Criminal Expertise and Sexual Violence: Comparing the Crime-Commission Process Involved in Sexual Burglary and Sexual Robbery
DOI | 10.1177/00938548211023541 |
Published date | 01 January 2022 |
Author | Kylie S. Reale,Julien Chopin,Eric Beauregard |
Date | 01 January 2022 |
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2022, Vol. 49, No. 1, January 2022, 98 –116.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211023541
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
© 2021 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology
98
CRIMINAL EXPERTISE AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE
Comparing the Crime-Commission Process Involved
in Sexual Burglary and Sexual Robbery
KYLIE S. REALE
ERIC BEAUREGARD
JULIEN CHOPIN
Simon Fraser University
Criminal expertise relates to the notion that some individuals may develop domain-specific offending skills that differentiate
them from those with less skills or experience (i.e., novices). In the expertise literature, burglary has emerged as a distinct
type of “expert” offense, therefore the current study sought to determine whether criminal expertise is more evident in the
crime-commission process of sexual burglary compared to sexual robbery. We used binary logistic regression to compare the
pre-crime, crime, and post-crime behaviors of 870 cases of hybrid sexual assault that occurred during the commission of
either a burglary (N = 319) (or) robbery (N = 479), both of which involved personal theft from a stranger victim. Findings
suggest that the crime commission process of sexual burglary involves a more sophisticated modus operandi and greater
expertise in detection avoidance (e.g., strategies to protect their identity and destroying and removing evidence) compared to
sexual robbery.
Keywords: decision making; criminal behavior; offending; sexual violence; sexual offenders
“Expertise” is a multi-faceted concept that generally refers to the manifestation of
specific characteristics, skills, and knowledge that are distinctive from those of novices
or less experienced people (Ericsson, 2006). First introducted to the field of sexual violence
by Ward (1999) in relation to persistent child sexual offending is the notion of “criminal
expertise.” Criminal expertise is thought to develop over time; however, some individuals
may become functional “experts” in sexual offending even without continual practice
through indirect means, such as covert modeling and rehearsal (e.g., sexual fantasies) or
symbolic modeling (e.g., pornography; Nee & Ward, 2015). According to Nee and Ward
AUTHORS’ NOTE: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests, including financial interests.
This work was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (752-2019-
1788). Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kylie S. Reale, School of Criminology,
Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6; e-mail:
kylie_reale@sfu.ca
1023541CJBXXX10.1177/00938548211023541Criminal Justice and BehaviorReale et al. / CRIMINAL EXPERTISE AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE
research-article2021
Reale et al. / CRIMINAL EXPERTISE AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE 99
(2015), “criminal expertise” manifests through both structural representations of skills and
knowledge as well as observable, behavioral manifestations that differ from that of a nov-
ice. Structural representations of criminal expertise have largely been examined in relation
to the development of knowledge and skills in memory (e.g., heuristics and short-cuts) and
offense scripts or cognitive schemas (see Nee & Ward, 2015 for a review). Behavioral
manifestations of expertise, however, are observable in the crime-commission process, such
as using strategies to avoid detection, planning the crime, and target appraisal for victims
and locations (e.g., Ó Ciardha, 2015; Ward, 1999).
In the broader expertise literature, individuals with burglary convictions have emerged
as “expert” decision-makers (Nee, 2015) and burglary offenses have been deemed to be a
“model of rationality” (Cromwell et al., 1991; Nee, 2015) as it is thought to involve con-
siderable skill and planning (Pedneault et al., 2015). As such, sexual burglary (i.e., a hybrid
offense involving breaking and entering as well as theft and sexual assault) provides a
unique opportunity to examine the notion of criminal expertise within this potential
“expert” population. In contrast, street robbery is typically described as a more “novice”
or “amateur” crime, committed by a person who acts impulsively and pays little attention
to the costs associated with their offense (e.g., Feeney, 1986; Piotrowski, 2011). As a
result, sexual robbery (i.e., a hybrid offense involving theft by force and sexual assault)
may involve a more novice or unsophisticated crime-commission process when compared
to sexual burglary. We therefore expect to find differences in behavioral manifestations of
expertise between sexual robbery and sexual burglary offenses.
LITERATURE REVIEW
On one hand, it has been argued that successfully engaging in criminality does not require
special skills (Hirschi, 1986), but others have argued that this apparent “absence in deci-
sion-making” is not an indication of a lack of skills and planning, but rather, demonstrates
that some people have developed in-depth knowledge and skills that allow them to make
better and more instantaneous decisions, particularly in situations that require urgent action
(Nee & Meenaghan, 2006). In other words, experts are thought to have domain relevant
knowledge stored in cognitive scripts, and once activated, these scripts enable them to pro-
cess information and make decisions rapidly (Ward, 1999). According to Ward (1999), this
allows some individuals to engage in behaviors during the crime-commission process that
reflect criminal sophistication and are indicative of offense related skills (e.g., planning an
offense, knowing how to avoid detection, and how to respond to various contingencies such
as victim resistance), which can be used to differentiate them from more those with more
novice offense skill sets.
The notion of criminal expertise can be directly linked to rational choice theory (RCT).
According to Cornish and Clarke (1986), during the commissioning of a crime, a person
will behave rationally in order maximize rewards while minimizing risks. Moreover, RCT
provides a framework to understand how decisions are made and proposes rationality and
self-interest as the cornerstones of decision making (Pedneault et al., 2015). Central to this
theory is the perspective that criminal behavior is not fundamentally different than non-
criminal behavior; actions tend to be rational and goal oriented to satisfy commonplace
needs (e.g., sex, money, status, and excitement or thrill; Clarke & Felson, 1993). RCT also
acknowledges that people have access to limited information to make decisions and that
To continue reading
Request your trial