulness of criminal profiling in the field, rather than in the laboratory.

Delaney 14
Works Cited
Bennell, Craig. “Validities and Abilities in Criminal Profiling: A Critique of the Studies
Conducted by Richard Kocsis and his Colleagues.”International Journal of Offender
Therapy and Comparative Criminology. Volume 50 (2006). 344-360.
Brooks, Michael E. Personal Interview. 18 January 2008.
Brussel, J. (1968). Casebook of a crime psychiatrist . New York: Bernard Geis
Associates.
Merriam; Webster. Merriam-Webster’s Notebook Dictionary .
FBI. Investigative Programs. 10 February 2008. Federal Bureau of Investigation. http://www.fbi.gov/hq/isd/cirg/ncavc.htm
Heath, David. FBI System to ID Killers Went Unused in Sniper Case. Policeone.
28 March 2008. http://www.policeone.com/investigations/articles/56308/
Hicks, Scotia J. Criminal Profiling. Ed. Bruce D. Sales. Washington DC: American
Psychological Association, 2006.
Kocsis, Richard. “Validities and Abilities in Criminal Profiling” International Journal of
Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. Volume 50 (2006). 458-477.
Langer, W. C. (1972). The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret wartime Report.
New York:
Basic Books.
Ramsland, Katherine. “On The Criminal Mind.” Crime Library. 10 February 2008. http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/profiling/history_method/index.html
.
Rumbelow, D. (1975). The complete Jack the Ripper . New York: Little, Brown.
Snook, Brent. “Taking Stock of Criminal Profiling.”Criminal Justice and Behavior 34
(2007): 437-453.

ThinkExist. February 10, 2008. http://thinkexist.com/quotes/with/keyword/criminal/ .
Delaney 15
(Henry Thomas Buckle).

Delaney 16
Checklist for Evaluating Web Pages
Name of Page: FBI Investigative Programs
URL of Page: http://www.fbi.gov/hq/isd/cirg/ncavc.htm
Date & Time Page Was Accessed: 1 February 2008 – 14 March 2008
Authority:
No
No
The author is listed on the page or a connecting page. author:
The author’s credentials are stated. credentials:
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
The author appears to be knowledgeable and has good credentials.
The sponsor of the site is listed. sponsor:
There’s an organization affiliated with the site or author. organization: FBI
You can find out about the purpose or intent of the organization.
Content:
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
The overall function of this web site is appropriate for my needs.
There are typographic, spelling, or grammatical errors in text.
The page clearly identifies the sources of its information. source/s: FBI Mission Statements
You can verify the sources of the information.
This appears to be a biased site.
This site is meant to persuade the reader.
This page is an advertisement or promotional material.
Advertising on the page might influence the way the content is read.

Yes
Currency:
Yes
When was the site last updated?
Delaney 17
Advertising is clearly separated from the contents of the page.
Is it important for the information on this page to be current?

Delaney 18
Checklist for Evaluating Web Pages
Name of Page: PoliceOne
URL of Page: http://www.policeone.com/investigations/articles/56308/
Date & Time Page Was Accessed: 18 February 2008
Authority:
Yes
Yes
The author is listed on the page or a connecting page. author: David Heath
The author’s credentials are stated. credentials: Seattle Times
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
The author appears to be knowledgeable and has good credentials.
The sponsor of the site is listed. sponsor: Trancite
There’s an organization affiliated with the site or author. organization: Seattle Times
You can find out about the purpose or intent of the organization.
Content:
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
The overall function of this web site is appropriate for my needs.
There are typographic, spelling, or grammatical errors in text.
The page clearly identifies the sources of its information. source/s: FBI Agents
You can verify the sources of the information.
This appears to be a biased site.
This site is meant to persuade the reader.
This page is an advertisement or promotional material.
Advertising on the page might influence the way the content is read.

Delaney 19
Yes Advertising is clearly separated from the contents of the page.
Currency:
No Is it important for the information on this page to be current?
When was the site last updated? November 8, 2002

Delaney 20
Checklist for Evaluating Web Pages
N AME OF P AGE : Katherine Ramsland
URL
OF
P
AGE
: http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminalmind/profiling/history_method/index.html
D
ATE
& T
IME
P
AGE
W
AS
A
CCESSED
: 1 February 2008 – 1 March 2008
A
UTHORITY
:
Y ES
Y
ES
Y ES
Y ES
T HE AUTHOR IS LISTED ON THE PAGE OR A
CONNECTING PAGE
.
AUTHOR
:
T
HE AUTHOR
’
S CREDENTIALS ARE STATED
.
CREDENTIALS
: P
H
.D.; P
UBLISHED
25
BOOKS
;
M ULTIPLE D EGREES IN C RIMINAL J USTICE
RELATED FIELDS
T HE AUTHOR APPEARS TO BE KNOWLEDGEABLE
AND HAS GOOD CREDENTIALS
.
T HE SPONSOR OF THE SITE IS LISTED .
SPONSOR : T RU TV
Y
ES
Y
ES
T
HERE
’
S AN ORGANIZATION AFFILIATED WITH
THE SITE OR AUTHOR
.
ORGANIZATION : T RU TV
Y
OU CAN FIND OUT ABOUT THE PURPOSE OR
INTENT OF THE ORGANIZATION .
C
ONTENT
:
Y
ES
Y ES
Y ES
N O
N O
T
HE OVERALL FUNCTION OF THIS WEB SITE IS
APPROPRIATE FOR MY NEEDS
.
T HERE ARE TYPOGRAPHIC , SPELLING , OR
GRAMMATICAL ERRORS IN TEXT
.
T HE PAGE CLEARLY IDENTIFIES THE SOURCES OF
ITS INFORMATION .
SOURCE
/
S
: H
ISTORICAL
D
OCUMENTS
,
I NTERVIEWS , & INFORMATION RECEIVED
FROM POLICING AGENCIES
Y OU CAN VERIFY THE SOURCES OF THE
INFORMATION
.
T HIS APPEARS TO BE A BIASED SITE .

Y ES
N
N
N
O
O
O
C
URRENCY
:
Y ES
When was the site last updated? N/A
Delaney 21
T HIS SITE IS MEANT TO PERSUADE THE READER .
T HIS PAGE IS AN ADVERTISEMENT OR
PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL
.
A DVERTISING ON THE PAGE MIGHT INFLUENCE
THE WAY THE CONTENT IS READ
.
A DVERTISING IS CLEARLY SEPARATED FROM
THE CONTENTS OF THE PAGE .
I S IT IMPORTANT FOR THE INFORMATION ON THIS
PAGE TO BE CURRENT ?

Delaney 22
Checklist for Evaluating Web Pages
N AME OF P AGE : ThinkExist
URL OF P AGE : http://thinkexist.com/quotes/with/keyword/criminal/ .
D
ATE
& T
IME
P
AGE
W
AS
A
CCESSED
: 13 February 2008
A
UTHORITY
:
Y
ES
N O
T
HE AUTHOR IS LISTED ON THE PAGE OR A
CONNECTING PAGE .
AUTHOR
: H
ENRY
T
HOMAS
B
UCKLE
T HE AUTHOR
’
S CREDENTIALS ARE STATED .
CREDENTIALS
:
Y ES
Y
ES
N O
N
O
T HE AUTHOR APPEARS TO BE KNOWLEDGEABLE
AND HAS GOOD CREDENTIALS
.
T HE SPONSOR OF THE SITE IS LISTED .
SPONSOR :
T
HERE
’
S AN ORGANIZATION AFFILIATED WITH
THE SITE OR AUTHOR
.
ORGANIZATION :
Y
OU CAN FIND OUT ABOUT THE PURPOSE OR
INTENT OF THE ORGANIZATION .
C
ONTENT
:
Y ES
Y ES
Y
ES
N O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
T HE OVERALL FUNCTION OF THIS WEB SITE IS
APPROPRIATE FOR MY NEEDS
.
T HERE ARE TYPOGRAPHIC , SPELLING , OR
GRAMMATICAL ERRORS IN TEXT
.
T HE PAGE CLEARLY IDENTIFIES THE SOURCES OF
ITS INFORMATION .
SOURCE
/
S
:
Y
OU CAN VERIFY THE SOURCES OF THE
INFORMATION
.
T
HIS APPEARS TO BE A BIASED SITE
.
T
HIS SITE IS MEANT TO PERSUADE THE READER
.
T
HIS PAGE IS AN ADVERTISEMENT OR
PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL
.
A
DVERTISING ON THE PAGE MIGHT INFLUENCE

Y ES
C
URRENCY
:
N O
When was the site last updated? N/A
Delaney 23
THE WAY THE CONTENT IS READ .
A DVERTISING IS CLEARLY SEPARATED FROM
THE CONTENTS OF THE PAGE
.
I S IT IMPORTANT FOR THE INFORMATION ON THIS
PAGE TO BE CURRENT
?