The Forensic Examiner (Sample) - Fall/Winter 2011

kent kiehl

$7.50 U.S./$9.50 CAN

peering inside a pyschopath’s mind

nternetdefamation

D e f e n D i n g Y o u r n a m e

p. 24

timeline of terrorismFree poster insert inside:

domestic terrorism,cyBer-radicaliZation, U.s. college stUdents& p. 10

p. 44

p. 76

p. 54

p. 19

p. 18

Books sent on approval • Shipping charges: $7.75 min. U.S. / Outside U.S., actual shipping fees will be charged • Prices subject to change without notice

when ordering, please refer to promotional code FoeX0311 to receive your discount.

Complete catalog available at ccthomas.com • [email protected]

easy ways to order!

@ EMAIL:[email protected]

Web: www.ccthomas.com

MAIL:Charles C Thomas •Publisher, Ltd.P.O. Box 19265Springfield, IL 62794-9265

FA X FAX:(217) 789-913055

*Savings include all titles shown here and on our web site. For a limited time only.

P.o. box 19265springfield, il 62794-9265

PHONE:1-800-258-8980or (217) 789-8980

• Blake, William F.—aDvanCEDPRivaTE invESTigaTion: aManual of advanced investiga-tive Skills for the Private invest-igator. '11, 260 pp. (7 x 10), $35.95paper.

• Payne, Brian K.—CRiME anDELDER aBUSE: an integratedPerspective. (3rd Ed.) '11, 374 pp.(7 x 10), 7 il., 18 tables, $68.95,hard, $48.95, paper.

• Webb, Howard—ManagingTHE USE oF FoRCE inCi-DEnT: For Criminal Justice off-icers, Supervisors, and admin-istrators. '11, 404 pp. (7 x 10), 5 il.,$74.95, hard, $54.95, paper.

• Garner, Gerald W.—PoLiCECHiEF 101: Practical advice forthe Law Enforcement Leader. '10,284 pp. (7 x 10), $60.95, hard, $40.95,paper.

• Latham, Krista E. & MichaelFinnegan—agE ESTiMaTionoF THE HUMan SkELETon.'10, 310 pp. (8 x 10), 46 il., 69tables, $64.95, hard, $44.95, paper.

• Schafer, John R.—PSYCHoLog-iCaL naRRaTivE anaLYSiS:a Professional Method to DetectDeception in Written and oralCommunications. '10, 220 pp. (7 x10), 10 il., $49.95, hard, $29.95,paper.

• Vardalis, James J.—iSSUES anDCaSES in LaW EnFoRCE-MEnT: Decisions, Ethics andJudgment. '10, 240 pp. (7 x 10),$53.95, hard, $33.95, paper.

• Yereance, Robert A, & ToddKerkhoff—ELECTRiCaL FiREanaLYSiS. (3rd Ed.) '10, 300 pp.(7 x 10), 14 il., 4 tables, $61.95,hard, $41.95, paper.

• DeLord, Ron, John Burpo, MichaelR. Shannon & Jim Spearing—PoLiCE Union PoWER, PoL-iTiCS, anD ConFRonTa-Tion in THE 21st CEnTURY:new Challenges, new issues. (2ndEd.) '08, 354 pp. (7 x 10), $69.95,hard, $49.95, paper.

• Kocsis, Richard N.—aPPLiEDCRiMinaL PSYCHoLogY: aguide to Forensic BehavioralSciences. '09, 306 pp. (7 x 10), 4 il.,2 tables, $65.95, hard, $45.95, paper.

• Williams, Howard E.—TaSERELECTRoniC ConTRoL DE-viCES anD SUDDEn in-CUS-ToDY DEaTH: Separating Evid-ence from Conjecture. '08, 226 pp.(8 x 10), 15 tables, $59.95, hard,$39.95, paper.

• Coppock, Craig A.—ConTRaST:an investigator's Basic Referenceguide to Fingerprint identifica-tion Concepts. (2nd Ed.) '07, 210pp. (7 x 10), 66 il., $53.95, hard,$33.95, paper.

• George, Robert M.—FaCiaLgEoMETRY: graphic Facialanalysis for Forensic artists. '07,96 pp. (7 x 10), 45 il., 2 tables $24.95,(spiral).

• Spi tz , Werner U.—Spitz andFisher’s MEDiCoLEgaL inv-ESTigaTion oF DEaTH: gui-delines for the application ofPathology to Crime investiga-tion. (4th Ed.) '06, 1358 pp. (8 1/2x 11), 1,420 il., 49 tables, $119.95,(cloth).

• Karagiozis, Michael & RichardSgaglio—FoREnSiC invESTi-gaTion HanDBook: an in-troduction to the Collection, Pre-servation, analysis and Presen-tation of Evidence. '05, 402 pp. (8x 10), 65 il., $75.95, hard, $55.95,paper.

• Lewis, Garland D. — BaTES’i.S.Q.D.: identification System forQuestioned Documents. (2nd Ed.)'05, 112 pp. (7 x 10), 125 il., $28.95,paper.

• Drielak, Steven C.—HoT ZonEFoREnSiCS: Chemical, Biolo-gical, and Radiological EvidenceCollection. '04, 436 pp. (7 x 10),119 il., (1 in color), 22 tables, $95.95,hard, $65.95, paper.

• Killam, Edward W.—THE DE-TECTion oF HUMan REMai-nS. (2nd Ed.) '04, 292 pp. (7 x 10),87 il., $65.95, hard, $45.95, paper.

• Brunelle, Richard L. & Kenneth R.Crawford—aDvanCES in THEFoREnSiC anaLYSiS anDDaTing oF WRiTing ink.'03, 236 pp. (7 x 10), 91 il., 4 tables,$59.95, hard, $39.95, paper.

• Coppock, Craig A.—THE iMP-LEMEnTaTion oF DigiTaLPHoTogRaPHY in LaW En-F o R C E M E n T a n D g o v -ERnMEnT: an overview gui-de. ‘02, 78 pp. (6 x 9), 4 il., $17.95,spiral (paper).

Coming soon!

now available!

• Mendell, Ronald L.—HoW To Do Finan-CiaL aSSET invESTigaTionS: a Pra-ctical guide for Private investigators, Col-lections Personnel, and asset RecoverySpecialists. (4th Ed.) '11, 276 pp. (7 x 10), 13il., 13 tables.

• Rengert, George F. & Elizabeth Groff—RESi-DEnTiaL BURgLaRY: How the UrbanEnvironment and our Lifestyles Play aContributing Role. (3rd Ed.) '11, 204 pp. (7 x10), 32 il., 12 tables.

• Rivers, R.W.—TRaFFiC CRaSH invES-TigaToRS’ ManUaL: a Levels 1 and 2Reference, Training and investigationManual. (3rd Ed.) '11, 246 pp. (7 x 10), 144il., 7 tables.

Save 10% on 1 Book ! • Save 15% on 2 Books !Save 20% on 3 Books !

Book SavingS(on separate titles only)*

1-800-423-9737 www.ACFEI.com

ACHIEVE NEW GOALS. LEARN NEW JOB SKILLS. GROW YOUR PASSION.The American College of Forensic Examiners Institute® provides the latest in certi� ed training. We o� er a range of online forensic credentials from Certi� ed Forensic Nurse, CFN® to Certi� ed Forensic Accountant, CrFA®. Check out our online catalog for a complete list of the certi� cations we o� er from all our associations.

ACFEI0311EX

CONTENTS

44

CE ARTICLES

10

32

DOMESTIC TERRORISM, CYBER-RADICALIZATION, AND U.S. COLLEGE STUDENTSBy Maria Wright, PhD, CHS-V

THE MOCK TRIAL JOURNEY:An AssessmentBy Thomas E. Baker, MS, MEd, MS

TAB

LE O

F C

ON

TEN

TS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

10

04 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER® Winter 2011

60

FEATURES

19

44

60

76

INTERNET DEFAMATION:Defending Your NameBy Joshua K. Roberts

IPREDATORBy Michael Nuccitelli, PsyD, CFC

CLINICAL DETECTION AND IMAGING OF CONTUSIONS IN SUSPECTED PHYSICAL ABUSEBy Eugene R. Bertolli, OD, Clifford D. Brown, OD, MPH, CAPT, PHS, Dominic R. Pannone, OD, and Thaddeus W. Bartles, OD

GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT:How the Center on Wrongful Convictions exonerates the wrongly convictedBy Katherine Ramsland, PhD, CMI-VIN THIS ISSUECOLUMNS

082454

66 5679 74

75 80 82 85 86 89

84

ACFEI NEWS

EXECUTIVE SUMMIT WRAP-UP

ES-21 LAS VEGAS

NEW MEMBERS

LOGO PRODUCTS

MEMBER SPOTLIGHT

PRODUCT REVIEWS

BOOK REVIEWS

CE TEST PAGES

PROFILE—KENT KIEHL: Peering Inside the Psychopath’s Mind

FICTION—Death of a Violinist

FALSELY ACCUSED—Johnny Pinchback Freed After 27 Years

COLD CASE EXAMINER—Caledon Ontario

THE DETECTIVE’S CORNER—Lock Down

VOLUME 20 • NUMBER 3 •WINTER 2011

19

32

WWW.ACFEI.COM • (800) 592-1399TA

BLE O

F CO

NT

ENT

S

nternetdefamation


76

Winter 2011 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER® 05

BOARDSB

OA

RD

S

Nicholas G. Apostolou, DBA, DABFA, CPA, Cr.FADonna Bader, MA, MSN, CFN, DACFEILarry Barksdale, BS, MA E. Robert Bertolli, OD, FACFEI, CHS-V, CMI-VKenneth E. Blackstone, BA, MS, CFC, DABFEDavid T. Boyd, DBA, CPA, Cr.FA, CMA Jules Brayman, CPA, CVA, DABFA, FACFEIJohn Brick, PhD, MA, DABFM, FACFEI Dennis L. Caputo, MS, DABFET, CHMM, FACFEI Dennis H. Chevalier, BS, MSM, DM, CMIDavid F. Ciampi, PhD, FACFEI, DABPSAndrew N. Dentino, MD, FACFEI, DABFE, DABFM James A. DiGabriele, PhD/DPS, CPA, Cr.FA, FACFEIJohn Shelby DuPont Jr., DDS, DABFD Per Freitag, PhD, MD, FACFEI, DABFML. Sue Gabriel, MSN, MFS, EdD, RNRon Grassi, DC, FACFEI, DABFM, DABFERichard C. W. Hall, MD, FACFEI, DABFM, DABFEJohn J. Haberströh, DC, CFC, CMI-V, FACFEIRaymond F. Hanbury, PhD, ABPP, FACFEI, DABFEDavid L. Holmes, EdD, FACFEI, DABFE, DABPSLeo L. Holzenthal Jr., PE, DABFET, FACFEILinda Hopkins, PhD, CFC, DABPS, DABRE Matthew Howard, PhDEdward J. Hyman, PhDZafar M. Iqbal, PhDNursine S. Jackson, MSN, RN, DABFNRobert S. Kassoff, PhD, DABPS, DACFM, DABFEPhilip Kaushall, PhD, DABFE, DABPS, FACFEIEric Kreuter, PhD, CPA, DABFA, FACFEIRonald G. Lanfranchi, DC, PhD, CMI-IV, FACFEIRichard Levenson, Jr., PsyD, DABFE, DABPS, FACFEIMonique Levermore, PhD, FACFEI, DABPS Jonathan Lipman, PhD, FACFEI, DABFE, DABPS Judith Logue, PhD, FACFEI, DABFSW, DABPSMike Meacham, PhD, LCSW, DABFSW, FACFEIDavid Miller, DDS, FACFEI, DABFE, DABFD

Leonard I. Morgenbesser, PhD, FACFEIJacques Ama Okonji, PhD, FACFEI, DABFE, DABPSNorva E. Osborne, OD, CMI-IIIGeorge Palermo, MD, PhD, FACFEI, DABFMRonald J. Panunto, PE, CFC, CFEI, DABFETLarry H. Pastor, MD, FACFEI, DABFE, DABFMTheodore G. Phelps, CPA, DABFAMarc Rabinoff, EdD, FACFEI, DABFE, CFCJerald H. Ratner, MD, CFP, PAHarold F. Risk, PhD, DABPS, FACFEISusan P. Robbins, PhD, LCSW, DABFSWWalter A. Robbins, DBA, CPA/CFF, Cr.FAJane R. Rosen-Grandon, PhD, DABFC, FACFEIDouglas Ruben, PhD, FACFEI, DABFE, DABPSJ. Bradley Sargent, CPA, Cr.FA, DABFA, FACFEIWilliam Sawyer, PhD, FACFEI, DABFE, DABFMHoward A. Shaw, MD, DABFM, FACFEIIvan Sosa, MDHenry A. Spiller, MS, DABFE, FACFEIMarilyn J. Stagno, PsyD, RN, FACFEIRichard I. Sternberg, PhD, DABPSJames R. Stone, MD, MBA, CHS-III, CMI-IVGeorge S. Swan, JDWilliam A. Tobin, MA, DABFET, DABLEE, FACFEIRobert Tovar, BS, MA, DABFE, DABPS, CHS-IIIBrett C. Trowbridge, PhD, JD, DABPS, FACFEIRichard A. Vera II, PI, MBA, CPA, CFEPatricia A. Wallace, PhD, FACFEI, DABFE, DABFM, CFCRaymond Webster, PhD, FACFEI, DABFE, DABFMDean A. Wideman, MSc, MBA, CFC, CMI-III

*Note: For spacing and consistency considerations, the number of designations listed has been limited to four.

FOUNDER AND PUBLISHER:Robert L. O’Block, MDiv, PhD, PsyD, DMin ([email protected])SENIOR EDITOR:Amanda Ingle ([email protected])MEMBER SERVICES: Candice Sickman ([email protected])EXECUTIVE ART DIRECTOR:Brandon Alms ([email protected])ICBS CAO:Tanja O’Block ([email protected])ANNALS® SENIOR EDITOR:Amanda Ingle ([email protected])ANNALS® ASSISTANT EDITOR:Julie Brooks ([email protected])INSIDE HOMELAND SECURITY® EDITOR:Julie Brooks ([email protected])ADVERTISING:Amanda Ingle ([email protected])

2011 EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD

CONTINUING EDUCATION

ACFEI provides continuing education credits for accountants, nurses, physicians, dentists , psychologists, counselors, s o c i a l w o r ke r s , a n d m a r r i a g e a n d f a m i l y t h e r a p i s t s . Approvals for continuing education activities are subject to change. For the most up-to-date status, please check the course catalog on our Web site, www.acfei.com, or contact the Continuing Education staff toll-free at (800) 423-9737. ACFEI is an approved provider of Continuing Education by the following:Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education National Association of State Boards of Accountancy National Board for Certified Counselors California Board of Registering Nursing American Psychological Association California Board of Behavioral Sciences Association of Social Work Boards American Dental Association (ADA CERP) The Missouri Sheriff’s Association co-sponsors Police Officer Standards Training (POST) accreditation for the American College of Forensic Examiners Institute’s activities. The American College of Forensic Examiners Institute is a member of the National Certification Commission and the Alliance for Continuing Medical Education. The Ethics exam, Law exam, Evidence exam, Certified Medical Investigator®, Certified in Disaster Preparedness Certified Forensic Accountant CrFA®, Certified in Homeland Security, CHS® Levels I-V, Certified Forensic Nurse, Certified Forensic Consultant, and Sensitive Security Information (SSI) are all approved for G.I. Bill benefits.

CHAIR Cyril H. Wecht, MD, JD, FACFEI, CFP; Chair, American Board of Forensic MedicineMEMBERSDouglas Wayne Beal, MD, MSHA, CMI-V, CFP; Chair, American Board of Forensic ExmainersAlexander Lamar Casparis, CPA, MBA, Cr.FA, FACFEI; Chair, American Board of Forensic AccountingDianne Ditmer, MS, RN, CFN, FACFEI; Chair, American Board of Forensic NursingDouglas E. Fountain, PhD, LCSW, DABFE, DABFSW; Chair, American Board of Forensic Social WorkersRaymond H. Hamden, PhD, FACFEI, CFC, CMI-V, Chair, Ameri-can Board of Psychological SpecialtiesJames H. Hutson, DDS, CMI-V; Chair, American Board of Forensic DentistryMarilyn J. Nolan, MS, FACFEI, DABFC; Chair, American Board of Forensic CounselorsGregg M. Stuchman; Chair, American Board of Recorded Evidence

ACFEI EXECUTIVE ADVISORY BOARD

The American College of Forensic Examiners International (ACFEI) does not endorse, guarantee, or warrant the credentials, work, or opinions of any individual member. Membership in ACFEI does not constitute the grant of a license or other licensing authority by or on behalf of the organization as to a member’s qualifications, abilities, or expertise. The publications and activities of ACFEI are solely for informative and educational purposes with respect to its members. The opinions and views expressed by the authors, publishers, or presenters are their sole and separate views and opinions and do not nec-essarily reflect those of ACFEI, nor does ACFEI adopt such opinions or views as its own. The American College of Forensic Examiners International disclaims and does not assume any responsibility or liability with respect to the opinions, views, and factual statements of such authors, publishers, or presenters,

nor with respect to any actions, qualifications, or representations of its members or subscriber’s efforts in connection with the ap-plication or use of any information, suggestions, or recommendations made by ACFEI or any of its boards, committees, publications, resources, or activities thereof.

The Forensic Examiner® (ISSN 1084-5569) is published quarterly by The American College of Forensic Examiners International, Inc. (ACFEI). Annual membership for a year in the American College of Forensic Examiners International is $165. Abstracts of articles published in The Forensic Examiner® appear in National Criminal Justice Reference Service, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, Criminal Justice Abstracts, Gale Group Publishing’s InfoTrac Database, e-psyche database, and psycINFO database. Periodicals Postage Paid at Springfield, Missouri, and additional mailing offices. © Copyright 2011 by the American College of Forensic Examiners Interna-tional. All rights reserved. No part of this work can be distributed or otherwise used without the express written permission of the American College of Forensic Examiners International. The views expressed in The Forensic Examiner® are those of the authors and may not reflect the official policies of the American College of Forensic Examiners International.

CONTACT US:Publication, editorial, and advertising offices of ACFEI, 2750 East Sunshine Street, Springfield, MO 65804. Phone: (800) 592-1399, Fax: (417) 881-4702, E-mail: [email protected]. Subscription changes should be sent to ACFEI, 2750 East Sunshine, Springfield, MO 65804.

POSTMASTER:Send address changes to American College of Forensic Examiners International, 2750 East Sunshine Street, Springfield, MO 65804.


WWW.ACFEI.COM • (800) 592-1399B

OA

RD

S

AmericAn BoArd of forensic AccountingCHAIRAlexander Lamar Casparis, CPA, MBA, Cr. FA, FACFEI

MEMBERS Stewart L. Appelrouth, CPA, CFLM, Cr.FA, FACFEIGary Bloome, CPA, Cr.FAD. Larry Crumbley, PhD, CPA, DABFA, Cr.FAJames A. DiGabriele, PhD/DPS, CPA, Cr.FA, FACFEIMichael W. Feinberg, CPA, Cr.FAMichael G. Kessler, Cr.FA, CICA, FACFEI, DABFAEric A. Kreuter, PhD, CPA, FACFEI, DABFARobert K. Minniti, CPA, MBA, Cr.FAJ. Bradley Sargent, CPA, CFS, Cr.FA, FACFEIJoseph F. Wheeler, CPA, Cr.FA, CHS-III, CFF

AmericAn BoArd of forensic counselorsCHAIR Marilyn J. Nolan, MS, FACFEI, DABFC, DABCIPChair Emeritus: Dow R. Pursley, EdD, FACFEI, DABFC

MEMBERSGeorge Bishop, LPC, LAT, FACFEI, DABFELaura W. Kelley, PhD, LPC, DABFC, FACFEIWilliam M. Sloane, JD, LLM, FACFEI, CHS-III

AmericAn BoArd of forensic dentistryCHAIRJames H. Hutson, DDS, CMI-V, FACFEI Chair Emeritus: Brian L. Karasic, DMD, MBA, DABFD, CMI-III

MEMBERS Bill B. Akpinar, DDS, CMI-V, FACFEI, DABFDStephanie L. Anton-Bettey, DDS, CMI-VSusan Bollinger, DDS, CMI-IV, CHS-IVRobert Byrd, DDSChester B. Kulak, DMD, CMI-V, CFC, DABFD

AmericAn BoArd of forensic exAminersCHAIRDouglas Wayne Beal, MD, MSHA, CMI-V, CFP

MEMBERS Jess P. Armine, DC, FACFEI, DABFE, DABFMRonna F. Dillon, PhD, DABFE, DABPS, CMI-V, CHS-IIIBruce H. Gross, PhD, JD, MBA, FACFEIDarrell C. Hawkins, MS, JD, FACFEI, CMI-VMichael W. Homick, PhD, DABCHS, CHS-VJohn L. Laseter, PhD, FACFEI, CMI-IV, CHS-IIILawrence Lavine, DO, MPH, CHS-V, CMI-VLeonard K. Lucenko, PhD, FACFEI, DABFE, CPSIMarc A. Rabinoff, EdD, FACFEI, DABFE, CFCJanet M. Schwartz, PhD, FACFEI, DABFE, CHS-V

AmericAn BoArd of forensic engineering And technologyCHAIRBen Venktash, DABFET, DABFE, FRSPH(UK), FIET(UK)VICE CHAIRGeorge C. Frank, CFC, DABFE, FACFEI

MEMBERSCam Cope, BS, DABFET, DABFE

Robert K. Kochan, BS, FACFEI, DABFET, DABFEJ.W. “Bill” Petrelli Jr., DABFET, CFC, AIA, FACFEI Max L. Porter, PhD, DABFET, CFC, FACFEI

AmericAn BoArd of forensic medicineCHAIRCyril H. Wecht, MD, JD, FACFEI, CFP

MEMBERS Douglas Wayne Beal, MD, MSHA, CMI-V, CFPZhaoming Chen, MD, PhD, MS, CFPJohn A. Consalvo, MD, DABFE, DABFM, FACFEILouis W. Irmisch III, MD, FACFEI, CMI-V, CFPE. Rackley Ivey, MD, FACFEI, CMI-V, CFPMichael Fitting Karagiozis, DO, MBA, CFP, CMI-VLawrence Lavine, DO, MPH, CHS-V, CMI-VKenneth A. Levin, MD, CFP, FACFEI, DABFME. Franklin Livingstone, MD, CFP, FACFEI, DABFMManijeh K. Nikakhtar, MD, CFP, MPH, CMI-VMatthias I. Okoye, MD, MSc, JD, FRCPJohn R. Parker, MD, FACFEI, DABFM, CFPJerald H. Ratner, MD, DABFE, DABFM, FACFEIS. Sandy Sanbar, MD, PhD, JD, FCLMGere Unger, MD, JD, LL.M

AmericAn BoArd of forensic nursingCHAIR Dianne T. Ditmer, MS, RN, CFN, CHS-III

MEMBERSDonna Bader, MSN, RNC, CFNHeidi H. Bale, RN, BSN, CFN, DABFNWanda Broner, MSN, RN, FNE, CENMarilyn A. Bello, RNC, MS, CFN, CMI-IVCynthia J. Curtsinger, RN, CFNLinda J. Doyle, RN, CLNC, CFN, CMI-IIIL. Sue Gabriel, EdD, MSN, RN, CFNDiane L. Reboy, MS, RN, CFN, FACFEIElizabeth Russell, RN, BSN, CCM, BCSharon L. Walker, MPH, PhD, RN, CFNCarol A. Wood, RN, CFN, BS, NHATheresa Wyatt, MSFN, RN, CFN, D-ABMDI

AmericAn BoArd of forensic sociAl WorkersCHAIR Douglas E. Fountain, PhD, LCSW, DABFE, DABFSW

MEMBERSMatthew A. Capezzuto, PhD, LISW-S, CMFSW, DABFSWPeter W. Choate, PhD, MSW, DABFSW, DABFEViola Vaughan-Eden, PhD, LCSW, CMFSW, DAPANathalie P. Hughes, MSW, LSW, CMFSWTina Jaeckle, PhD, LCSW, MFSW, CFCShannon C. Lebak, MSW, LSW, CMFSWMichael G. Meacham, PhD, LCSW, DCSW, FACFEIKathleen Monahan, DSW, MSW, CMFSW, CFC Susan P. Robbins, PhD, LCSW, DCSW, DABFSWSteven J. Sprengelmeyer, MSW, MA, FACFEI

AmericAn BoArd of PsychologicAl sPeciAltiesCHAIRRaymond H. Hamden, PhD, FACFEI, CFC, CMI-VCHAIR EMERITUSRaymond F. Hanbury, PhD, FACFEI, DABPS, DABFE

MEMBERSCarol J. Armstrong, PhD, LPC, DABPSRobert J. Barth, PhD, DABPSRonna F. Dillon, PhD, DABPS, CMI-V, CHS-IIICarl N. Edwards, PhD, JD, FACFEI, DABPSPaula Mackenzie, PsyDHelen D. Pratt, PhD, FACFEI, DABPSDouglas H. Ruben, PhD, FACFEI, DABPS, DABFERichard M. Skaff, PsyD, DABPSCharles R. Stern, PhD, DABPS, FACFEI, CMI-VJoseph C. Yeager, PhD, DABFE, DABPS, FACFEI Donna M. Zook, PhD, DABPS, CFC

AmericAn BoArd of recorded evidenceCHAIRGregg M. Stutchman

MEMBERSErnst F.W. Alexanderson, BA, MBA, FACFEI, DABREEddy B. Brixen, DABFETCharles K. Deak, BS, CPC, DABFE, DABRERyan O. Johnson, BA, DABFE, DABREMichael C. McDermott, JD, DABRE, DABFE, FACFEIJennifer E. Owen, BA, DABRE, DABFEThomas J. Owen, BA, FACFEI, DABRE, CHS-VLonnie L. Smrkovski, BS, DABRE, DABFE, FACFEI

AmericAn BoArd of registered investigAtorsMEMBERSKenneth E. Blackstone, MS, CFC, DABFEMark Boutwell, CPPP, FIPC, CMI-IRobert Boyden, PhD, MS, SCSAMarvin “Gene” Bullington, CFC, FACFEIDennis Chevalier, CPPP, FIPC, CMI-IJohn Daab, PhD, MA, MBA, MPS, MA, RIJoseph A. Juchniewicz, MA, SSI, CHS-III, RIEric Lakes, CHS-III, CLWE, MCSELt. David Millsap, RI, CMI-IIIHarold F. Risk, PhD, DABPS, FACFEIDana Way, CMI-V, RI, DABRICyril H. Wecht, MD, JD, CFP, FACFEI

executive Advisory BoArd of the internAtionAl college of the BehAviorAl sciencesCHAIR Janet M. Schwartz, PhD, FACFEI, DABFE, CHS-VBOARD SECRETARYSteven Crimando

MEMBERS Mike Baer, PhD Duane L. Dobbert, PhD, FACFEISue Gabriel, EdD, RN, CFNMark L. Goldstein, PhDRaymond H. Hamden, PhD, FACFEI, CFC, CMI-V Janice L. Hargrave, MEd, CFCDavid L. Holmes, EdDTina Jaeckle, PhD, LCSW, MFSW, CFCGary Kesling, PhD., LMFT, LPC, DAPALon Kopit, PsyD, LPC, BCPCCarl J. Patrasso, PsyDKatherine Ramsland, PhD, CMI-VJerald H. Ratner, MD, CFPDoug Ruben, PhDRonald M. Ruff, PhD

ACFEI EXECUTIVE ADVISORY BOARDS


ACFE

I NEW

SACFEI NEWS

ACFEI NEWS and announcements

ACFEI member Mark Abramson displays The Forensic Examiner® in front of the United States Capitol building in Washington, D.C.

The Legal Advisory Board is seeking board members who have a JD degree from an accredited law school and a current, valid license to practice law. Send your resumes/curriculum vitae to [email protected] to apply for a board position.

The Examiner is seeking to receive cold case submissions involving our members from around the world; the “Cold Case Examiner” will be a one-page article sent in by the read-ers providing a summary of the case. For a first-look at this new feature, turn to page 82 of this issue to read a cold case submission from member Jennifer Paddon. To have your cold case featured, please e-mail your one-page article via a Word document and include any photos, evidence, or supplemental details to [email protected].

GET YOUR PICTURE DISPLAYED IN THE FORENSIC EXAMINER®!

Members—send the Examiner pictures of yourself holding a copy of the Examiner on vacation or business travels! Take a copy of the journal and your camera with you on your trav-els—we want to see your pictures. Email your high-resolu-

tion photos to [email protected], or mail to Forensic Traveler, 2750 E. Sunshine, Springfield, MO 65804.

Forensic specialists, members, and students may contribute to The Forensic Examiner® by submitting articles for consideration. We welcome submissions from all areas of the forensic profession, and are seeking well-written, engaging articles offering original perspectives; more specifically, we are currently looking for ar-ticles on the topics of food forensics and food science/technology.

Submission GuidelinesThe Examiner will not consider manuscripts that have been sub-mitted to any other publication. All submissions must adhere to the following requirements:

• Sent in a Microsoft Word document• Must be typed and double-spaced, one-sided on 8 ½ x 11-

inch paper, and one-inch margins• Include a title page with the article title and the author(s)

name, degrees, affiliation, and contact information• Submissions containing references must include in-text cita-

tions and a reference list, and both must strictly adhere to the style of the American Psychological Association (APA style)

• Include a one-paragraph biography of the author at the end of the paper

• Include all authors’ résumés or curricula vitae

Continuing Education SubmissionsEmpirical research manuscripts submitted as continuing edu-cation articles must be more than 4,000 words and include the following additional components:

• An article abstract of no more than 120 words• A list of three to five keywords that express the precise con-

tent of the manuscript (used for indexing purposes), posi-tioned immediately following the abstract

• A list of at least three learning objectives covering the main points of the manuscript, positioned immediately follow-ing the key words

• A minimum of six multiple-choice test questions that adequate-ly cover the material highlighted in the learning objectives (used to offer continuing education credit through journal learning)

• In-text citations and a reference section that both strictly adhere to the style of the American Psychological Associa-tion (APA style)

To submit, email your manuscript to [email protected].

Mark your calendars for the 2012 Executive Summit, which will be held October 17–19 at the Rio All-Suite Hotel in Las Vegas. This will be an exciting event you will not want to miss! Be sure to register by February 1, to receive the member loyalty rate of $499.

SAVE THE DATE! 2012 EXECUTIVE SUMMIT

BOARD MEMBERS WANTED

COLD CASE SUBMISSIONS


CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS

Choose from the following:• MS in Forensic Toxicology• MS in Drug Chemistry• MS in Forensic DNA & Serology• MS in Forensic Science• PSM in Forensic Science (includes business courses)• Certificate programs are also offered

ADVANCE YOUR CAREERWhile Still Doing The Job You Love

Earn a Masters Degree in Forensic Science Online

A DECIRVING AWARD

Ian TebbettOutstanding Leadership

2011

University of Florida o�ers the world’s largest forensicscience program with more than 700 graduates.Enroll today at WWW.FORENSICSCIENCE.UFL.EDU


ABSTRACTSince 9/11, there has been an increase in domestic terrorism inspired by the Global Salafi Jihad ideology. Some of the individu-als who undergo radicalization are U.S. col-lege and university students. Radicalization is promoted on the Internet in ways that appeal to the young and impact those who are searching for their identities and places in life. Radicalization is complemented by the open environment of higher educa-tion, where college- and university-based organizations can become forums for the presentation of radical messages in a way that connects with the students. This article describes the four-stage radicalization pro-cess, explains why students are particularly vulnerable, and offers suggestions for imple-menting an effective response.

Domestic Terrorism, Cyber-Radicalization,

U.S. CollegeStUdentS

CE

ART

ICLE

CE ARTICLE: 1 CE CREDIT

INTRODUCTIONThe terrorist threat to the United States is changing. Since 9/11, there has been a shift in the operational terrorist threat from core al-Qaeda to smaller cells, such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) in Pakistan and al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) (Straw, 2010), and there has been an increase in domestic terror-ism inspired by militant Islamist ideology. What motivates individuals, particularly those born or living in the United States, to carry out autonomous jihad (holy war) is the Global Salafi Jihad ideology (Sageman, 2003; Silber & Bhatt, 2007). This ideology, which was first decreed by Usama bin Laden in his 1998 fatwa (interpretation of Islamic law), is a violent Sunni revivalist adaptation of Salafi Islam. Salafi Islam calls for the creation of a Muslim state that is governed by sharia, or strict Islamic law (Sageman, 2003). It pro-motes a literal interpretation of the Qur’an, and its goal is to establish a “pure” society that adheres to the social practices that existed in Arabia during the seventh century (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). Salafists believe that only a rec-reation of the practices of the devout ancestors will return Islam to the dominant religious force it was centuries ago (Sageman, 2003). The Global Salafi Jihad ideology calls for a worldwide, violent overthrow of all societies that are not committed to this philosophy.

It imposes an individual obligation on all Muslims to fight and defeat the “far enemy,” specifically Americans (Sageman, 2003). Becoming radicalized to the Global Salafi Jihad ideology is an evolutionary process. Prior to 9/11, this process often took years; however, within the past decade, the pace of radicaliza-tion has accelerated (Silber & Bhatt, 2007), and the gap between thought and action has narrowed (Straw, 2010). What once took years could take just a few months today. Its participants are continuing to get young-er, too. Between the two time periods of 2001-

2005 and 2006-2009, the average age of ter-rorist group leaders decreased from 32 to 30; the average age of terrorist group members decreased from 27 to 23; and the average age of “lone wolves” (self-radicalized Islamist extremists who are not affiliated with any par-ticular group) decreased from 30 to 23 (Straw, 2010). The radicalization process begins when an individual is exposed to, and begins to explore, a militant Islamist ideology (United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 2008).

&

By Marie Wright, Ph.D., CHS-V


▼ Four members of Islamic Jihad show off their weapons during an interview in Gaza City, MCT PHOTO

STAGES OF RADICALIZATIONBoth the FBI and the New York City Police Department have identified a four-stage radicalization process through which or-dinary individuals can be enticed to adopt a violent Islamist extremist mindset (FBI Counterterrorism Division, 2006; Silber & Bhatt, 2007).

Stage 1: Pre-RadicalizationThis is the starting point for individuals before they are exposed to the ideology of Global Salafi Jihad. These individuals, who are pri-marily male Muslims between the ages of 15 and 35, are impressionable and are searching for their purposes in life. During this stage, it is difficult to determine whether an individual is becoming radicalized because the events are indiscriminate, and the indicators are subtle or

non-existent (FBI Counterterrorism Division, 2006; Silber & Bhatt, 2007).

Stage 2: Self-IdentificationThis stage often begins with a crisis that chal-lenges an individual’s previously held beliefs. The individual is at a crossroads, possibly cop-ing with the loneliness of social alienation, the loss of a job, or the death of a family member. During this time, the individual begins to explore the tenets of Salafi Islam, gradually moves away from his former life, and estab-lishes connections with other like-minded individuals (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). The journey begins online, where anyone can instantly locate a plethora of militant Islamist websites, violent video games, on-line forums filled with radical anti-Western rhetoric, and propaganda-filled audio and

video messages from extremist Islamic lead-ers. The Internet is the individual’s primary source of information about Salafi Islam, and it provides a portal that connects him to others who are searching for answers (United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 2008).

CE A

RTIC

LEWWW.ACFEI.COM • (800) 592-1399

4 STAGE RADICALIZATION PROCESS

1. PRE-RADICALIZATION

2. SELF-IDENTIFICATION

3. INDOCTRINATION

4. JIHADIZATION


THIS ARTICLE IS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING FOR CONTINUINGEDUCATION CREDIT:(ACFEI) The American College of Forensic Examiners International provides this con-tinuing education credit for Diplomates and certified members.

AFTER STUDYING THIS ARTICLE, PARTICIPANTS SHOULD BE BETTER ABLETO DO THE FOLLOWING:

1. Describe the characteristics of the four-stage radicalization process.2. Explain why U.S. college and university students are the preferred demographic for

radicalization by Islamic extremists.3. Identify options for addressing the increasing threat of domestic terrorism on our col-

lege and university campuses.

KEY WORDS: Domestic terrorism, Global Salafi Jihad, Jihadist, radicalization, Salafi Islam TARGET AUDIENCE: Professionals working in cyber security, public safety and security, intelligence, critical infrastructure protection, and educationPROGRAM LEVEL: BasicDISCLOSURE: The author has nothing to disclose.PREREQUISITES: None

EARN CONTINUING EDUCATION CREDITSTAKE THE CE TEST FOR THIS ARTICLE ON PAGE 89

CE

ART

ICLE

The individual also begins to attend a Salafi mosque on a regular basis (Silber & Bhatt, 2007) and he seeks guidance from the imam (Muslim cleric) to better abide by every te-net of the religion. An extremist imam can use his knowledge of Salafi Islam–and his ability to provide a theological justification for terrorist attacks–to expedite and prog-ress the individual’s level of radicalization (FBI Counterterrorism Division, 2006). Ultimately, the individual will change his

behaviors and physical appearance to bet-ter associate with his new identity (FBI Counterterrorism Division, 2006), giving up gambling, smoking, and drinking; growing facial hair; and wearing traditional Muslim at-tire (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). See Supplement 1 for further indicators of radicalization. By the end of this stage, the individual is more prone to accept and adopt a radicalized ideology that justifies or supports violence against those whose beliefs are contrary to those of Salafi Islam. He does not, however, yet see himself as an active participant in their jihad (FBI Counterterrorism Division, 2006).

Stage 3: IndoctrinationDuring this stage the individual’s religious beliefs become progressively more extreme as he transitions from the ideology of Salafi Islam to that of Global Salafi Jihad. In the past, this evolution was guided almost ex-clusively by a self-taught, charismatic Islamic leader who provided a distorted perspective of Islam in order to radicalize his followers and create a jihadist mindset (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). Over the past several years, though, cyber-radicalization has supplemented, and in some cases started to replace, face-to-face radi-calization (United States Senate Committee

on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 2008). The individual devotes much of his time to militant Islamist websites and radical online forums, where he connects with like-minded extremists who reinforce and legitimize his beliefs and growing level of commitment to Global Salafi Jihad (United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 2008). During this stage the individual and his group often be-gin proselytizing, preaching the superiority of Salafi Islam and advocating the destruction of Western society (FBI Counterterrorism Division, 2006). As the individual and his fellow members become increasingly cohesive, they progressively adopt the beliefs of the most radical members, becoming more isolat-ed from those outside of the group (Sageman, 2003). During this time of group bonding, mem-bers often engage in recreational activities, such as white-water rafting, camping, martial arts training, or firearms practice (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). Paintball games that simulate combat environments are particularly popu-lar; they are used to practice military tactics. These activities help to solidify the group’s co-hesiveness and further define the individual’s extremist identity (Silber & Bhatt, 2007; FBI Counterterrorism Division, 2006). As the individual forms his new identity, Global Salafi Jihad becomes more than an ide-ology; it becomes a personal cause. Worldwide conflicts are viewed as conspiratorial attacks against Islam by nonbelievers, and humanity is perceived as having only two sides: “true” Muslims who strictly follow the tenets of Salafi Islam (“us”), and everyone else (“them”). The individual’s sole purpose becomes the creation of a “pure” global Islamic society, and his “us vs. them” perspective enables him to morally justify jihad in order to achieve that objective (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). As the individual begins to envision the goal of militant jihad, he withdraws from the Salafi mosque that he frequented during the self-identification stage. This withdrawal may be triggered because the individual no longer feels the mosque is radical enough, or fears that continuing to worship at the mosque


WWW.ACFEI.COM • (800) 592-1399C

E ART

ICLE

could result in increased surveillance, which would interfere with his terrorist intentions (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). By the end of this stage, the individual has fully accepted the militant viewpoint that justifies, supports, and encourages worldwide violence against all disbelievers of Salafi Islam. He has concluded that his participation in militant jihad is required to further the cause (Silber & Bhatt, 2007).

Stage 4: JihadizationThis is the attack stage, during which the in-dividual sees himself as a mujahid (holy war-rior) and becomes involved in the operational planning for jihad. Whether the individual independently searches for opportunities to conduct a terrorist attack or accomplishes this by being part of a collective group, the intent is the same: to kill nonbelievers of Salafi Islam, particularly Americans and their allies, in order to establish a global Muslim state governed by sharia (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). Planning, preparation, and execution of the operational activities can occur quickly, and are sometimes completed in just a few weeks. The individual actively searches the Internet to gather information on potential targets, formulate a mode of attack, obtain instructions for building weapons, receive instructions on military tactics, and find reinforcing spiritual justification for an at-tack. All the while he maintains contact with other extremists, who encourage and chal-lenge each other’s call to action (United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 2008). The individual also receives help from other operatives, particularly group mem-bers, as he plans and prepares for an attack. Their assistance may include travel planning, providing false documents, acquiring funds (possibly through fraud, embezzlement, or theft), developing attack plans, conducting surveillance activities, stealing or purchasing material, and developing an explosive device (Silber & Bhatt, 2007; FBI Counterterrorism Division, 2006). Typically the individual, or the leader of the individual’s group, will travel overseas to a training camp that is located in a terrorist region, such as Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan,

SUPPLEMENT 1: WARNING SIGNS OF RADICALIZATIONRadicalization is at the heart of terrorism. The process can be difficult to detect because it is complicated and changeable. Those who are familiar with an individual who is be-coming radicalized, however, will see dramatic modifications in that individual’s per-sonal behaviors. The following changes should act as warning signs (Lajeunesse, 2010):

• Adopting a more religious lifestyle and terminating certain secular be-haviors, particularly smoking, drink-ing, and gambling.

• Wearing traditional Muslim attire and praying five times daily.

• Expressing criticism toward those who are not living their lives in ac-cordance with the Global Salafi Jihad ideology.

• Terminating all associations with fam-ily members, friends, or acquaintanc-es who do not abide by the tenets of Global Salafi Jihad.

• Withdrawing from the mosque that was frequented in the past, believing that the imam and the Muslims in at-tendance are not devout (militant) enough.

• Increasing online or in-person commu-nication with others who subscribe to the Global Salafi Jihad mindset.

• Watching terrorist videos and listen-ing to propaganda-filled audio mes-sages from extremist Islamic leaders.

• Adopting strong anti-Western and anti-Semitic views and advocating the belief that the U.S. is at war with Islam.

• Engaging in fundraising activities for non-local Islamic charities.

• Embracing the notion that women are inferior, avoiding social contact with women, demanding that women wear modest attire and head cover-ings, and believing that men have the right to beat women.

• Advocating for the death of all non-believers of the Global Salafi Jihad ideology, including other Muslims who are seen as apostates.

• Believing that the only form of gov-ernment is one that is governed by sharia; all others must be destroyed so that a “pure” Muslim state can be re-established.

• Participating in paramilitary exercises with other like-minded extremists.

• Expressing a desire to travel overseas to a terrorist region, such as Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Kashmir, Yemen, or Somalia.

• Making vague and suspicious com-ments before traveling abroad, such as, “I’ll be gone for a while and might not be back,” or “I have something im-portant to do and may not return.”

Source: Lajeunesse, G. C. (2010, September/October). Radicalization in the homeland – the need for community partnership and education. University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Institute for Security Studies. Retrieved January 1, 2011, from http://iss.unlv.edu/Guest%20Columns/guestcolumn-septemberoctober%202010.html


CE

ART

ICLE

ACADEMIC INSTITUTION LOCATION

Arizona State University Tempe, AZ

Baruch College New York, NY

Berea College Berea, KY

Bowling Green State University Bowling Green, OH

Bradley University Peoria, IL

Brandeis University Waltham, MA

Brigham Young University Provo, UT

Brooklyn College Brooklyn, NY

Brown University Providence, RI

Bryn Mawr College Bryn Mawr, PA

Bucknell University Lewisburg, PA

California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA

California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA

California State Polytechnic University Pomona, CA

California State University, Long Beach Long Beach, CA

California State University, Northridge Northridge, CA

Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA

Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, OH

Clarkson University Potsdam, NY

College of DuPage Glen Ellyn, IL

The College of William & Mary Williamsburg, VA

College of Wooster Wooster, OH

Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO

Columbia University New York, NY

Drew University Madison, NJ

Duke University Durham, NC

East-West University Chicago, IL

Emory University Atlanta, GA

Emporia State University Emporia, KS

Florida Institute of Technology Melbourne, FL

Florida International University Miami, FL

Fordham University Bronx, NY

George Mason University Fairfax, VA

The George Washington University Washington, DC

Georgetown University Washington, DC

Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA

Georgia Perimeter College Alpharetta, GA

Georgia State University Atlanta, GA

Golden Gate University San Francisco, CA

Guilford College Greensboro, NC

Harvard University Cambridge, MA

Henry Ford Community College Dearborn, MI

Illinois Institute of Technology Chicago, IL

Indiana University Bloomington, IN

Kashmir, Yemen, or Somalia (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). Such travel not only provides the in-dividual with additional exposure to military jihadist tactics, but also reinforces his radicalized mindset and his conviction to die for the cause. Before the attack, the individual may draft a last will and testament or make a video to fur-ther strengthen his resolve to commit suicidal jihad and ensure that his death has meaning (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). By the end of this stage, a terrorist attack will occur.

THE RADICALIZATION PROCESS AND HIGHER EDUCATIONThe Global Salafi Jihad movement poses a specific challenge to higher education because some of the individuals who are becoming radi-calized are college and university students. In the beginning stages of radicalization, there is no clear-cut, overt indication that these individ-uals are beginning to develop a jihadist mindset. In fact, they appear to be nothing more than typical, middle-class university students who spend time together in social groups. It is pre-

ACCORDING TO THE FBI COUNTERTERRORISM DIVISION (2006), THERE ARE FOUR CONVERSION TYPES:

1. “FAITH REINTERPRETERS” – Muslims who, after a pe-riod of introspection and assessment, choose to modify their religious beliefs and follow a more extremist form of Islam.

2. “PROTEST CONVERTS” – Those whose dispossessions

(e.g., ethnic, economic, political, racial, legal, or social de-privations) negatively impact their attitudes and beliefs toward others, and cause them to turn to a more mili-tant religious ideology for explanation and vindication.

3. “JILTED BELIEVERS” – Individuals whose dissatisfaction with their current faith leads them to change religious beliefs.

4. “ACCEPTANCE SEEKERS” – Those searching for stron-

ger interpersonal relationships and who find comfort in the solidarity of extremist groups (FBI Counterterrorism Division, 2006).

“Faculty and

staff need to

recognize the

behavioral

indicators of

radicalization,

while avoiding

stereotyping

or profiling”

TABLE 1: LOCATIONS OF MSA CHAPTERS


WWW.ACFEI.COM • (800) 592-1399C

E ART

ICLE

College of Wooster Wooster, OH

Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO

Columbia University New York, NY

Drew University Madison, NJ

Duke University Durham, NC

East-West University Chicago, IL

Emory University Atlanta, GA

Emporia State University Emporia, KS

Florida Institute of Technology Melbourne, FL

Florida International University Miami, FL

Fordham University Bronx, NY

George Mason University Fairfax, VA

The George Washington University Washington, DC

Georgetown University Washington, DC

Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA

Georgia Perimeter College Alpharetta, GA

Georgia State University Atlanta, GA

Golden Gate University San Francisco, CA

Guilford College Greensboro, NC

Harvard University Cambridge, MA

Henry Ford Community College Dearborn, MI

Illinois Institute of Technology Chicago, IL

Indiana University Bloomington, IN

Indiana University Northwest Gary, IN

Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis Indianapolis, IN

Iowa State University Ames, IA

Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD

Kansas State University Manhattan, KS

Kent State University Kent, OH

Lehigh University Bethlehem, PA

Long Island University Brooklyn, NY

Louisiana Tech University Ruston, LA

Loyola University Chicago Chicago, IL

Loyola University New Orleans New Orleans, LA

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA

Miami University Oxford, OH

Michigan State University East Lansing, MI

Michigan Technological University Houghton, MI

Middle Tennessee State University Murfreesboro, TN

Middlebury College Middlebury, VT

Midwestern University Glendale, AZ

Mississippi State University Mississippi State, MS

Monroe Community College Rochester, NY

Montclair State University Montclair, NJ

New Jersey Institute of Technology Newark, NJ

New Mexico State University Las Cruces, NM

North Carolina State University Raleigh, NC

Northeastern Illinois University Chicago, IL

Northeastern University Boston, MA

Northern Illinois University DeKalb, IL

Northwestern University Evanston, IL

Oberlin College Oberlin, OH

The Ohio State University Columbus, OH

Ohio University Athens, OH

Oregon State University Corvallis, OR

Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA

Polytechnic University of Puerto Rico San Juan, PR

Princeton University Princeton, NJ

Purdue University West Lafayette, IN

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY

Rice University Houston, TX

Rutgers University Newark, NJ

Saginaw Valley State University University Center, MI

San Joaquin Delta College Stockton, CA

San Jose State University San José, CA

Santa Clara University Santa Clara, CA

Southern Illinois University at Carbondale Carbondale, IL

Southern Methodist University Dallas, TX

Stanford University Stanford, CA

State University of New York at Albany Albany, NY

State University of New York at Buffalo Buffalo, NY

cisely this demographic Islamist extremists find so appealing. They refer to these students as “clean skins”—ordinary individuals with U.S. citizenship or residency, with no criminal or terrorist history, who can hold legitimate travel documentation (Straw, 2010; Silber & Bhatt, 2007). Salafi jihadists understand that U.S. law enforcement agencies face legal and constitu-tional obstacles to monitoring U.S. citizens and that there is greater propaganda value in having U.S. citizens attack their own country (Donalds, 2007). They also understand that intelligent people who are recruited to a cause are more likely to be dedicated to that cause, since injustice and indignity are more pow-erful motivators than poverty or ignorance (Donalds, 2007). U.S. colleges and universities are filled with intellectually bright, curious, and impres-sionable students, many of whom already question society’s values in addition to their own personal beliefs (FBI Counterterrorism Division, 2006). It is not uncommon for re-ligious conversions to occur, and in the open

environment of higher education, radical groups can thrive. Individuals have a tendency to seek out other like-minded individuals with whom to establish a social group (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). For students struggling to understand themselves, their religion, and their place in society, college- and university-based orga-nizations can become forums for conveying radical messages in a way that resonates with the students (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). Perhaps nowhere is this more evident than with the Muslim Students Association (MSA), the largest and most influential Islamic student organization in North America (Investigative Project on Terrorism, 2008). The MSA was established in 1963 at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Its founders were members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a “rigidly conservative and high-ly secretive Egyptian-based organization dedi-cated to resurrecting true Islamic governance based on sharia law” (Investigative Project on Terrorism, 2008). With its motto, “Allah is our

objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope” (Federation of American Scientists, 2010), the Muslim Brotherhood provided the ideological founda-tion for Global Salafi Jihad. Today, more than 175 MSA chapters exist on U.S. college and university campuses (Table 1). Although the MSA has gained legitimacy on U.S. campuses as a benevolent group dedicated to helping Muslim students advance their faith, in reality, it has promoted extremist Islamist ideologies on college and university campuses throughout North America (Investigative Project on Terrorism, 2008). For example, one book increasingly cited for discussion is Kitab al-Tawhid (The Book of Monotheism), the foundational book for militant Islamist ideology (Silber & Bhatt, 2007). This book was written by Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wah-hab, the 18th century founder of Wahhabism (Encyclopedia of World Biography, 2010). An ultra-conservative orientation within Salafi Islam, Wahhabism is the dominant form of


1928 1948 1952

▼ Members of the Muslim Student Association pray at Halas Field at Loyola’s Lake Shore campus, MCT PHOTO

CE

ART

ICLE

State University of New York at New Paltz New Paltz, NY

State University of New York at Stony Brook Stony Brook, NY

Stevens Institute of Technology Hoboken, NJ

Temple University Philadelphia, PA

Tennessee Tech University Cookeville, TN

Texas A&M University College Station, TX

Texas Tech University Lubbock, TX

Truman State University Kirksville, MO

Tufts University Medford, MA

Tulane University New Orleans, LA

University of Akron Akron, OH

University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL

University of Alabama at Huntsville Huntsville, AL

University of Alaska at Fairbanks Fairbanks, AK

University of Arizona Tucson, AZ

University of Arkansas Fayetteville, AR

University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA

University of California, Irvine Irvine, CA

University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA

University of California, Riverside Riverside, CA

University of California, San Diego San Diego, CA

University of Chicago Chicago, IL

University of Cincinnati Cincinnati, OH

University of Colorado at Boulder Boulder, CO

University of Delaware Newark, DE

University of Evansville Evansville, IN

University of Georgia Athens, GA

University of Houston Houston, TX

University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago, IL

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, IL

University of Iowa Iowa City, IA

University of Kansas Lawrence, KS

University of Kentucky Lexington, KY

University of Louisville Louisville, KY

University of Maryland, College Park College Park, MD

University of Massachusetts/Amherst Amherst, MA

University of Michigan-Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, MI

University of Michigan-Dearborn Dearborn, MI

University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN

The University of Mississippi Oxford, MS

University of Missouri-Columbia Columbia, MO

University of Missouri-Kansas City Kansas City, MO

University of Missouri-St. Louis St. Louis, MO

University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, NE

University of Nebraska at Omaha Omaha, NE

University of New Hampshire Durham, NH

Islam in Saudi Arabia (Anonymous, 2010b), and it embraces the ideology of Global Salafi Jihad.

RESPONDING TO THE THREAT OF DOMESTIC TERRORISMU.S. college and university campuses are uniquely open environments where there is a continuous exchange of students (Vest, 2006). This variability in the student popu-lation means that the level of extremism on campus can fluctuate over time, and it can be disproportionately affected by the presence of a few like-minded individuals (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008). Even one intensely resolute individual can have an impact on the level of extremism at a

the muslim Brotherhoodegypt’s oldest islamist organization, the muslim Brotherhood, has grown into a worldwide Sunni islamist movement with branches inmore than 70 countries. its stated goal is to create states ruled byislamic law, or Sharia.

founded by Hassan al Banna to spread islamic morals, charitable works; became involved in politics to drive British from egypt

Dissolved by egyptian government for attacking British, Jewish interests; accused of assassinating Prime minister mahnound al nuqrashi

Plays supporting role in coup ending colonial rule


1964 1980s 201020051954

Anonymous. (2010a). Muslim Students’ Association. Retrieved October 20, 2010 from http://www.msanational.org/resources/msawebsites.html

WWW.ACFEI.COM • (800) 592-1399C

E ART

ICLE

University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM

University of New Orleans New Orleans, LA

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC

University of North Florida Jacksonville, FL

University of North Texas Denton, TX

University of Northern Iowa Cedar Falls, IA

University of Oklahoma Norman, OK

University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA

University of Rhode Island Kingston, RI

University of Rochester Rochester, NY

University of South Alabama Mobile, AL

University of South Carolina Columbia, SC

University of South Florida Tampa, FL

University of Southern California Los Angeles, CA

The University of Tennessee-Knoxville Knoxville, TN

The University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX

The University of Texas at Dallas Richardson, TX

University of the Pacific Stockton, CA

University of Toledo Toledo, OH

The University of Tulsa Tulsa, OK

The University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT

University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA

University of Washington Seattle, WA

University of West Florida Pensacola, FL

University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire Eau Claire, WI

University of Wisconsin-La Crosse La Crosse, WI

University of Wisconsin-Madison Madison, WI

University of Wyoming Laramie, WY

Vanderbilt University Nashville, TN

Villanova University Villanova, PA

Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, VA

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, VA

Washburn University Topeka, KS

Washington University in St. Louis St. Louis, MO

Wayne State University Detroit, MI

Weber State University Ogden, UT

Wellesley College Wellesley, MA

West Virginia University Morgantown, WV

Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, MI

Western Washington University Bellingham, WA

Wichita State University Wichita, KS

Worcester Polytechnic Institute Worcester, MA

Yale University New Haven, CT

particular college or university (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008). In this milieu, there unquestionably are small groups of college and university students who are becoming radicalized in the United States. The academic community can address the threat of radicalization on our campuses in the following ways: Promote and reinforce the values of open-ness, free debate, and inquiry (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008).One of the most distinguishing characteristics of the academic environment is its inherent openness to the exploration of diverse ideas. The ability to debate, discuss, and directly challenge ideas is essential to higher education. By providing an open and vibrant environ-

ment for intellectually rigorous and thought-provoking dialogue, academic institutions can provide a setting where individuals can chal-lenge those who espouse militant extremism (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008). Actions that are contradictory to the values of higher education, such as actively policing students or aggressively censoring student activities, will likely cause those who are considering jihad to conceal their actions earlier, making it even harder to detect an impending domestic terrorist attack (Straw, 2010; Sims, 2007). Promoting intellectual inquiry and debate is a responsibility of academic administrators, faculty, and staff. To this end, every U.S. col-lege and university should have well publicized

and readily accessible policies and procedures that enforce an acceptable code of conduct and address the right of free speech in a variety of settings, including public forums, demonstra-tions, and protests. Break down the separation between different student groups (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008). The danger in allowing segregated communities to develop on campus is that in such an environment, existing attitudes and beliefs of the group members tend to be reinforced so that there is little opportunity for dissent, independent thought, or the attenuation of radical pre-conceptions (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008). Academic insti-tutions can combat radicalization and create

Banned after failed attempt to assas-sinate President gamal abdul nasser; grows underground

Writings of one prominent mem-ber, Sayyid Qutb, who advocated jihad (struggle), inspire found-ing of radical groups, including islamic Jihad and al Qaeda

Tries to rejoin political mainstream, forming alliances with major political parties, wins seats in parliament

Wins 20 percent of seats, leading President Hoani mubarak to have the constitu-tion rewritten, banning religious political parties

Brotherhood-aligned candidates win no parlia-mentary seats, leading to accusations of fraud, a basis for the current protests


CE

ART

ICLE

opportunities for interfaith and intercultural dialogue by encouraging students to become involved in activities that promote interactions between different groups, such as campus arts events and community volunteer activities (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008). College and university adminis-trators need to balance all requests for separate facilities from religious and cultural groups against the need for an integrated campus community (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008). Ensure that all personnel are aware of their roles in preventing violent extremism (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008). Faculty and staff need to recog-nize the behavioral indicators of radicalization, while avoiding stereotyping or profiling (Straw, 2010). Those indicators, described above in the self-identification, indoctrination, and jihadiza-tion stages, become increasingly apparent dur-ing the radicalization process. Common sense is an effective benchmark: any non-normative behaviors, such as advocating violence as an ac-ceptable course of action (Straw, 2010), should be reported to college or university adminis-trators, and if necessary, to law enforcement. This means that faculty and staff must have the confidence to report suspicious behaviors to administrators at the institution, and the academic institution must have the processes in place and the willingness to get that informa-tion to the police (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008). A partnership should exist between an aca-demic institution and the local police. Law enforcement can offer support and guidance in developing incident response strategies and pro-cedures, and can also offer training to help fac-ulty and staff recognize and respond to poten-tially violent extremist behaviors (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008).

CONCLUSIONThe security of our nation is impacted by our ability to recognize and respond to the radicalization process. The pace of those be-coming radicalized to the Global Salafi Jihad ideology has accelerated, and the average age of the participants is consistent with that of traditional college and university students.The academic community plays an impor-tant role in identifying and responding to the warning signs of radicalization. The values of

higher education—to share ideas, to encourage open debate and discussion, and to engage in constructive disagreement—are what enable us to try to logically persuade those who espouse the extremist ideologies that are the enemies of rational thought (Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills, 2008). n

REFERENCESAnonymous. (2010a). Muslim Students’ Association. Re-

trieved October 30, 2010, from http://www.msana-tional.org/resources/msawebsites.html

Anonymous. (2010b). Wahhabi. Retrieved June 5, 2010, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi

Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills. (2008, January). Promoting good campus relations, foster-ing shared values and preventing violent extremism in universities and higher education colleges. Retrieved December 15, 2010, from http://www.bis.gov.uk/as-sets/biscore/corporate/migratedd/publications/e/ex-tremismhe.pdf

Donalds, T. J. (2007, March 30). Radical Islam in Britain: Implications for the war on terrorism. Defense Techni-cal Information Center. Retrieved May 20, 2010, from http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA467202

Encyclopedia of World Biography. (2010). Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Retrieved June 5, 2010, from http://notablebiographies.com/supp/Supplement-A-Bu-and-Obituaries/Ibn-Abd-al-Wahhab-Muhammad.html

FBI Counterterrorism Division. (2006, May 10). The rad-icalization process: From conversion to jihad. Federal Bureau of Investigation Intelligence Assessment. Retrieved March 17, 2010, from http://cryptome.org/fbi-jihad.pdf

Federation of American Scientists. (2010). Muslim Broth-erhood. Retrieved June 4, 2010, from http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/mb.htm

Investigative Project on Terrorism. (2008). Muslim Stu-dents Association dossier. Retrieved June 3, 2010, from http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/84.pdf

Lajeunesse, G. C. (2010, September/October). Radical-ization in the homeland – the need for community partnership and education. University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Institute for Security Studies. Retrieved January 1, 2011, from http://iss.unlv.edu/Guest%20Columns/guestcolumn-septemberoctober%202010.html

Sageman, M. (2003, July 9). The global salafi jihad. State-ment of Marc Sageman to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States. Retrieved June 1, 2010, from http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/li-brary/congress/9-11_commission/030709-sageman.htm

Silber, M. & Bhatt, A. (2007). Radicalization in the west: The homegrown threat. Retrieved May 14, 2010, from http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/pub-lic_information/NYPD_Report-Radicalization_in_the_West.pdf

Sims, P. (2007, September/October). Degrees of separa-tion. New Humanist. Retrieved May 31, 2010, from http://newhumanist.org.uk/1573/degrees-of-separation

Straw, J. (2010, April). The evolving terrorist threat. Se-curity Management, 54(4), 46-55.

United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (2008, May 8). Violent Is-lamist extremism, the Internet, and the homegrown

terrorist threat. Retrieved June 3, 2010, from http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/IslamistReport.pdf

Vest, C. M. (2006, June). Openness and globalization in higher education: The age of the Internet, terrorism, and opportunity. Center for Studies in Higher Educa-tion, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved May 3, 2010, from http://cshe.berkeley.edu/publications/docs/ROP.Vest.Openness.7.06.pdf

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

MARIE WRIGHT, Ph.D., CHS-V is a Professor of Management Information Systems at Western Connecticut State

University. She received her Ph.D. in Information and Control Systems from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. She has authored more than three dozen arti-

cles on information systems security, pub-lished in journals such as Computer Fraud & Security, Computers & Society, Data Security Management, The Forensic Examiner, Network Security, and Review of Business, and she is the co-author of Information Security: Contemporary Cases (Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2007). She is a mem-ber of the American College of Forensic Examiners International, American Board of Information Security and Computer Forensics, American Society for Industrial Security, Association for Computing Machinery, Beta Gamma Sigma National Honor Society, Computer Security Institute, Information Systems Security Association, InfraGard Connecticut, and the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

CERTIFIED NATIONAL THREAT ANALYST (CNTA)

Learn from terrorism experts today and become a Certified National Threat Analyst, CNTA, where professionals will be taught the intricacies of the ter-ror network. For more informa-tion on the program, see the “Timeline of Terrorism” foldout in this issue, or call (877) 219-2519.


WWW.ACFEI.COM • (800) 592-1399FEAT

UR

E

Typically, the elements of a cause of action for defamation include1. A false and defamatory statement con-

cerning another2. The unprivileged publication of the state-

ment to a third party (somebody other than the person defamed by the state-ment)

3. Damage to the plaintiff

Initially, a statement must be both false and defamatory. If “A” states that “B” has red hair, when in fact “B” has brown hair, the statement is false, but absent other facts, not defamatory. Likewise, if “A” states that “B” is a crimi-nal, when in fact “B” did rob a bank, then the statement, while defamatory, is not false.

Therefore, making the “truth” an absolute defense to any cause of action for defamation.Second, in the context of defamation law, a statement is “published” when it is made to a third party. That term does not mean that the statement has to be in print; therefore, if “A” says to “B” that “A” believes “B” stole from the collection plate at church, that state-ment does not give rise to a cause of action for defamation as it was never “published” to a third party. Finally, the Plaintiff must have been dam-aged. Damages are typically to the reputation of the Plaintiff, but depending upon the laws of the jurisdiction, it may be enough to simply establish mental anguish. Most jurisdictions also recognize “per se” defamation, where

certain allegations are automatically presumed to cause damage to the Plaintiff. Typically, the following may constitute defamation per se:

• Attacks on a person’s professional char-acter or standing

• Allegations that an unmarried person is unchaste

• Allegations that a person is infected with a sexually transmitted disease

• Allegations that the person has commit-ted a crime of moral turpitude

Regardless of the nature of the communi-cation, coming up with a numerical value to quantify the damage is difficult in every defamation case where actual monetary loss is negligible, speculative, or impossible to determine.

nternetdefamation


By Josh K. Roberts

reedom of speech is one of the fundamental rights of an American citizen. That liberty is not unchecked, however, as there are numerous laws against unbridled free speech. The laws prohibiting defamation are one such example. Generally speaking, defamation is the issuance of a false statement about another that causes that person or entity to suffer harm. Slander involves the making of defamatory statements usually by an oral (spoken)

representation. Libel involves the making of defamatory statements in a printed or fixed medium, such as in a magazine or newspaper. Today, most courts treat both forms of defamation the same.

FEATURE


FEAT

UR

E

PUBLIC FIGURESIn 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan added additional require-ments where a public figure attempts to bring an action for defamation. The public figure must also prove that the statement was made with “actual malice,” meaning that the person making the statement knew the statement to be false or issued the statement with reckless disregard as to its truth. Many a celebrity has sued a media outlet over defamatory al-legations of conduct, and often the story did include false statements, but unless the court finds that the speaker acted with “actual mal-ice,” it will not award damages. The concept of a “public figure” is broader than just celebrities and politicians. A person can become an “involuntary public figure” as the result of publicity, even though that person did not want or invite the public attention. For example, people accused of high profile crimes may be unable to pursue actions for defamation even after their in-nocence is established, on the basis that the notoriety associated with the case and the accusations against them turned them into involuntary public figures. A person can also become a “limited public figure” by engaging in actions which generate publicity within a narrow area of interest. For example, if a person makes a comment to a public media outlet regarding a specific issue, say a city’s proposed tax increase, they may be deter-mined to be a limited public figure relative to later comments made by others about said person on the same issue.

THE EVOLUTION OF DEFAMATION IN THE U.S.While the law in America relating to defamatory statements has gradually evolved over the years, the mediums by which defamatory statements are disseminated has changed rapidly with the advent of the Internet. Decreasing are the days of defamation by print and television media where the defamatory comment is viewed only by the limited audience of that medium’s cir-culation. These mediums have been replaced by communications via web pages that stay posted for virtually limitless periods of time to be viewed anew each day by any reader who happens to use any one of the free, yet remark-ably sophisticated, internet search engines. Further, with the advent of Internet social networking sites and smart phones, a defamatory statement can not only be sent instantaneously to the very people that you would least want read-ing it, but the audience does not have to even seek the information as it comes directly to them via their smartphone. The Internet has spawned a new brand of high-tech lynching via Internet defamation that the law has not only failed to keep up with, but has actually protected. As opposed to print or television media, who often perform at least cursory fact-check-ing as they can be held liable for defamatory material they publish, Internet blog and ser-vice providers (“ISP”) have been provided a statutory defense anointing them immune from damages for defamatory material that may be published via their Internet site. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 is a landmark piece of

Internet legislation in the United States. 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers of “interactive computer services” who publish information provided by others, stating: “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any informa-tion provided by another information content provider.” The justification for the legislation is that the amount of information communicated via interactive computer services is staggering. It would be impossible for service providers to screen each of the millions of postings for pos-sible defamatory statements. If faced with po-tential liability for each message posted on their message boards, interactive computer service providers might choose to severely restrict the number and type of messages posted. Congress considered the free speech implications and chose to immunize service providers to avoid any such restrictive effect. Thus, the legislation provides blanket immunity to ISPs for defama-tory statements posted on their webpages by Internet authors. The problem with the law is that with the anonymity of the Internet, in practice, it extends this immunity to the makers of the defamatory statement as well. To post on an Internet message board, it usually takes little more than an e-mail ac-count. Thus, an Internet writer can post com-ments without directly identifying themselves or can falsely identify themselves via any num-ber of free email account services. Further, while a more sophisticated investigation can reveal the identity of the computer from which

As previously recited, the most popular defense to an action for defamation is that the statement was the “truth”, which is an absolute defense to any action for defamation. Another defense to a defamation action is “privilege.” Free expression in certain forums is considered so important that almost any statement is privileged from prosecution. For ex-ample, statements made by witnesses in court, arguments made in court by lawyers, statements by legislators on the floor of the congress, or by judges in the courtroom, are or-dinarily privileged and cannot support a cause of action for defamation no matter how false or outrageous. Another defense recognized in most jurisdictions is that the statement was merely an “opinion.” If a person makes a statement of opinion, as opposed to fact, the state-ment may not support a cause of action for defamation.

Defenses todefamationWhile actions for defamation have their roots in common law, most jurisdictions have now enacted statutes which provide defenses to defamation ac-tions. Depending upon the circumstance, they may change the elements of the cause of action, limit when an action may be filed, or create affirmative defenses to an action for defamation.


The Forensic Examiner (Sample) - Fall/Winter 2011

Documents

Transcript of The Forensic Examiner (Sample) - Fall/Winter 2011