|
Suspect Characteristics in Child Molestation Cases |
|
Actually Guilty but Denying |
Guilty but Admits |
Not Guilty and Denying |
|
From Interview Observations |
From Interview Observations |
From Interview Observations |
| 1. Angry, hostile, or over-ingratiating to
examiner. |
1. Shamed, embarrassed. |
1. Frightened, upset, cautious, in shock, depressed if
allegations are not fresh. |
| 2. Does not volunteer or admit to many personal flaws. |
2. Self-depreciating. |
2. Presents self as imperfect although fearing
implications of doing so, sticks to information even though it may be seen
as potentially self-incriminating. |
| 3. Often alienated from everyone, including extended
family, but may deny relational problems, presents things as too good to
be
true, or if admitting to problems, projects the blame to others. |
3. Admits to significant problems in relationships,
feels helpless or inadequate to change them. |
3. Relationships generally working, but admits to some
problems in them, taking his share of the blame/responsibility; broad
support base of extended family or friends is well established. |
| 4. Sociopathic quality to relationships is frequent,
manipulative; may also be chaotic/unstable, or rigid/narrow. |
4. Less sociopathic, more inadequate. |
4. Quality of relationships is generally good, stable,
flexible, non-sociopathic. |
| 5. Does not spontaneously change Statements or
self-correct or call into question his own recall or correctness; will not
usually add new information spontaneously, unless self-serving. |
5. Will spontaneously change statements, self-correct,
becomes more candid across sessions; will call into question his own
recall or correctness spontaneously, not necessarily self-serving,
including negative information. |
5. Will spontaneously change statements, self-correct,
call into question his own recall, or correctness, adds more information
spontaneously, even negative information. |
| |
|
|
|
Suspect's Attitudes Toward Law Enforcement
|
Suspect's Attitudes Toward Law
Enforcement |
Suspect's Attitudes Toward Law
Enforcement |
| Withholding of information, hostile, cautious from very
beginning. |
Seeking help. |
Initially seeks to give information, seeks to understand how
allegations arose; sees police as doing their job; may later come to view
them as incompetent. |
| |
|
|
|
From Psychological Testing Findings |
From Psychological Testing Findings |
From Psychological Testing Findings |
| 1. Self-descriptions on tests very defensive, denies most problem
areas. |
1. Self-descriptions either nondefensive or exaggerated. |
1. Mildly defensive to nondefensive. |
| 2. Test attitudes toward alleged victim are either minimizing or
exaggerating of child's problems. |
|
2. Test attitudes toward alleged victim are not minimizing or
exaggerating of child's problems. |
| 3. If valid profiles obtained, more disturbed in those
accused of chronic patterns of abuse; frequently serious problems of stress
tolerance, impulsivity, antisocial features, aggression, poor
relationships, substance abuse. |
3. May reflect high current stress, along with long-term difficulties. |
3. Situational stress, usually no pattern of long-term sexual
difficulties or chronic maladjustment. May have some personality problems
which are readily acknowledged. |
| |
|
|
|
Suspect's Attitudes Toward Alleged Victim
|
Suspect's Attitudes Toward
Alleged Victim |
Suspect's Attitudes Toward
Alleged Victim |
| 1. Very angry, blaming of the child as well as others;
betrays his relationship as being pseudopeer through his attribution of
negative features to the child. |
1. Feels guilt in relation to the child, may still deny
certain features of the crime as a face-saving mechanism; may see the
child as more central to his needs than spouse or other adults; more of a
peer relationship, boundaries blurred, less clearly adult/ child, more conflictual. |
1. Does not believe the child would consciously lie,
but sees ex-spouse as instigator; has positive adult relationships that are
the primary source of gratification; relationship with child clearly
defined as adult/child, not chronically conflicted. |
| 2. Shares little information
about nature of
relationship, interactions, avoids this area. |
2. May talk about child as being initiator of sexual
incidents; child said to display unusual curiosity, sexual interest, or
behaviors that are unanticipated for child's age. |
2. Non-defensive about relational features, volunteers
much about the parent/ child dialogue, describes usual level of exchanges
regarding sexuality, but may regard child as more naive or less
experienced than others. |
| 3. Perpetrator may have been rigid as disciplinarian in
some areas, such as privileges, outside social relations, doing homework;
victim may fear being punished because of these experiences; these
practices may be freely admitted by perpetrator who does not perceive
their relationship to the allegations; these patterns are usually
confirmed by other observers. |
3. Rigid disciplinary approaches may prevail, although
some describe more chaotic, inconsistent and inadequate parenting where
boundaries are lacking and the child has taken advantage of the
perpetrator's guilt. |
3. Accused tends to have been flexible, or even lax in
disciplinary approach; often a divorced parent who is overly indulgent of
child because of limited visitation time; other observers confirm that the
accused is a good parent, concerned, non-abusive. |
