IN-DEPTH interviews with 30 perpetrators who were convicted and incarcerated for aggravated robbery gave Dr Rudolph Zinn a clear idea on the profile of a residential robber.
Zinn, senior lecturer in Forensic and Crime investigation at the University of South Africa, researched this topic for his PhD.
The profile of residential robbery perpetrators, according to Zinn, looks like this:
• Most were male, except for two females who were convicted as being accessories to the crime, rather than the primary instigators.
• The perpetrators were representative of South Africa’s racial demographic profile.
• Eighty-three per cent were South African citizens with the remaining 17 per cent holding the citizenship of other African countries.
• The average age of a house robber is between 19 and 26 years.
• On average they would form a group of four people when attacking a household.
• Only 20 per cent had completed high school to grade 12 and none had further tertiary education.
• Seventy-six per cent were unemployed and a number of these had left employment to make money solely from robbery.
• Eighty per cent had not received any type of military or security related training. The remaining 20 per cent that had received such training had either been employed as security guards or were foreign nationals who had worked in the police or military of their home countries.
• All were experienced criminals and had committed a number of other crimes before deciding to target households for robbery.
• On average each perpetrator admitted to having committed 103 crimes, including crimes other than robberies over a seven-year period before being arrested the first time.
• Seventy per cent came from what was described as dysfunctional or broken homes.
• Given the nature of the crime, a distinctive characteristic of house robbers is the willingness to use lethal violence against victims.
Zinn also gave some of the motivations these 30 criminals had for involvement in residential robberies:
• Ninety-seven per cent of the perpetrators in the study stated that the primary motivating factor for becoming involved in this type of crime was economic gain.
• Twenty-two per cent of the perpetrators had also committed farm attacks, which are considered no differently as robberies of other types of residences.
• Sixty-five per cent of what was stolen was spent on cars, clothes, drugs and alcohol.
• Thirty-five per cent of what was stolen was spent on survival like paying for food and rent.
• The victims were targeted because of their wealth. Demographic factors like race played no part in decisions of the perpetrators to target specific households.
• A contributory factor was the existence of role models in their communities who were criminals and were wealthy because of criminal activities. These individuals are well known and generally respected in their communities.
• Eighty per cent of the perpetrators in the study stated that their families, friends and acquaintances knew that they were involved in crime to make a living. This indicates a high tolerance for criminality in the communities from where they came.
• Residential robbery was chosen as a particular crime to become involved in because it resulted in more money more quickly than other types of crime and chances of being caught were seen as very low.
• All the perpetrators started with non-violent property crimes like theft before progressing to violent crimes like robbery.
In choosing a target, Zinn said:
• Sixty-three per centof the perpetrators in the study would prefer to travel between 10 and 30 minutes by vehicle from where they lived to commit a residential robbery. Most would travel much further if the target was deemed lucrative enough.
• Seventy-seven per cent of the perpetrators stated that they chose targets for which they had some inside information like from domestic workers, gardeners or other service providers, including security guards or from relatives or acquaintances of these people.
• Some perpetrators know people who make a living through burglary and will get information on specific houses from them.
• Generally, perpetrators prefer to choose targets in neighbourhoods that have many entrance and exit points with easy access to main roads and where street security is low or non-existent.
• Only 25 per cent of the perpetrators in the research stated that they deliberately chose a house because it had low security. Targets were chosen because they had reasonable information or suspicion that there would be much of value to steal once they had gained access to the property.
• The perpetrators in this study said they would tend to focus on what they termed as the middle class. This term was used broadly to talk about anyone who had relative wealth. Sometimes people with expensive jewellery, clothes or other visible signs of affluence would be followed home with the assumption that they would have expensive possessions in their residences.
About planning and executing a residential robbery the 30 revealed:
• All perpetrators stated that they would spend some time prior to the attack doing surveillance on the targeted residence. In some cases this could be as little as 30 minutes prior to the attack and in other cases up to two weeks. The purpose of the surveillance is to orientate the perpetrators to the layout and type of neighbourhood, household security measures, the habits and patterns of the residents.
• Fifty-seven per cent of the perpetrators stated that they preferred to carry out residential robberies between 7pm and midnight. This is when most people are at home and a time when there is noise from televisions and radios which will provide perpetrators with some level of cover to allow them to take the victims by surprise.
• Fourteen per cent of the perpetrators also attacked houses between 3am and 7am as it was quiet, the neighbours would be asleep or not paying particular attention and they would not be disturbed by visitors to the house.
• Seven per cent stated that they also attacked houses between 10am and 12pm. This was when domestic workers would be in the house, doors would be open, alarms would also be turned off and there would be the relative cover of noise.
• The most common way to access a property was to break in by forcing locks on gates or doors, breaking windows or disabling electric fences and climbing over the walls.
• Some of the perpetrators attacked houses where there were social functions, as they could walk through gates or doors that were left open. In some cases the perpetrators would wait for the residents to leave or arrive home and attack them in the driveway before forcing them inside the house.
• Before breaking into the house, the perpetrators stated they would try and identify the numbers and locations of everyone in the house. They would typically do this during the pre-attack surveillance and once they were on the property, by peering though windows, preferably under the cover of darkness.
Read more on this research on https://www.pcb.org.za
