threat assessment and the active shooter

©2002 The Workthreat Group, LLC

Threat Assessmentand the

Active ShooterATAP No. CA Chapter Meeting

February 12, 2013

presented by

Michael H. Corcoran, Ph.D.


What we will accomplishl Understand the threat assessment process

l Determine how to assess the actual risk

l Understand the key behaviors to identify

l Identify the key factors of an assessment

l Discern how to apply this to a shooter

l Putting it all together to avoid false positives


Assessment & Resolution Process Obtain all the facts of the incident

DO YOU CALL 911? Determine what files/records you can review Determine appropriate interviews Review & analyze all the facts Determine if further action is needed Determine if outside assistance necessary Review and reevaluate all new information Implement a plan Make sure monitoring is decided upon Review the outcome and the action’s taken


Assess Immediacy Potential of Violence Is the threat plausible/realistic and any plan?

Is the victim available to the subject (or are there good substitutes)?

80% of attackers do not warn their victims of an attack, thus words are not so revealing

Are alcohol or drugs involved?

Have acts of violence occurred at this location before or any violent history from subject?

Relationships


For Violence Prevention in ANY Setting Remember:

l Violence is not spontaneous

l Therefore, interrupting at any level of potential violence may mitigate and/or eliminate an act

l A spontaneous inappropriate statement is often not as revealing as a plan…and the ability to carry out that plan.

SO WHAT SHOULD YOU DO?


Move Away from the MH Model –No Time With An Active Shooter

1. Develop a strictly fact-based approach

2. Do not rely on psychological or demographical profiles – they’re not specific enough

3. Do not rely on verbal or written threats

4. Instead, look at pathways of ideas and behaviors


Move Away from the MH Model - Perform CPR:

1. Conduct – What are the specific “attack-related” behaviors of the potential attacker

2. Plan – What is the specific thinking of the potential attacker

3. Relationship – Between the potential attacker, the stressors of that environment, and the potential victim. The stronger the link, the higher the risk.


Conduct of the Potential Attacker

Those who commit targeted violence generally show behaviors linked to the attack

Attack related behaviors generally move along a continuum

a) Idea of an attack

b) Communicate the idea or show unusual interest

c) Visiting the scene of the attack


Plan of the Potential Attacker We know acts of targeted violence are neither

impulsive or spontaneous

Planning evolves around a series of factorsa) Identify the target(s)

b) Determine best time

c) Determine the best means and the approach

Planning provides a sense of purpose or an attainable goal to end their pain and take control


Relationship of the Potential Attacker

The interaction between the attacker, the victim and the environment (past stressful events and the current situation).

Attackers past history of dealing with the specific environment.a) Look at the type of event (specific stressor)

b) The attackers response to those events

c) The likelihood the event will occur again


Relationship of the Potential Attacker

Now look at the current environment that also includes the potential victima) Likelihood past stressor will occur for the attacker

b) How others will respond to this behaviori. Do they support, accept or ignore the threat

ii. Do they express disapproval

Finally, assess the potential targeta) How familiar is the target to the attacker

b) How accessible is the target – will others do


Investigative & Operational Mode

A threat assessment is not the traditional “do we have a crime and what evidence do I need”

You must determine if the subject poses a threata) Someone who threatens doesn’t always pose a threat

b) Waiting for the “threat” means wasting time from looking for the relevant factors of the potential risk of violence

c) You must perform CPR

The key – start by looking for the “attack-related” behaviors – the Conduct



Assess the potential risk by:

Gathering information on the attacker Learn about behaviors,

interest and state of mindi. Material created or

possessed by attacker

ii. Persons who know or have known attacker

iii. Review any available records


Investigative & Operational Mode Assess the potential risk by:

Interviewing the subject – it really depends on

i. Need for additional information

ii. The stage of the investigation & strategy for resolve

iii. Caution - Interview may intensify attackers interest in victim



Assess the potential risk by:

Gather information on target(s)

1) Are they identifiable or has the attacker even identified them

2) Is victim well known to attacker

3) Is the victim vulnerable and does he/she understand issue



Now assign the degree of potential risk based on

i. Is it more or less likely the attacker will use violence against the victim

ii. How close is the attacker to committing the violent act

iii. What changes could increase or decrease the act


Why Are These Threat Assessment Principles Applicable to Shooters?

Let’s hear from the “experts” –

at least those who have spent years assessing and interviewing

mass murderers.



Dr. Michael Welner, a New York University School of Medicine forensic psychiatrist and chairman of The Forensic Panel says:

Orchestrating a murder spree is something that is fantasized about, planned out and rehearsed for weeks, months or possibly years before the shooting occurs. Planning is an important component for the gunman; it gives him an advantage of having a dress rehearsal for the crime.



"The shooting becomes a statement of whom they want to be," Welner adds. "These are crimes in which the perpetrators aim for immortality and spectacle and see the shooting as their crowning achievement. After that, nothing else matters, including living."



Dr. Scott Thornsley, associate professor of criminal justice at Mansfield University in Mansfield, Pennsylvania says:

It is typical for a shooter to choose the location of attack ahead of time, and he will typically select a place where people feel safe, such as at a restaurant or a school. He controls the day, time, location and the weapon he's going to use.



Typically, shooters are individuals with a long history of frustration and failure, unable to cope with life's disappointments, according to Thornsley. He says that quite often the shooter blames others for their unhappiness. The lack of emotional support with friends or family also adds to the shooter's frustration. The shooting occurs when a life problem has emerged and they are overwhelmed.



Sociologist Joseph Gasper with Johns Hopkins University says:

Issues surrounding challenged masculinity are also connected to how lethal violence is viewed in America. Relationship problems and a history of rejection are also contributing factors to the shooter's motives. They have no social outlets, and bullying certainly contributes to that.



Dr. Lawrence Miller, clinical and forensic psychologist says:

The violence-prone individual is typically an externalizer – he’s looking for someone to blame and his reaction often involves a noxious brew of persecutory ideation, projection of fault, and violent revenge fantasies. This is partly due to his general sense of narcissistic entitlement and tendency toward impulsive self-gratification, paradoxically fueled by his self-perceived incompetence to take any real constructive action. As these thoughts and emotions continue to percolate, the individual increasingly isolates himself from the input of others and accretes a mindset of self-justified martyrdom, often leading to hopeless suicidality with a retaliatory tinge.



Dr. Michael Stone, professor of clinical psychiatry at the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York City, who has closely examined the minds of 208 mass murderers says:

Usually you’re dealing with an angry, dissatisfied person who has poor social skills or few friends, and then there is a trigger that sets them off. 96.5 percent of mass murderers are male, and a majority aren’t clinically psychotic. Rather, they suffer from paranoia and often have acute behavioral or personality disorders.



And what about the

School Shooter?


From the USSS Study Offenders tend to be male

75% of attackers were white

Most attackers are from intact families

40% were A or B students – only 5% were failing

40% were part of “mainstream” social groups

40% were in extracurricular activities

Suspensions, disciplinary problems and expulsions were uncommon.


From the USSS Study

2/3rds had never had a psychiatric evaluation - those who did, only half met the criteria for a psychiatric disorder

Most attackers had no overt shifts in academic or social functioning prior to their acts

A majority of attackers had a history of being bullied, threatened or harassed – or at least that was their perception.


From the USSS Study

• 50% had an interest in violent media – games, movies, etc.

• 50% had a weapon fascination

• 33% had a history of violence

• 25% had a history of arrest

• 12% had a history of cruelty to animals


From the USSS Study

More than 60% had a history of weapon use or experience

More than 50% had experience with firearms

More than 66% got weapons from their home

A majority of attackers had a history of suicidal behavior


From the USSS Study Despite impulsivity being a common adolescent

trait, most school shootings are well planned

Other people were aware of the attackers intent – 80% of cases (hence the best predictor)

Referring an adolescent for psychiatric assessment usually just results in a pissed off adolescent who is going to minimize symptoms

Hence, the need to apply CPR!


Everyone Wants One Assessment Tool

l Since so many are expected to know how to assess the threat, this would be beneficial

l But as we have discussed, it involves a multitude of issues and considerations

l Best alleviation of stress – multidisciplinary

l Best results treating cancer – multidisciplinary

l So wouldn’t that make sense here too?


The “CPR Approach”l Utilize a set of investigative and operational

activities to identify, assess and manage

l Move away from psychopathology alone and focus on how the subject:– Is processing – his conduct

– Has behaved in the past

– Keep process away from “profiling”

l Clinical instruments helpful in evaluating the contribution of psychopathology


There Is No Linear Assessment

l Handouts of “Red Flags” are probable at best

l Hence, “computer programs” questionable

l Quality of data obtained is critical, especially information from others and the “subject”


There Is No Linear Assessment

l Violent behavior in one area does not mean the person will be violent in another

l Know who can assist ahead of time

l Develop a plan, to include monitoring

l Must always consider victim, subject and the environment


CASEEvan has been a machinist with a local custom airline parts company for over 25 years. All machinist receive a bonus if they are able to get their tasks done prior to the deadline. Today, Evan’s machine broke down so he called the maintenance office and they said they would be down shortly. After a no-show of an hour, Evan called again and again they said they would be right down. After another no-show hour, Even stuck his head into the supervisors office, told Jeff the problem, said he was going home as he was feeling ill and, “I’m going to get my AK-47 – maybe that’ll get a response.”

Evan then left and Jeff was so stunned he waited 30 minutes before doing anything. You now get the call from the owner.


CASE

Jimmie is in a local middle school. Two of his friends are currently in the principals office and they told the principal that Jimmie was planning on taking over the wood shop class today and shooting Mr. Johnson. The principal, Mr. Woods, asked the boys how they know this is true? Both told Mr. Woods that Jimmie solicited them to be part of the “take-over”. They had agreed but when Jimmie showed up with a back-pack full of weapons, they decided this was not a good idea and decided to report it.

Mr. Woods was unsure of the best thing to do at this point, so he calls you.


CASEBill is recently divorced. His 1966 Mustang that he painstakingly restored and kept running over the 13 years of his marriage was about all he managed to salvage from the marriage. But recent engine problems convinced Bill he needed a new engine. Bill knew that his best friend Pete worked at a garage so he felt confident it would be in good hands.

It’s been a month now and the owner keeps saying he is still waiting for the engine. Bill told John, the owner of the garage this Monday, “If this is not done by Wednesday I’m coming down with my .357 – and I don’t mean the engine!”

John calls you and wants to know what to do.


SUMMATION PERIOD

Questions?

threat assessment and the active shooter

Documents