Criminology / Psychology Essay Example

John Leonard Orr: The Pillow Pyro.John Leonard Orr, born April 26^th 1949, is an inmate at California State Prison where he is serving a life sentence for four counts of murder in the first degree and over twenty counts of arson (Wambaugh, 2017). From 1984 to 1991, Orr, a fireman and arson investigator, set roughly 2,000 fires across California claiming four lives and costing millions of dollars in damages (Petherick, 2014). Over the course of his spree, media and police dubbed Orr The Pillow Pyro . Orr set fires using a timing device consisting of a lit cigarette, three tied matches, yellow notepaper, and elastic bands. Using this device, Orr set fires in department stores, heavily congested areas, and dry forest areas around cities (Petherick, 2014). Only one of these incidents caused all four deaths. On October 10th 1984, in South Pasadena, Orr set a fire at Ole`s Home Center hardware store. A two-year-old child, his grandmother, a 26-year-old mother of two, and a 17-year-old employee all died in the store. The case was originally dismissed as an electrical fire, but Orr himself, an investigator on the case, declared it was arson displaying desire for recognition in his work (Brogan, 2009). Orr would often work cases for fires he started, gaining the veneration of his peers due to his ability to quickly find the point of origin of each fire which is regarded by his daughter as part of the motivation for his crimes (Girardot Orr-Kovach, 2018).

Investigators on The Pillow Pyro case considered Orr a suspect after fires were set at and around several conferences for arson investigators. Shortly thereafter, Orr s fingerprint was matched to a partial print found at a crime scene, and he was arrested December 4^th 1991 (Wambaugh, 2017). After his arrest, rates of arson in California dropped by almost 90% (Department Of Homeland Security, 2003). In the two years following his arrest, Orr was sentenced to six counts of arson. In 1998, Orr was sentenced to twenty further counts of arson and the four murders of 1984 (Department Of Homeland Security, 2003). This occurred after a book manuscri pt was found in his home wherein the protagonist, crimes, and modus operandi bore many key similarities to Orr and the crimes of which he was accused (U.S. Court of Appeals. 9th Cir. 1992).

The manuscri pt itself, Points Of Origin , was an erotic fiction pertaining to a fire investigator who was an arsonist demonstrating an obsessive and possibly semi-sexual fascination with fire. Orr had this obsession from an early age, as described in court-ordered psychiatric evaluations conducted for his trial by Dr Ronald Markman. Markman went on to testify that Orr suffered from OCD that manifested as anxiety-alleviating pyromania (Los Angeles Times, 1998). During the same day of the trial, Orr was accused of being pathologically obsessed with power, control, and attention (Los Angeles Times, 1998).

This desire for control permeated Orr s life. Seemingly in contrast with his later crimes, Orr had pursued positions of authority in military and law enforcement attempting to and failing to join the United States Air Force and the Pasadena Police Department in his youth. As Orr aged, he became controlling over those in his life, was unable to control his anger, and his fire obsession became more pronounced playing with matches and displaying an interest in fire to his family regularly (Girardot Orr-Kovach, 2018).

Theoretical explanations of fire-setting.Gannon Pina s (2010) review of contemporary literature about fire-setting highlighted a wide array of criminogenic needs that relate to arson, with a focus on understanding and predicting fire-setting behaviour. Orr aligns quite well with several features of this model. His race, OCD diagnosis, impulsivity, short temper, and poor emotional regulation are all characteristics this model distinguishes as criminogenic needs for arson. However, most of the model s features are notably absent in Orr s case. Whilst Orr was Caucasian, he defied every other sociodemographic marker in the model such as unskilled employment, lower IQ, and younger age. Additionally, he had a diagnosed pyromania, no prior criminal charges, had never suffered sexual abuse, and gained sexual satisfaction from fire-setting (Girardot Orr-Kovach, 2018) all of which oppose criteria laid out in the model. The discrepancy between Orr s traits and the model s characteristics calls into question the validity of this research, as it clearly cannot be applied to every fire-setter. This in turn impacts the model s usability, as it cannot predict or understand every fire-setter.

Typologies and classification models attempt to outline several types of fire-setter, addressing this shortcoming. Some Classification models are based on motive, such as Icove Estepp (1987) who divided offenders into eponymously titled categories of motivations. From Orr s semi-auto-biographical manuscri pt, we can deduce that he was motivated by his excitation around fire and a desire to destroy things. As such, Orr would fall under the Excitement and Vandalism typologies of the model which Icove Estepp (1987) found were present in 40% and 27% of male arson cases respectively. However, Rix (1994) posited that these numbers were lower, with 12% for Excitement and 10% for Vandalism , introducing the possibility that other areas of Icove Estepp s model are flawed. Additionally, it should be noted that classification models based on motive are reductionist, as they rely on the self-reported motivations of arsonists and ignore possible input from development and psychopathology.

Conversely, some classification models are based on offender behaviour. Douglas et al (1992) suggested the existence of two typologies of arsonist based on behaviour rather than motive. These were The Organised Arsonist - who uses complex incendiary devices and takes a more methodical careful approach to fire-setting and The Disorganised Arsonist - who is more impulsive and plans very little. Using this model, Orr would fit into the former category because of his meticulous approach to arson. However, this model is considered reductive and overly simplistic in comparison to later models, such as Canter Fritzon s (1998) quadripartite model. This model consists of four typologies, each distinguished by the cause of fire-setting, the aim of the act, and the emotions involved. Using this model Orr falls into the Expressive-Object typology, due to his repeated similar attacks on public spaces for the purposes of emotional release and fire fascination.

Whilst this model takes motive into account, placing it as more useful than Douglas et al s (1992) model, it is still considerably reductive when compared to later factorial theories. To that end, all classifications and typologies based singularly upon motives or behaviours suffer from similar shortcomings, such as not taking causative criminogenic needs into account. Due to this, these theories are poorly applicable to the treatment and prevention of fire-setting, and are not holistically useful as an explanation for Orr.

Factorial Theories are another branch of theoretical explanations for fire-setting behaviours. Some such theories take only a single causative factor into account as an explanation for fire-setting, such as Virkkunen et al s (1987) neurobiological theory which postulated that low cerebrospinal fluid monoamine metabolite levels (CFMML) could be a cause of fire-setting behaviour. This theory is tangentially supported by the link between low CFMML and depression (Ogawa, Tsuchimine, Kunugi, 2018) which itself has shown causative links to fire-setting (Bradford, 1982). However, as well as the severely poor real-life applicability of testing CFMML, which requires a painful lumbar puncture procedure, this theory contains the fault of all single-factor theories reductionism. Multi-factor theories were developed as a response to the reductionism and poor applicability of single-factor theories. These theories integrate the strengths of typologies, classification models, and factorial theories to produce a more dynamic and holistic explanation for fire-setting.

Gannon et al s (2012) Multi-Trajectory Theory of Adult Firesetting, or M-TTAF , is an example of one such multi-factor theory of fire-setting. This model consists of two tiers fire-setting explanation and arsonist typologies. Tier one posits that several factors exist at the core of fire-setting, which are exacerbated by psychological vulnerabilities. The greater number of these factors and vulnerabilities that are combined increases the risk of fire-setting as a coping mechanism. Orr fits the Cognitive Functioning and Contextual Circumstance factors, due to his lifelong obsession with fire and his job necessitating being around fire regularly. This was further exacerbated by his psychological vulnerabilities of Fire Fascination and Poor Emotional Regulation (Girardot Orr-Kovach, 2018).

Tier two of the theory postulates the existence of five typologies. These typologies are differentiated by motivation, clinical features, and what combination of factors and vulnerabilities caused them with focus given to outlining one primary causative factor. The integration of these features creates a useful tool for the rehabilitative treatment of fire-setters, outlining to practitioners which specific facets of a fire-setter s psychology require the most attention. Using this model, Orr fits into Multi-Faceted subtype of arsonist. This is because he fits both the subtypes of Emotionally Expressive , due to his need for recognition and his issues with communication and impulse regulation and Fire Interested , due to his inappropriate fire fascination and thrill-seeking motive (Girardot Orr-Kovach, 2018).

Although it should be noted that both subtypes also contain the criterion of Offense Supporting Attitudes a criterion seemingly undercut by Orr s career as an arson investigator and his earlier aspirations of police service. This oversight may infer that the MTTAF isn t a perfect facilitator of fire-setter typologies. This flaw aside, considering there is no standardised treatment or risk assessment tools currently in use for fire-setting behaviour, the M-TTAF represents a valuable advancement in this field of study due to its broadly applicable first tier and treatment centred second tier.

Of the models discussed above, a common criticism is reductionism. Typologies, classification models, and single-factor theories all suffer from focusing narrowly on one or too few fire-setting causes and criminogenic needs. Thusly, despite its minor shortcomings, when compared to other models the MTAFF remains the most holistically useful model for explaining and treating fire-setting behaviour and thereby the most effective explanation for actions of John Leonard Orr.