MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1834388405 · doi:10.1002/jip.1406

Escalation from Fetish Burglaries to Sexual Violence: A Retrospective Case Study of Former Col., D. Russell Williams

2013· article· en· W1834388405 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew E. Brankley, Alasdair M. Goodwill, Kylie S. Reale

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeriousnessPsychologyCriminologyHomicideSexual violenceSocial psychologyPoison controlSuicide preventionMedical emergencyLawMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Criminal history narrative studies reveal an escalation in sexual offender behaviour from non‐contact to contact offending, with an ever‐increasing likelihood of sexual violence and homicide. In particular, researchers have found that sexual offenders often have a history of committing burglaries prior to contact offences. Accordingly, researchers have suggested that burglaries may be associated with an increased likelihood of future sexual offending, particularly when they have a sexual element to them. However, to date, there has been little quantitative research focusing on the mechanisms of escalation in sexual offences. This paper seeks to study factors associated with sexual offence escalation in terms of changes in offence seriousness and frequency. Specifically, case evidence was gleaned from a series of fetish burglaries and subsequent sexual assaults and murders committed by the former Canadian Colonel David Russell Williams (RW). Cluster analysis, chi‐square, ANOVA, and regression analyses were conducted on the crime scene information of RW's 82 cases of fetish burglary. Analyses revealed a significant escalation in the frequency and seriousness of RW's fetish burglary offences prior to committing acts of sexual violence and ultimately sexual homicide. Recommendations for future research predicting escalation of sexual offending by frequency and seriousness of offending behaviour are discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Investigative Psychology and Offender ProfilingSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207