CR 311 Ashford University Forensic Science Discussion

Week 1 – AssignmentIs It All Good and True?
[WLOs: 1, 2] [CLOs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Flawed Forensics: The System with Joe Berlinger

© Infobase. All Rights Reserved.
Length: 45:13
As technology and scientific methodology evolve, concerns about good or valid science or flawed science also
evolve. New methodologies and scientific processes must be carefully evaluated to prove validity. Some
processes never attain their hype, some initially appear valid but evolving technology and science later disprove
them, while other processes never existed and were simply a dramatic plot twist. It is difficult for the average
person to tell the difference.
Prior to beginning work on this assignment, please review the following:
• From the text:
◦ Chapter 1: Forensic Science and Criminalistics
◦ Chapter 2: Crime Scene Processing and Analysis and Forensic Technologies
• The videos:
◦ All About Forensic Science
◾ Segment 1. What Is Forensic Science 05:04
◾ Segment 2. Busting TV Stereotypes 04:32
◦ Burned: Three Alleged Arson Cases Investigated
◦ Flawed Forensics: The System With Joe Berlinger
• From the free PDF copy at the web page Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path
Forward
(https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12589/strengthening-forensic-science-in-the-united-states-a-path-
forward)
◦ Introduction
◦ Findings and Recommendations
• The web pages:
◦ Choosing a Career (https://www.aafs.org/home-page/students/choosing-a-career/)
◦ Crime Scene Investigation (https://www.nfstc.org/products/crime-scene-investigation-guide/)
◦ CSI Effect Theory: Strategies and Views (http://projects.nfstc.org/csieffect/index.html)
• The article Peer Review in Forensic Science
• These Ashford Library modules:
◦ Evaluating Web Resources: Why It’s Important and What to Look for
(https://onedrive.live.com/embed?cid=52CEE421F3DD799D&resid=52cee421f3dd799d!
123&authkey=ACMdEXqpFsUl1z4&em=2&wdAr=1.3333333333333333)
◦ Evaluating Sources
(https://content.bridgepointeducation.com/curriculum/file/420d54f6-c10c-4395-b5cc-
6ec62a958837/1/Evaluating%20Sources.zip/story_html5.html)
Scientific evidence must be evaluated by forensic experts through a peer review process, which the courts often
rely on to determine validity of scientific methods. Similarly, you must carefully evaluate the validity of the
material supporting your work. For this assignment, you must use at least three Scholarly, Peer-Reviewed, and
Other Credible Sources
(https://content.bridgepointeducation.com/curriculum/file/e5359309-7d3c-4a21-a410-
44d59303ccef/1/Scholarly%20Peer-Reviewed%20and%20Other%20Credible%20Sources.pdf) in addition to the
course text. You may also want to review the recommended resources, which may further support your work on
this written assignment.
In your paper, address the following:
• Evaluate the evolution of forensic science.
• Identify examples of scientific methods that have been disproven.
• Explain the peer review process.
• Compare and contrast common perceptions to the realities of forensic science.
• Explain the CSI effect.
• Evaluate what impact the CSI effect has or does not have on the forensic field and the criminal justice
system.
• Evaluate the impact of junk science, real or perceived, on the forensic field and criminal justice.
The Is All Good and True? paper
• Must be 750 words in length (not including title and references pages) and formatted according to APA style
as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center’s APA Style
• Must include a separate title page with the following:
◦ Title of paper
◦ Student’s name
◦ Course name and number
(http://writingcenter.ashford.edu/apa-style)
◦ Instructor’s name
◦ Date submitted
For further assistance with the formatting and the title page, refer to APA Formatting for Word 2013
(http://writingcenter.ashford.edu/apa-formatting-word-2013) .
• Must utilize academic voice. See the Academic Voice (http://writingcenter.ashford.edu/academic-voice)
resource for additional guidance.
• Must include an introduction and conclusion paragraph. Your introduction paragraph needs to end with a
clear thesis statement that indicates the purpose of your paper.
◦ For assistance on writing Introductions & Conclusions (http://writingcenter.ashford.edu/introductionsconclusions) as well as Writing a Thesis Statement (http://writingcenter.ashford.edu/writing-a-thesis) ,
refer to the Ashford Writing Center resources.
• Must use at least three scholarly, peer-reviewed, and/or credible sources in addition to the course text.
◦ The Scholarly, Peer-Reviewed, and Other Credible Sources
(https://content.bridgepointeducation.com/curriculum/file/e5359309-7d3c-4a21-a41044d59303ccef/1/Scholarly%20Peer-Reviewed%20and%20Other%20Credible%20Sources.pdf) table offers
additional guidance on appropriate source types. If you have questions about whether a specific source is
appropriate for this assignment, please contact your instructor. Your instructor has the final say about the
appropriateness of a specific source for a particular assignment.
◦ To assist you in completing the research required for this assignment, view this Ashford University
Library Quick ‘n’ Dirty
(https://ashford.mediaspace.kaltura.com/media/Ashford+University+Library+Quick+%27n%27+Dirty/0_bcsbcjee)
tutorial, which introduces the Ashford University Library and the research process, and provides some
library search tips.
• Must document any information used from sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center’s
Citing Within Your Paper (http://writingcenter.ashford.edu/citing-within-your-paper)
• Must include a separate references page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford
Writing Center. See the Formatting Your References List (http://writingcenter.ashford.edu/format-yourreference-list) resource in the Ashford Writing Center for specifications.
Consider using the “Q” program to conduct your research. Searching for an article from the Ashford Library using
“Q”
*Note: To install and access “Q” see Q for Success and the Guide to Installing and Using Q for Success
(https://content.bridgepointeducation.com/curriculum/file/dd00f749-7449-469c-9bd31e6e269bd895/1/Guide%20to%20Installing%20and%20Using%20Q%20for%20Success.pdf)
• Once in the Q program, type in specific search terms to search for library sources on your topic.
• Click on Source to help narrow your search by type of source or database.
Carefully review the Grading Rubric (http://au.waypointoutcomes.com/assessment/25745/preview) for the
criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment.
Waypoint Assignment
Submission
The assignments in this course will be submitted to Waypoint. Please refer to the instructions below to submit
your assignment.
1. Click on the Assignment Submission button below. The Waypoint “Student Dashboard” will open in a new
browser window.
2. Browse for your assignment.
3. Click Upload.
4. Confirm that your assignment was successfully submitted by viewing the appropriate week’s assignment tab
in Waypoint.
For more detailed instructions, refer to the Waypoint Tutorial
(https://content.bridgepointeducation.com/curriculum/file/dc358708-3d2b-41a6-a000ff53b3cc3794/1/Waypoint%20Tutorial.pdf)
(https://content.bridgepointeducation.com/curriculum/file/dc358708-
3d2b-41a6-a000-ff53b3cc3794/1/Waypoint%20Tutorial.pdf) .
This tool needs to be loaded in a new browser window
Load Week 1 – Assignment in a new window
Forensic Science and
Criminalistics
1
microgen/iStock/Thinkstock
Learning Outcomes
After reading this chapter, you should be able to
• De ine forensic science and how it contributes to a case, as well as explain the
CSI Effect and the scienti ic method.
• Summarize the history of forensic science and contributors to the ield.
• List and describe some forensic science specialties.
• Identify the elements of a forensic investigation, how physical evidence can be
produced, and forensic analysis.
• Describe the work and work product of a forensic scientist.
• Describe the U.S. court system, and the key rulings on physical evidence
admissibility through expert testimony.
• List and discuss major issues in forensic science today.
Crime Scene Processing
and Analysis and
Forensic Technologies
2
SEInnovation/iStock/Thinkstock
Charles Steele, Purdue University Northwest
Learning Outcomes
After reading this chapter, you should be able to
•
•
•
•
Contrast the differences between the types of improvements in quality systems.
Identify actions to take when initially responding to a crime scene.
List and describe the steps involved in processing a crime scene.
Explain the factors and types of information required to reconstruct a crime
scene.
• Provide examples of technology used to collect and analyze evidence.
Introduction
Crime scene investigations are driven by the principal expressed by Dr. Edmond Locard (1877–1966), who said that every contact leaves a trace. As people
interact with other people, places, or things, they will inevitably leave something of themselves behind and take something of the other with them (Saferstein,
1998). It is a crime scene investigator’s job to ind these traces and reassemble them into a complete picture that can tell the courts and jury what happened.
The forensic investigation of crime scenes requires a wide range of skills and technologies. Although there are common aspects to all crime scene investigations,
every crime is unique. Skilled crime scene investigators must therefore have a suf icient breadth of knowledge to correctly evaluate and satisfy these needs.
Forensic investigations typically begin with crime scene processing, which is the irst topic of this chapter (Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation,
2000). The success or failure of a criminal investigation is often dictated by how well crime scene investigators do this job. Crime scene processing is all about
recognizing, documenting, preserving, and collecting potential evidence and submitting it to the laboratory for analysis. Crime scenes need to be thoroughly
documented via notes, sketches, photographs, video, and laser scanning to make sure that no aspect of the environment is lost. Speci ic procedures need to be
followed to protect and preserve the physical integrity and legal value of the evidence. There is only one chance to get this right; once a crime scene is released, it
is no longer protected, so there is no way to control what changes occur within it. Therefore, investigators cannot go back and correct errors or omissions.
Well­documented and proven methods for investigating crime scenes are often a component of law enforcement training. Unfortunately, no matter how complete
these methods, unanticipated issues and problems will occur. Crime scenes are often messy. The investigative team may not have experience working with each
other. Priorities and needs may not be immediately obvious. The boundaries of the crime scene itself may not be fully understood before the investigation begins.
Consider a situation in which a person is found dead on a bed, in a bedroom, in a house. When approaching the scene, what is the priority? Should the irst
responder check the body irst or secure the scene? A decision must also be made as to what exactly is part of the crime scene. Is it the body, the bed, the bedroom,
the house, or the entire property? Once these decisions are made, an order of operations must be established so that evidence is collected in the most ef icient and
least destructive way.
After a crime scene is processed, the investigation moves to crime scene analysis, in which the crime is reconstructed. Based on the all the data—investigative
indings, laboratory results, and even medical tests (and/or medical examiner’s results, in death cases)—a reconstructive theory can be formed. In practical terms,
investigators cannot wait until all the data is compiled before considering theories of the case. Blood patterns may be interpretable and provide insight into
movements or actions. Weapons found at the scene may correlate to wounds. Cartridge casing might indicate the presence and number of shooters. Pattern
evidence like footprints and tire marks inform investigators about the presence of involved people and vehicles. Crime scene analysis can take a long time to
complete, and each piece of information helps focus the investigation. It is, however, important to remember that any theory formed from early crime scene
analysis may need to change as additional data are compiled.
What follows in this chapter are speci ic types of crime scenes, initial steps to take, legal considerations, typical steps for processing, and an introduction to some
of the various equipment and techniques that can be used when investigating a crime scene.
Think About It
Does every crime have a crime scene?
Try to envision a crime that does not have a crime scene. Now, imagine that you are a forensic expert who needs to ind evidence. What are you processing,
and where is it? Now once again, consider—does every crime have a crime scene?
2.1 Education
Historically, most crime scene investigators were law enforcement personnel with little or no scienti ic training. This is not to say that these people were not good
at their jobs. Nonscientist crime scene investigators brought us innovations such as forensic photography and the understanding of the temperature dependence
of cyanoacrylate­developed ingermarks (Weaver et al., 2009). But forensic science is an evolving ield.
Practical Training
Recognizing that crime scene investigations had errors, omissions, procedural failures, and insuf icient technology, national bodies like the NAS identi ied a need
to increase scienti ic and procedural rigor (National Research Council, 2009). The resulting changes are working their way into all areas of forensic science,
including crime scene investigations. As of mid–2018 almost all specialized crime scene investigation units are police personnel, but specialized scienti ic training
is increasingly required for these jobs. Many police agencies now require applicants for crime scene unit positions to have a higher level of education than
previously needed, including in some cases a college degree.
Fortunately, some colleges and universities now offer forensic science degrees, and many more offer some type of crime scene analysis class. In all likelihood, if
you are reading this book, you are taking such a class. Larger police agencies tend to have formalized training programs for crime scene personnel. Professional
organizations also offer regular training classes and seminars.
In most cases, however, unless the student is a police department trainee , the actual crime scene portion of the training will be limited to mock crime scenes in a
staged environment. These staged environments allow students to learn how to examine a crime scene, collect evidence, and utilize the relevant technology in a
safe environment, where they cannot damage an investigation.
Think About It
Mock crime scenes are a commonly used training method. If you were going to stage a crime scene for training purposes, how might you do it? What details
might you include, and why?
Although useful, mock crime scenes are limited in that students must be able to ignore
any distractions happening outside of the staged area. In any staged location, there will
be real­world contamination. Mock crime scenes are also limited by the creativity of
the instructor. Still, when properly done, mock crime scenes can introduce students to
the realities of working in a crime scene.
This experience can be improved with the use of computer simulations. Immersive
virtual environment training simulations make it possible to more uniformly create
and curate arti icial crime scenes. Students can now walk through a virtual crime
scene and document evidence. Such simulations have the advantage of being
consistent and easy to use. All that is required is an open space and a proper computer.
Quality Control
Because consistency and accuracy are of major concern in forensic science, it is now
required that any accredited educational program teach quality control. Following
standard operating procedures (SOPs) that meet the guidelines of internationally
recognized quality systems is a common way to maintain consistency of practice and
ensure the best results. However, there are multiple approaches to quality systems,
and not all are equally appropriate. Therefore, care must be taken not to follow other
systems blindly or inappropriately.
Universal Images/Superstock
Mock crime scenes can help students get hands­on practice in forensic
environments.
Most production­based quality control systems are built on the principals laid out in
Six Sigma. They maintain quality by monitoring factors that contribute to a inal product and adjust these factors until an acceptable error rate is achieved.
However, crime scene analysis, like medicine, should not allow for an acceptable error rate. Instead, forensic science should follow laboratory­based quality
control systems, which are typically based on guidelines published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). These approaches to quality
control are driven by a best practices model and rely on the input of day­to­day practitioners for continual improvement.
Corrective actions, preventative actions, and improvements are used to identify real and potential areas for improvement in a typical quality system (Indiana
State Police Laboratory Division, 2017). Corrective actions are submitted when there is an actual error or system breakdown. Preventative actions are similar but
are submitted when a situation arises that could lead to an error. An improvement is submitted when a better way to do something is discovered. Once a
corrective action, preventative action, or improvement is submitted, it will be evaluated according to a standard process, and if the reviewers agree that the issue
warrants a change, the relevant SOP will be modi ied. Therefore, crime scene investigators should be well versed in the SOPs of their agency and stay abreast of
latest innovations across the industry.
Regardless of the training vehicle, students must come away appreciating the best practices for moving and operating within a crime scene. We will now explore
the steps to take when encountering and investigating a crime scene.
2.2 Initial Responses to Crime Scenes
There are many ways to classify a crime scene. It might be indoor, outdoor, or in a vehicle; it might be on public or private property. Within these various locations,
crime scenes are further classi ied according to the type of offense believed to have been committed. Properly identifying the type of crime scene encountered is
important because it dictates how the investigation must proceed. Factors like setting up security, deciding whether a warrant is needed, iguring out how long a
scene might need (or be able) to be held secure, and determining what equipment and safety precautions are needed all depend on a crime scene’s type.
Throughout this chapter, the discussion will focus on crime scenes that are places. However, a crime scene may not always be a place. Computer­based crime is a
major concern for law enforcement and security professionals. In this arena, the crime scene is the virtual world of hard drives and data storage. This topic will be
discussed in more detail in a later chapter. A crime scene can also be a person. Violent or sexual assault leave leaves trace evidence on victims. Medical personnel
typically collect evidence from living victims, while medical examiner personnel typically collect evidence from deceased victims.
A location­based crime scene is secured to protect the evidence within de ined perimeters. Outside the security boundaries, the environment is luid and subject
to a lot of activity. Investigators and support staff congregate in this outer area. In this way, necessary activities like staging gear and equipment, planning
activities, and parking vehicles do not interfere with or contaminate the evidence.
The initial response to any crime scene depends on emergent needs. For example: Is there a reason to believe that perpetrators might still be present? The
responding of icer usually does not know the answer to this question. Of icers must exercise extreme caution when responding to a scene without reliable
information, as is common when responding to a 911 call. They may need to disarm and detain a suspect, and the of icers’ safety is a primary concern.
Beyond the possibility of encountering an armed suspect, initial responders also need to be wary of environmental hazards or hidden traps. Hazardous chemicals
can be found in many environments. A crime scene need not be an illicit drug lab to contain hazards. Acids, poisons, and lammable chemicals have many legal
uses and tend to be poorly stored. In addition, the United States has a strong gun culture and numerous hunters and sportsmen. Deadly weapons can therefore be
present almost anywhere. The list of potential hazards includes guard animals, biological hazards, poorly maintained structures, and many more.
Think About It
How hazardous is an ordinary environment?
Consider an average home owner’s craft area or workshop. How many potential hazards can you think of that would warrant special care if that area were
to become a crime scene?
The initial responder must quickly establish who is at a crime scene, assess their condition, and determine whether medical help is needed. Once the hazards are
assessed, the of icer needs to determine if there are victims who might need emergency medical assistance. If paramedics need to tend to an injured person, the
of icer must do his or her best to make sure evidence is not destroyed. The well­being of injured persons is of the highest importance. This means that at times,
some evidence will be lost or contaminated.
When the scene is known to be free of potential dangers and wounded persons, the next priority is to secure the scene. First responders must do their best to
determine the perimeter of the scene. Their primary goal is to keep people out of the scene until properly trained crime scene personnel can respond. The actions
of the irst responders will cause changes in the scene. If the conditions are not recorded immediately, they may be forgotten, and important details can be lost.
Therefore, responders should note a scene’s initial conditions and record these as soon as possible.
The time of day, the weather, whether doors are locked or unlocked, whether lights are on or off, and any unusual features, odors, or sounds should all be
documented. First responders should also keep track of who has been inside the crime scene before it has been fully secured. They should also note who is nearby,
since suspects have been known to be present as spectators and because after a crime scene has been secured, it may be necessary to extend the perimeter to
include a larger area.
The takeaway here is to stay safe, establish control, and document everything. Crime scenes can be dangerous. Activities in and around the scene may be critical to
the investigation. Security barriers need to be maintained until investigators are ready to release the scene.
Note that protections guaranteed under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution require that crime scenes that occur on private property are subject to a
property owner’s discretion. If the owner asks the police to leave, in most cases they must do so until a search warrant is obtained. There are speci ic exceptions to
this rule called exigent circumstances, which will be discussed shortly.
The Fourth Amendment
There is an important constitutionally based body of law surrounding searches and seizures of places and persons; investigators and police of icers must know it
well. It is rooted in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no
Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or af irmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or
things to be seized.
This seemingly straightforward amendment deeply affects the actions of law enforcement, and as a result, there is substantial case law around it. Citizens have a
“reasonable expectation of privacy,” and the most protected premises are one’s person, one’s home, the area immediately surrounding the home (called the
curtilage), and one’s vehicle. For the purposes of a crime scene investigation, a home can be considered off limits to a search without a warrant unless there is an
ongoing emergency, the owner consents, or there is no one to object. The same may be true of the immediate surrounding area and any vehicles on the property.
But there are no such limitations on searches in public areas. Additionally, in general, a search warrant is needed to search a person or to take blood or other
intrusive specimens. A warrant is issued by a judge or magistrate following an af idavit by an of icer or investigator that provides supported probable cause to
believe the search will reveal evidence of a crime. A search warrant is not given so that of icers can look to see if there is any actionable evidence. It must be
known in advance that there is probable cause that the search will yield evidence of a crime.
As mentioned above, however, there are exceptions to the need for a warrant. When circumstances would lead a reasonable person to decide that entry or another
immediate action is necessary to prevent people from being hurt, evidence from being destroyed, or a suspect from escaping, of icers may act in advance of getting
a warrant. These are called exigent circumstances, and in practice they can be dif icult to determine (Cornell Law School, n.d.). Courts across the country have
routinely denied the use of evidence from exigent searches when the judge decided that the need was not present.
The U.S. Supreme Court clari ied the concept of exigent searches in Missouri v. McNeely (2013). In this case the court stated:
A variety of circumstances may give rise to an exigency suf icient to justify a warrantless search, including law enforcement’s need to provide emergency
assistance to an occupant of a home . . . engage in “hot pursuit” of a leeing suspect . . . or enter a burning building to put out a ire and investigate its
cause.
In addition, although invasive searches of a person without a warrant are generally prohibited, the police can search a person prior to or as part of an arrest. This
is known as a search incident to an arrest. This search­incident rule is in place to protect the police from being attacked with hidden weapons.
Think About It
The need to abide by the Fourth Amendment and obtain warrants is a serious issue. Do you think the law is bene icial or detrimental to crime scene
investigations?
Other exceptions also exist, such as the plain­sight exception. If an object is in plain
sight, and the police of icer has the right to be where the item is seen, no warrant is
needed to seize it. There is also a community caretaking exception, in which police
may take charge of someone’s property to hold it in a secure place for them because
they are unable to keep it secure. Finally, as mentioned earlier, an owner of a vehicle or
property can consent to a search.
Police of icers and crime scene investigators must be cautious about searches and
seizures to ensure that any evidence they obtain is later admissible in court. Evidence
that is seized illegally will not be admitted.
Experienced crime scene investigators must learn about warrant requirements and
how to apply them to speci ic cases. Even with experience, nuances can be dif icult to
correctly interpret. Consider a scenario in which a murder suspect is a homeless
person living under a state highway bridge. The bridge and the area under it are
clearly public property, so the investigators determine that they do not need a warrant.
They seize the suspect’s property and ind evidence related to the murder. It sounds
reasonable, but a conviction in a case like this is likely to be reversed on appeal. Even a
cardboard box under a highway can be a home and is therefore protected under the
Fourth Amendment.
Will Powers/Associated Press
Similarly, having an incomplete warrant can be the same as not having a warrant at all.
Consider a situation in which investigators properly request and are granted a warrant Of icers must serve a search warrant issued by a judge in order to enter a
home without permission of the home owner or resident.
to search a home but accidently omit any reference to or mention of an unattached
structure like a shed or garage. In such a case, evidence found in any unattached
structures may not be admitted to trial, since no permission or authority was granted to search them.
Emerging technologies are further complicating the concept of reasonable expectation of privacy and probable cause. Early research promotes the idea that the
structure and appearance of a person’s face can be inferred from DNA (Curtis & Howard, 2018). Some estimates suggest that this technology will be viable for
investigative use by 2024. Early opponents are already suggesting that this technology represents an extreme form of pro iling and should not be the basis for a
valid warrant. Proponents counter by saying that the image of the face would be an investigative tool, not a con irmatory one. After all, if a suspect is found from a
sketch based on DNA, that same DNA can be used to positively identify or exonerate the person.
It is clear why many people argue that DNA­based data is personal and should be protected. But what about less invasive information? In 2004 investigators
placed a Global Positioning System (GPS) tracker on a Jeep Grand Cherokee belonging to Antoine Jones without a valid warrant. The case was contested all the way
to the U.S. Supreme court (United States v. Antoine Jones, 2012) where it was decided that GPS installation fell under the restrictions imposed by the Fourth
Amendment and was unconstitutional without a warrant.
That still leaves the question of whether passive GPS tracking data can be used without a warrant. GPS navigation and social media location tags are becoming
more prevalent. Millions of people use cell phone apps that plan out their journeys, mark their paths, track their steps, or simply let the world know where they
are. Millions more have their movements followed without their conscious knowledge. Whether deliberately or accidentally catalogued by a suspect, such data can
be invaluable to investigators trying to reconstruct the events of a crime. But is it protected under the Fourth Amendment? In June 2018 the Supreme Court
decided in Carpenter v. United States (2017) that accessing historical cell phone data without a valid warrant violates the Fourth Amendment. Crime scene
investigators are bound by what the courts determine is legal. Sidestepping these rules, whether intentionally or unintentionally, will often result in evidence not
being heard by a jury.
Think About It
Do you think law enforcement should be able to track a person’s movements by way of a GPS unit attached to a vehicle or by way of cell phone without the
person’s knowledge? Law enforcement could argue that this is no different from having the person followed, except that it is a lot less expensive. Do you
think you have a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding your whereabouts? If you are willing to let Facebook or your cell phone provider track you,
have you given up your expectation of privacy?
2.3 Steps in Crime Scene Processing
Depending on the type of crime and the department’s resources and policies, scenes may be searched and processed by police of icers, detectives, or specialized
units. Only large departments have the resources to maintain specialized crime investigation units. No matter who is processing a crime scene, there are common
steps that should be followed.
Duties of a Forensic Evidence Technician
A forensic evidence technician explains some of the duties and procedures involved in
her work.
Step 1: Secure the Scene, Do an Initial Survey, and Recognize Evidence
The major purposes of scene security are to limit access to the scene, avoid introducing extraneous marks and trace materials at the scene, and reduce the
possibility that useful evidence will be altered or destroyed.
The purpose of the initial survey is to understand what evidence is present throughout the scene and to formulate a hypothesis about what may have occurred.
The more complicated the case and scene, and the more serious the crime, the more time investigators will spend surveying the scene. The initial survey allows
the team to decide their next steps, divide up the tasks, and proceed in a logical order. Video footage may be taken during the initial survey to record initial
conditions as accurately as possible and to give others who do not have access to the scene a chance to see it. The survey should give the investigators an idea of
how much searching, documentation, and evidence collection will be required.
Step 2: Search the Scene
All areas of the scene should be systematically searched for any possible evidence. The initial search
results and working hypothesis should guide the search team. If a suspect is not present, part of
undertaking the search is to ind evidence that can connect a person to the scene. Such evidence could
be blood, body luid residue, ingerprints, footwear indentations, or automobile tire impressions. Keep
in mind that if the person in question is a regular occupant of the premises, proving a connection will
not likely mean much.
Investigators may also be looking for evidence of corpus delicti—evidence that supports the
commission of a crime. This type of evidence is often found at a location related to a suspect rather
than at the scene of a crime. For example, missing property found in a suspect’s residence might
connect that person to the scene of a burglary. A weapon may link a suspect to an assault. Flammable
liquids might connect a suspect to an arson ire.
Step 3: Document the Scene and Evidence
Documentation involves two aspects: documenting the scene and documenting the evidence. The
detailed search should have revealed what the investigators consider evidence. This may include
patterns like blood spatter, overturned furniture, or out­of­place objects, and it could include individual
items that will be collected later.
Documentation is perhaps the central reason to investigate a crime scene. Classic documentation
methods involve notes, sketches, and photography; to these we can easily add videography and virtual
reconstruction. Certain information should be included with all documentation:
•
•
•
•
case number
date
time
location
John Raoux/Associated Press
•
person responsible for documenting evidence (sketcher, evidence collector, etc.)
Notes
Scene searches are critical to an investigation; this is
when evidence is found and collected. In addition to the
examples mentioned in the text, what might
investigators be looking for?
Notes are records of observations at scenes that cannot be readily photographed, sketched, or video
recorded. They may be handwritten, keyed into a computer or handheld device, or audio recorded. As mentioned earlier, irst responders should make notes about
the scene’s initial condition. The notes will form the basis for the note taker’s later report, a formal rendering of what was observed in connection with the
investigation.
Some authorities suggest several logs be kept while a scene is investigated. First is the security log. At a minimum, this log should record who was inside the
secured area of the scene; it should catalog the entry and exit of every person. It has been suggested that a continuously running video camera be set up at a
certain distance from the entry/exit point to act as the security log. A photography log should also be kept. This log is a written record of every photograph taken.
Finally, there is the evidence log—a written record of every item seized from the scene, complete with a brief description, assigned number, and name/initials of
the person who seized it.
Sketches, Location Mapping, and Laser Mapping
Sketches are useful for preventing perspective errors caused by camera orientation of photographs and videos. Accurate sketches require the use of tape
measures and other measuring devices that may interfere with the scene if one is not careful. Alternatively, some success has been had with location­tagged
photographs, which can be combined with computer­aided drafting (CAD) system software to reconstruct a crime scene with a high degree of precision.
Either of these techniques has its roots in drafting and technical drawing. Proper sketches use exact measurements to accurately represent the perimeters of the
scene and the position of its objects. When a sketch or image map is properly done, a crime scene can be reassembled from its data.
To accurately specify an object’s location, measurements between two ixed points are required. If the scene occurs in a square or rectangular room, or in a space
with other perpendicular reference lines, then measurements from the two will uniquely place the object (essentially specifying x­ and y­coordinates on a graph).
Sketches made at the scene are called rough (preliminary) sketches.
The data will later be used to make a smooth ( inished) sketch. In a smooth sketch, a scale is adopted, in which 1 inch might represent 2 feet, for example. After
the scale is set, measurements are not included because everything is drawn to scale. Extraneous items—those not pertinent to the case—can be left out of the
smooth sketch to avoid clutter. Like every product of a crime scene investigation, sketches should contain the case number, the date, the location, the name of the
sketcher, and if applicable, the name of the measurer.
Most sketches will include a loor plan. If it is necessary to include information from a room’s walls or ceiling—such as blood or blood patterns—a cross­
projection sketch can be made. Here, the sketcher “folds out” a room’s walls and ceiling onto a lat surface to record the information. In this way, three­
dimensional information can be sketched in two dimensions.
Location mapping takes a different approach. Instead of measuring the perimeter and location of objects from an established reference point, each image is
imbedded with a meta­tag that pinpoints its location on an absolute grid. This method requires the presence of ixed calibration points but eliminates the need to
drag measuring tape across the scene. An advantage to location­mapped images is that they integrate easily with CAD software and can be used to digitally
reconstruct a scene.
Many CAD systems are also easily integrated with laser mapping. Similar to location­tagging photographs, laser mapping uses a stand­alone laser with an
integrated camera. As the camera photographs an object, the laser precisely measures its location. These systems are lightweight and relatively inexpensive. Laser
mapping has an advantage over older technologies in that it makes it possible to measure spaces that are hard or in some cases physically impossible to access.
Some systems even run from a cell phone app.
Think About It
Do you think CAD programs and computer­based reproductions and images are more valuable to investigators and ultimately jurors than sketches and
photographs? What are the pros and cons of each?
Laser scanners are another recent technological advancement in use at crime scenes. These scanners utilize a rotating pulse laser and mirror to take millions of
measurements. The technology is similar to a highway patrol speed gun, except that in this application the target is stationary and the gun is moving. As the laser
is rotated around all the degrees of a sphere, laser pulses are ired and bounce off objects, re lecting a portion of the beam back to the detector. Based on how long
it takes a beam to return, a computer can calculate how far away the surface of re lection is from the laser base.
The point of re lection is calculated via right angle geometry, and a point cloud is generated showing where the solid obstruction is in three­dimensional space.
Some systems can even incorporate color and texture from photographs. These systems are easy to set up and use.
Taking Photographs and Videos
Even as imaging technology improves, photographs and videos are still among the
most important methods of recording what a crime scene looks like. There are
technical and scene guidelines for photographing scenes and evidence that refer to
cameras, lenses, and technical issues in photography itself. Crime scene photographers
must be familiar with these guidelines (National Forensic Science Technology Center,
n.d.a).
Scene photography guidelines are fairly straightforward and usually recommend an
approach using overall, midrange, and close­up photos of each subject. The overall
picture should provide a wider perspective of the subject; midrange should be a closer
shot that provides more detail; close­ups should be taken to show small details. Using
a lash is recommended because things visible to the eye in low light are not always
captured in a photo without a lash. Outdoors, shadows that interfere with the clarity
of a photo can be corrected using ill lash, a lash that ills in light where the shadows
are. Generally, front lighting should be used for photos, since backlighting, or shooting
into the sun, almost always causes problems. Side lighting is recommended for
showing the details of three­dimensional indentation impressions because it creates
just enough shadow to maximize pattern details, while front lighting tends to wash
them out.
Photographs must be taken of the overall crime scene and any patterns that are
present. Keep in mind that some patterns—like the way furniture is arranged or
disturbed in a room—cannot be collected except by photo and video. Once the scene is
released, these will be the only records of that pattern. Additionally, photos showing
the evidence in relationship to the larger scene must be taken. Evidence items must be
photographed, both at a distance and close­up, with and without a label or numerical
marker. Photos without labels show an unaltered scene, which is important to the
investigation. The same rule holds for placing a scale into a picture—one picture
without the scale, then another with it. Evidence that will be collected is often marked
by numbered placards. The placard numbers correspond to the items’ numbers in the
evidence log that is submitted to the lab.
Cultura Limited/Cultura Limited/Superstock
It was traditionally recommended that the scene photographer maintain a log that
listed each picture taken, the photographic conditions, and the settings used, such as
shutter speed and f­stop. That is no longer necessary. Most photography is digital, and
it is easy to keep an electronic record of photographic conditions. Furthermore, if the
camera is set on an automatic mode, the camera will select some or all of its own
settings. In this case it is not necessary to record all of the camera’s settings, but it is
still a good idea to keep a record of photographs taken in a photo log.
While photographs are an extremely helpful type of documentation, they
cannot duplicate elements like scale. Different angles can change the
way things appear in photographs.
Think About It
Do you think evidence looks the same in pictures as it does in real life? Could photographs be manipulated to alter the evidence?
Normally, people view objects under some form of white light. In these conditions, things that are of similar colors will blend in with each other. One of the
advantages of photography is that by adjusting the light or adding a photographic ilter, it becomes possible to show things otherwise invisible to the human eye.
This works because what people see as a single color is really a combination of many different wavelengths of light hitting the human eye. By changing which
wavelengths are present or by blocking some of the wavelengths that re lect off an item from entering a camera lens, color differences can be shown. This
phenomenon is referred to as forced metamerism, and it makes it easier to separate objects from their backgrounds in photos (Steele, 2015).
Even when crime scene photographs are not collected with different­colored lights or optical ilters, computer imaging software can create a similar effect by
altering the wavelength components. This is simply an application of color correction; anyone who has used computer art programs will be familiar with this
technique. Image enhancement is another common technique that can improve the quality of the photo, revealing details that may be invisible to the human eye.
However, there is a risk of altering an image so much that its appearance is not true to the captured image. Therefore, an unadulterated version of each photo
should always be kept for reference. In addition, the photographer or image analyst needs to record how an image has been altered and provide the reason why.
Given the increasing importance of image evidence, image alteration is a signi icant issue. Digital photography experts can tell if an image has been edited by
accessing information within the image ile. Sometimes there are reasons to alter an image’s exposure, brightness, contrast, color, or magni ication, which might
enhance a detail the photographer was trying to capture. There is nothing wrong with changing an image, as long as the photographer is forthcoming about it.
Video recording is a supplementary type of photography. As mentioned earlier, a video recording can act as a security log. Video recorded inside the scene can also
be shared with persons outside the secure area, reducing the number of people potentially contaminating the crime scene. Good­quality video can also provide a
way for the jury to see the scene, if doing so is believed to be helpful and permitted by the court.
As with photography, there are some guidelines for recording video of a crime scene. The camera should be held as steady as possible. A tripod or monopod
should be used when possible and practical. It can be helpful to zoom in and out, but zooming should be done slowly and with a speci ic purpose. If the video
camera has a built­in clock, it should be set to correspond to the master clock used to record all times in the crime scene documentation. Failing to synchronize
clocks can lead to contradictions later—such as if a video recording began at 9:36 a.m. but the team did not arrive at the crime scene until 9:44 a.m. Another issue
to pay attention to is sound or narration. Narration is helpful if a narrator speaks slowly, informatively, and in an unemotional voice. Video recorder microphones
are very sensitive and tend to pick up background noise and comments that may not sound professional to someone in court. To avoid this issue, some crime
scene video instructors suggest not using the microphone or narration. The video record should contain the case number, date, time, location, and name of the
videographer.
Step 4: Identify, Collect, and Preserve Evidence
Following documentation, which involves recording all the physical evidence that is to be collected, the next step involves identifying the evidence. This step
requires identifying and numbering the evidence, collecting it, and insuring it will be preserved in a condition suitable for subsequent lab analysis.
Identi ication
Any item of physical evidence that will be collected must be identi ied. Generally, this identi ication consists of a number and a brief description, as shown in the
example in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1: Evidence log example
The length of an evidence log can vary from case to case, but maintaining an accurate list of evidence can save a lot of time
later.
Items that are to be collected are often marked with numbered placards. The number on the placard should correspond to the number used to identify that item.
The number and description are documented in the evidence log, which is a complete listing of physical items seized at the scene. This practice reduces
paperwork and avoids the potential of making a clerical error if the evidence items are renumbered. It also makes it possible to relate evidence item numbers back
to the original evidence in a photo or video from the scene.
Collection, Packaging, and Preservation
Collecting and preserving evidence consist of using proper collection methods, using proper containers, and properly storing evidence in the lab or property
storage area. It is always best to collect items intact; circumstances may force an investigator to take a sample of something, but it is best to avoid doing so. A
pattern of blood on a loor must be sampled (by swabbing up some of it), or the loorboards must be collected, which may not always be possible or practical.
Agencies usually have guidelines that pertain to the collection process, but investigators must always use their best judgment. The goal is to collect the important
evidence, or an appropriate sample of it, and to document in detail where it came from. Additionally, investigators must be sure to collect proper control and
comparison specimens for any questioned evidence (hair, blood, handwritten documents, etc.) they are collecting.
Think About It
Forensic evidence can be dif icult to contain. Have you ever transported leftovers from a restaurant and had the contents leak out? Now imagine you knew
you had to transport dozens of individual leftover packages, some with liquids, some with powders. What precautions would you take up front?
When collecting a specimen, it is exceedingly important to select the right container.
The container must completely contain the specimen. If portions of the specimen are
left exposed, they are vulnerable to being contaminated. In addition, containers must
be able to prevent the specimen from leaking out (especially if the item is small or a
powder or liquid). Low­density polyethylene ziplock bags are good containers because
they can hold a variety of samples and are transparent. This is important, because
clear packaging allows the evidence to be identi ied without breaking tamper­proof
evidence tape. However, ziplock bags are not used for biological evidence, because
they are airtight.
Biological evidence (blood and body luids, including swabs and stained items) needs
to be allowed to dry. Therefore, it should not be packed in airtight containers; these
increase the chance for bacterial growth, which will destroy the evidence. The
exception is large samples of biological luids, such as vials of blood. These are
collected in special containers that are usually prepared with preservatives to prevent
degradation.
Nonbiological liquids also have special storage container needs. Jars with screw­on
caps, vials, and sealed paint cans are all common containers. It is important to
remember that not all liquids can be put in the same containers. Solvents, acids, and
bases all require speci ic types of containers. Using an inappropriate container can
result in degraded seals and spilled or lost samples. In extreme cases, the sample may
react with the container and become useless for the purposes of the investigation.
Prathaan/iStock/Thinkstock
Packaging and labeling evidence correctly is extremely important to
preserving it and ensuring its admissibility in court.
Sharp objects like knives and broken glass need to be put into containers that are strong and can prevent them from ripping through. Containers also need to
secure evidence so it doesn’t bounce around or get damaged in transport. Electronic devices and computer hard drives should be packed in nonconducting
containers to prevent electrical damage.
Once a specimen has been properly contained, it should be labeled with the case number, date, time, location, and the name of the investigator who collected the
item. The label should be af ixed in a visible place and the container sealed with tape, unless it already has a tamper­proof seal. This process can be made more
ef icient by preprinting labels. High­volume agencies often use bar code systems that allow investigators to rapidly label and track samples via inventory­control
programs. In the chapters to follow, we will discuss collection and packaging techniques appropriate to speci ic categories of evidence.
Once the evidence is collected, it is either stored or submitted for testing. If testing is needed, an item should be delivered to the crime lab as quickly as possible.
Some evidence, like ingerprints on items, can degrade completely within a few days under normal storage conditions. Evidence that is left in the trunks of cars
can experience temperature extremes that degrade the specimens even faster (Steele, 1994, 2015).
Evidence storage presents a challenge for laboratories and law enforcement agencies because cases take time to process and evidence needs space in which to be
stored. Evidence such as frozen items that are submitted to a laboratory may be stored by the laboratory for an extended period. Some types of evidence, such as
controlled substances or irearms, may remain in the secure possession of the laboratory until they are eventually destroyed. Most of the time, however, the items
are returned to the custody of law enforcement for secure storage.
If a case goes to trial, evidence is brought to court; once admitted into evidence, it becomes the property of the court. It must then be securely stored for some
length of time. Procedures vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and sometimes from case to case, regarding how long evidence needs to be stored after the case is
completed. Sometimes a court order or other authorization is required before evidence can be destroyed. Cases can be reopened decades after they have been
adjudicated if new technology, such as improvements in DNA pro iling, becomes available. This is usually called postconviction testing, and many states have
statutes that govern its application. There are also old, unsolved cases with evidence that may be subjected to new forms of testing and comparisons that were not
done at the time of the crime. These are usually called cold cases. Some police agencies have established cold case units that are speci ically devoted to
reexamining old, cold cases.
Submitting Evidence to the Laboratory
Items that are submitted to a lab are recorded on a laboratory submission form, which includes the case number, date of incident, name(s) of person(s) involved,
type of case, brief description of the case, and the contact information of the submitting agency and investigators. There may be space for investigators to state
what type of examination they are requesting (such as “compare with DNA of John Jones and Mary Smith”). In complicated cases or cases in which the requested
examination is not obvious, investigators should talk to the lab technician who will coordinate the handling of the case. If possible, it is good practice for the lab to
retain the identifying numbers assigned by the investigators. Otherwise, every item will have more than one identifying number, and errors could be made along
the way. Law enforcement agencies and the laboratory can agree in advance on a numbering and identifying scheme for evidence.
Think About It
Laboratories and law enforcement work together to identify, track, and store evidence. What problems do you think might arise if the police and crime lab
used different identi ication and storage methods?
A given case may involve more than one submission of evidence to the laboratory. The lab will have a way to deal with this situation. Figure 2.2 shows an example
of a laboratory evidence sheet. The submission form usually asks: Has evidence previously been submitted in this case? If the answer is yes, the new submission
will be carried under the same case number, but with a new lab number. In a complex case, like a homicide, evidence may be submitted from the scene. Later, the
medical examiner may provide evidence after a victim is autopsied. Still later, specimens from persons of interest or from vehicles may be submitted. Similar to an
evidence log, the number of lab submission forms can vary depending on the case.
Figure 2.2: Illinois State Police lab submission form
This is an example of a form used to submit evidence to a laboratory.
Adapted from http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/forms/dd/dd2922.pdf
(http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/forms/dd/dd2922.pdf)
Think About It
Should all evidence in every case be examined? How would you decide what is important to examine and what is not?
Chain of Custody
Chain of custody encompasses the notion that an item of evidence can be traced from its seizure to its introduction as evidence in a courtroom. If the state cannot
adequately account for who had care, custody, and control of an item between seizure and the courtroom, that item may be deemed inadmissible. When
investigators seal an item at the scene, the lab examiner will take great care to not break the investigator’s seal. The package will be opened elsewhere—such as at
the other end of the envelope or bag—and resealed following examination. The person who sealed the evidence will initial the tamper­proof tape or packaging.
Ideally, the evidence item is opened only once—for laboratory examination—then resealed and not opened again unless the investigator or lab examiner is asked
to do so in the courtroom.
The courts have generally been satis ied with “ordinary business records” to establish chain of custody. The state does not normally need to produce anyone who
had access to the evidence along the way. The label, tag, bar code, or whatever device or strategy is being used to track and maintain the chain is very important,
since evidence can exchange hands many times. An item of evidence might go from the scene, to the department property room, to the lab receiving unit, to the lab
master storage vault, to an examiner’s bench (possibly more than once and possibly to more than one examiner), back to the lab master storage vault, back to the
department property room, and inally to the court’s evidence storage room and to the courtroom.
The case of Connecticut v. Richard B. Crafts (1993) is interesting from a forensic standpoint because almost every common subspecialty was involved in examining
the evidence. The case illustrates how a wide spectrum of circumstantial evidence must sometimes be assembled to resolve a case. As you read about the case,
consider how the steps of crime scene processing factored into getting the evidence into court, and consider the evidence’s impact on the case.
Case Illustration: Connecticut v. Richard B. Crafts
In November 1986 a light attendant named Helle Crafts hired Keith Mayo, a private investigator, to ind evidence that her husband, Richard B. Crafts, was
having an extramarital affair, which she wanted to use in a divorce suit against him. Mayo had the evidence of the affair but had been unable to give it to
Helle Crafts and be paid for his services, because Helle disappeared. After returning to JFK Airport on a light from Europe, she rode home to Connecticut
with a fellow light attendant and was never seen again. Both her light attendant friend and Mayo were concerned about her disappearance. Helle had told
her friend that her husband was abusive and that if something ever happened to her, he should be looked at with suspicion.
Richard was a part­time Newtown, Connecticut, police of icer. Perhaps because of this, the Newtown police were reluctant to make much of the fact that
Helle was missing when they were told about it. Fortunately, Mayo was able to get the state’s attorney’s of ice involved, and they asked the Connecticut
State Police to look into the matter. Richard told investigators that Helle had said she was going to visit her mother in Europe, and her car was found in the
employee parking area at the JFK Airport. However, there was no record of her on a light to Europe.
The morning after Helle had returned home, Richard instructed the nanny to take their children to their grandparents’ home, saying he would join them
later. Richard then went to a rental store and asked to rent a large diesel­powered wood chipper. He rented a U­Haul truck to tow the wood chipper. Richard
owned a wood lot along the shores of Lake Zoar and said he was going out to his wood lot to cut wood. There was a major snowstorm that night, and a
snowplow driver said he saw a truck pulling a wood chipper. He was not able to see the face of the driver but said the truck pulling the wood chipper was
heading toward Richard’s wood lot. The snowplow driver said that there was no one else on the roads because of the storm.
State Police investigators were now suspicious of Richard and conducted an extensive search of the wood lot alongside Lake Zoar. As they searched for
clues along the shoreline and in areas where Richard had been chipping wood, they picked up leaves, surface material, and debris and placed them into 50­
gallon barrels illed with water, which loated off the leaves and low­density debris. The water was then poured through a ine­mesh sieve for evidence.
Using this technique, investigators discovered
•
•
•
•
•
a human tooth,
a human dental restoration,
hundreds of small pieces of human bone,
part of a inger with some ingerprint friction ridges, and
a human toenail that was painted with red nail polish.
State Police divers also looked in the lake for evidence and recovered a Stihl chain saw with about a half tank of fuel still in it.
This case required forensic odontologists (to examine the tooth and the restoration) and forensic anthropologists (to examine the bone). Additionally, a
forensic pathologist (state medical examiner) provided an opinion about the cause and manner of death.
The minute pieces of bone, the chain saw, and other evidence were examined in a forensic laboratory. The chain of the chain saw contained blood, hairs,
and ibers. Wood chippings from the Lake Zoar site as well as from the U­Haul rental truck were collected. Some bits of chippings and debris contained hair.
The wood chipper was extensively examined, but it had been rented to someone else after Richard had rented it, and when State Police got to it, nothing
probative was uncovered. The blade was also swapped out with every rental, and the one that was in the machine at the time of Richard’s rental was not
available.
State Police believed Richard had murdered Helle and disposed of her body using the wood chipper. Police obtained a search warrant for the Crafts’ home.
The wall­to­wall carpeting in the master bedroom was gone and was never found. Richard said he was in the process of replacing it. The mattress was gone
too, but the box spring was still there and had blood spatter on it.
Without going into the investigative details, here is a summary of the basic case facts and the forensic evidence. What story can each piece of evidence tell?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Tooth/restoration: Identi ied as having come from Helle Crafts.
Bone chips: Human; consistent with production by a high­speed wood chipper blade; tool marks consistent with those on the wood chips; all
originating from head, hands, or feet; blood group O (same as Helle).
Wood chips: The tool marks from the wood chipper blade were consistent with one another, consistent with having been produced by a wood
chipper blade, and consistent with the marks on the bone chips. This means that all marks could have been made by the same blade in the wood
chipper.
Chain saw: The chain saw had a serial number, but it was badly marred from being in the water. Using serial number restoration techniques, the
serial number was restored. The chain saw was traced to a retailer in Connecticut, and the retailer had the credit card slip Richard used to
purchase the saw. He paid nearly $645 for it. In addition, a questioned document examiner veri ied that the signature on the credit card slip
belonged to Richard.
Box spring bloodstains: Medium­velocity blood spatter. This means that there was force involved in their production. They are typically seen in
blunt­force beatings on the head when the blunt­force object contacts the head when it is bloody. These were blood type O, the same as Helle. They
were of relatively recent origin because one isoenzyme could be typed. It is not likely they were more than a year old, and probably not that old.
Hairs: Human; morphologically consistent with one another; morphologically consistent with hairs from a hairbrush from Helle’s bathroom. The
defense correctly pointed out that the hairbrush could not truly be used to identify Helle.
Fibers: The ibers found in the chain saw blade were consistent with ibers from a nightgown Helle owned and was known to have worn but which
was not recovered.
Partial inger: The friction ridge skin on the partial inger was consistent with Helle’s known ingerprint, but not enough detail overlapped between
the two to make a positive identi ication.
Toenail and polish: Consistent by instrumental methods of analysis with a bottle of nail polish recovered from Helle’s bathroom. Nail polish cannot
be individualized. It was not possible to say that the polish on the toenail came from that bottle, only that it could have.
Crafts case was an extreme example of a highly circumstantial case. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence that implicates Richard in Helle’s death and
more convincingly in the disposal of her remains. Most of it by itself is not very strong. The question for the jury, then, is whether many pieces of
circumstantial evidence that point to the same conclusion constitutes proof beyond a reasonable doubt. This death investigation case began in late 1986
and continued into 1988, but the irst trial ended in a mistrial. The state retried the defendant, Richard Crafts, in 1989, and he was convicted.
Re lect On It
Based on this case, would you change your previous opinion of whether all evidence should be examined?
2.4 Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction
There is a difference between crime scene processing and analysis. Processing consists of evaluating and identifying evidence; documenting, collecting, and
packaging evidence; and submitting relevant items to a forensic lab. Analysis, on the other hand, is part of an effort to reconstruct events. The scene and scene
patterns are important in reconstructions, but all other medical/lab indings and investigative information must be considered.
It is never possible to fully reconstruct a crime based on the record or analysis of physical evidence. However, some reconstruction attempts are broader than
others. An investigator might, for example, interpret a blood pattern left at a scene. This information may contribute to understanding the case, but it is limited to
the single event that caused the pattern. Investigators might also try to reconstruct the movements of people in a scene to try to create a theoretical timeline. This
could be based on an observation such as a footprint on the cover of a magazine that was found under an overturned table. These timelines are often critical to
generating a complete description of the crime, but it is important to remember that different events can sometimes result in identical sets of evidence.
Any reconstruction is a hypothesis, or theory, about what may have happened based on the available evidence. As more data comes in, the theory must be
modi ied. The lab analysis of the items submitted from the scene is critical to the reconstruction. Matching (or failing to match) bloodstains or ingerprints with
people, or bullets or cartridge cases with guns—as well as establishing the meaning of various scene patterns—is essential. In death cases, the medical examiner’s
report is another critical item. The cause and manner of death must be established. The decedent must be positively identi ied, wounds described, bullets
recovered, sexual assault evidence collected, and so on. Sometimes other specialists must be brought into a case, and their indings become important to the total
picture. If there is insect activity on a corpse, for example, a forensic entomologist can help establish the time that has passed since death. If there are bite marks
on a body or on food items at a scene, a forensic odontologist can compare those marks with the known teeth of persons of interest.
Scenes may present any number of patterns that can be useful in reconstruction. These include blood patterns; glass fractures; tracks and trails; modus operandi;
tire skid marks; clothing, article, or object positions; gunshot residue; bullet or projectile trajectories; and ire burn. Not all of these patterns will be included at
every scene, but they can be helpful when reconstructing events.
Glass fracture patterns can reveal information such as which side of the glass was struck, the order of shots ired, and force and angle of impact. Tracks and trails
may consist of footprints, footwear impressions, blood droplets, or drag marks and can show the movements of people at a scene. A modus operandi (MO) is a
habitual pattern that a criminal follows. Investigators have for years used MO patterns to link cases. A newer and more sophisticated application of this type of
analysis is pro iling. Law enforcement personnel with psychology backgrounds and special training in criminal pro iling can use information from a scene and its
analysis to paint a pro ile of the offender. The pro ile is never suf icient to identify a person, but it may narrow down the list of potential suspects. The pro ile is
based on studying past crimes for which a perpetrator has been apprehended. Often, certain offenders will have characteristics in common, such as age,
relationships with other people, or type of job, which can help the pro iler. Skid marks from tires are useful in reconstructing traf ic accidents, as they can help
determine how fast a vehicle was moving when the brakes were applied. Patterns of clothing, furniture, or other articles can help determine what happened and
set some context. The objective is to look for the unusual—things that would not be expected in the circumstances. Things that are upset or out of place might
indicate a ransacking or a struggle or provide hints about a motive. It is important to igure out what type of case the scene represents. Is it an intentional murder,
a robbery, a burglary, a sexual assault, or an aggravated assault? Does it look like the offense was committed by a stranger, someone the victim knew, or someone
who lives on the premises?
Think About It
Suppose you are an investigator with a large agency and you get a call to look into a report of a dead body off the side of a busy interstate highway. Arriving
at the location, you ind that there is indeed a body. What are your next steps? Why could this case be dif icult to solve?
2.5 Advances in Forensic Technologies
As casework demands have increased and budgets have not, labs have sought ways to improve their ef iciency and productivity. Databases, laboratory
information management systems (LIMS), and robotics are important tools that help satisfy this need. Databases help save time in an investigation by pooling
data from multiple jurisdictions. While there are many databases available, three of the most signi icant for law enforcement are Automated Fingerprint
Identi ication Systems (AFIS), Combined DNA Indexing System (CODIS), and National Integrated Ballistic Information Network (NIBIN).
AFIS holds ingerprint images from people who were arrested or who have applied for a gun license, security clearance, trusted traveler card, or to drive a school
bus, and those from unsolved cases. We will discuss AFIS more in Chapter 8, but it is a database that is easily searched to locate matches. Similarly, CODIS holds
DNA pro iles of convicted felons and arrestees, as well as missing person pro iles and pro iles from cases in which the DNA depositor has not yet been identi ied.
Any new pro ile can be CODIS­searched for matches. CODIS will be described and discussed more fully in Chapter 11.
NIBIN is an image database for bullets and cartridge cases. NIBIN is the only automated interstate ballistic imaging network in operation in the United States, and
it is available in most of the major population centers. This program allows users to match images of bullets and cartridges recovered at a crime scene with those
loaded into the database from known weapons or other crimes. Software can match the bullets and cartridge cases if they were ired from the same weapon.
NIBIN will come up again in Chapter 9.
Most large labs run some form of LIMS. A fully operational LIMS tracks every item of evidence that passes through the lab, records every transfer of that evidence
from a vault to a bench and back, captures analytical results such as spectra, and contains all notes on examined items, in addition to the inal report that is sent
out. These systems are fairly large and expensive, server based, and require reliable backup. However, once implemented, they can save time and paperwork.
Speed and ef iciency can also be improved by the use of laboratory robots. Robots include any machine that can process multiple samples on its own without
human intervention, beyond loading and unloading. These machines are ideal when a method is repetitive and requires no judgment or interpretation. Robots are
generally robust, reliable, and accurate. Their associated software keeps detailed records of their actions. Typical tasks may involve transferring samples between
containers, dispensing chemicals for a reaction, moving reaction vessels or tubes along a line, and similar tasks. Most standard drug identi ication, forensic
toxicology, and DNA sequencing can be performed by robots, leaving human laboratory personnel free to perform other work.
Robotics and Ef iciency in Forensic Laboratories
A crime lab manager discusses the bene its and potential of the growth in robotics in
forensic science.
Less commonly, robots can be integrated with optical recognition software to perform time­consuming microscopic examinations like searching a vaginal swab
smear for sperm cells. Using luorescent or staining techniques on the slide, a microscope equipped with appropriate robotics can manipulate the slide in a
systematic manner while a detector searches for a signal associated with the sperm cell. The robot keeps track of the spatial coordinates where it found the signal,
making it easy for a human examiner to con irm the presence of cells in a short amount of time.
Forensic science also relies on analytical methods that come from other industries and areas. Consider the methods developed for product and materials failures,
acoustic analysis, and polygraph tests. Product and materials failure experts are usually engineers or production scientists, and product and materials failure cases
are almost always civil cases that involve monetary damages. For example, automobile manufacturers are regularly sued over alleged defects in a car’s design or
manufacture that are said to have caused accidents. Like criminal cases, these cases are built on reconstructions from available evidence. Sometimes, technology
developed for use in these cases can go on to impact forensic scientists in criminal investigations. For example, security inks used to thwart and track
counterfeiters began as a batch coding system for ink companies to prove that product failures encountered by their customers were related to old material and
were not poorly made batches.
Acoustic analysis, which involves the instrumental analysis of sound waves using a
wavelength spectrum, has its roots in military techniques for identifying submarines.
There are many devices for doing this type of work, and much of the available software
runs on standard personal computers. Using a voice spectrograph, also called a
voiceprint, graphs of sounds that show intensity and variation by frequency are used
to compare unknown voices or sounds to known ones, with the goal of being able to
reliably identify or exclude questioned voices or sounds. The expert community
disagrees over the accuracy of this method, but many courts have admitted this type of
evidence.
Finally, there is the polygraph, sometimes known as a lie detector, which has been
around for decades. With an occasional exception, polygraph tests have not been
admissible as evidence in courts, due to their unreliability as a truth or deception
detector. You may recall that the irst legal case involving the admissibility of
scienti ic/technical evidence into court, Frye v. United States, was a polygraph case
(Chapter 1.6). Polygraph rests on the idea that measurable physiological features,
mainly sweating, heart rate, and respiration rate, will be affected if a person is
knowingly untruthful. Although polygraph examiners can detect signs of
untruthfulness in many people, there is the occasional person who can “beat” the
polygraph. In addition, if individuals think they are being truthful even when they
aren’t, the polygraph may not detect the lie. Polygraph is widely used in
preemployment screening and for national security purposes. However, these
applications do not involve a polygraph record being admitted into evidence in courts.
The takeaway from this discussion should be that forensic scientists and crime scene
investigators need to stay current with other ields and disciplines even if they do not
seem directly related to criminal investigations. Technological advances in other ields
can have a signi icant impact on law enforcement.
SVproduction/iStock/Thinkstock
Acoustic analysis involves the comparison of a known sound against an
unknown sound.
Conclusion
This chapter explained crime scene investigation, which involves both crime scene processing and analysis. Crime scenes themselves should all be approached as
unique events with special needs, safety, and security concerns. Even though each case is unique, there are common steps that need to be followed when
processing a crime scene to avoid mishandling or illegally seizing evidence. Evidence that is not treated correctly will likely not be usable or admissible in
subsequent judicial proceedings.
The reconstruction aspect of crime scene analysis provides hypothetical theories about the evidence encountered. These theories help direct the investigation and
indicate what happened. Remember that as more evidence is evaluated and understood, the reconstruction and subsequent hypothesis are subject to change. The
methods and procedures used in crime scene analysis evolve over time. Computerized systems and databases can streamline routine analysis and improve
ef iciencies. Techniques imported from other industries can also positively impact crime scene investigations. The chapters that follow will discuss speci ic
categories of evidence and how these are collected, preserved, and analyzed in a laboratory.
Take the role of a new crime scene investigator and investigate and process a crime scene.
Key Ideas
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Although there are common steps that should be followed in crime scene investigations, every crime scene should be treated as a unique entity with
speci ic needs.
Crime scene processing involves recognizing, searching for, documenting, identifying, collecting, and preserving evidence and submitting it to the
laboratory.
Crime scene analysis is reconstruction and involves synthesizing all scene information, lab indings, medical examiner indings (in death cases), and
investigative information.
Reconstructions are theories based on the available evidence and information. They are always imperfect and not “proof” of what actually happened.
Each step involved in processing a crime scene is important, as is the order in which the steps are done. The methods employed in crime scene
investigation need to adhere to established quality procedures that meet industry standards.
Scene security and chain of custody are key to recovered evidence being admissible in court and useful to solving the case and prosecuting offenders.
All types of documentation are important. They detail different kinds of information and are required to fully record a crime scene.
Technologies and investigative aids can be important in training for and practicing forensic science.
Critical Thinking Questions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
There is a call regarding a burglary and an assault at a residence. You arrive at the home and notice it is in a rural area surrounded by woods. What steps
would you take upon arriving? How would you properly secure the crime scene?
You respond to a crime scene in a private residence and ind that a homicide has been committed. The immediate situation is handled, the medical
examiner comes and takes away the deceased’s body, and you and your team want to start a detailed search. An owner of the property is there, however,
and says he wants you to leave immediately. You need to search the house. What options do you legally have at this point?
At a bloody scene, you ind what look like trails of blood throughout a private residence. These look like important patterns for the case. What is the irst
thing you should do to preserve the evidence? How do you think the blood trails could help reconstruct the crime scene?
You are working a crime scene, and one of your colleagues who has just returned from a training class shares with you a way to collect your evidence
more ef iciently than what is described in the formal SOP. Should you use the new method or follow the SOP? Why?
In what type of case do you think voice spectrograph technology might be useful to investigators?
Key Terms
Click on each key term to see the de inition.
acoustic analysis
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
The instrumental analysis of sound waves using a wavelength spectrum.
Automated Fingerprint Identi ication System (AFIS)
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
A computer system that uses biometric identi ication derived from digital images to store, analyze, and compare ingerprints.
chain of custody
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
Using documentation to track where evidence has been and identify who has been in control of it at every point from the scene to the courtroom.
Combined DNA Indexing System (CODIS)
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
A set of large computer­based database iles containing DNA pro iles, enabling input, storage, and searching.
computer­aided drafting (CAD) system
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
Software used to produce threedimensional images (not to be confused with computer­aided dispatch systems used in law enforcement, which are also called
CAD systems).
corrective action
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
A report iled within a quality control system when an error has occurred and needs to be investigated to determine the proper response.
crime scene analysis
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
Using the information present at a crime scene, the investigative information developed, and the results of analyses of all the evidence from the crime scene to
form a reconstruction hypothesis.
crime scene processing
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
The process of searching for, recognizing, documenting, collecting, and submitting evidence from a crime scene.
criminal pro iling
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
The construction of a perpetrator’s personality pro ile and description based on psychology and research on past offenders.
cross­projection sketch
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
A two­dimensional sketch that represents three realworld dimensions by ” lattening out” a room’s walls and ceiling, much like cutting the edges of a rectangular
box so that its sides and top can be laid lat.
exigent circumstances
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
Circumstances (such as a person being in danger or a suspect trying to escape) that would lead a reasonable person to decide that it is necessary to enter a
protected space or take other immediate action without a warrant.
improvement
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
In the context of a quality control system, an improvement is a submitted suggested alteration to the SOPs intended to improve the process and/or output.
International Organization for Standardization(ISO)
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
A standard­setting body that includes representatives from various national standards organizations.
Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS)
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
An integrated software package for tracking items, test results, and chain of custody for evidence into, through, and out of a laboratory.
metamerism
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
A phenomenon whereby an object appears to be a different color under different lighting.
modus operandi (MO)
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
The habits (when committing an offense) of a repeat offender.
National Integrated Ballistic Information Network (NIBIN)
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
A large database of images of bullets and cartridge cases.
preventative action
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
A report iled within a quality control system when there is a situation that might lead to an error and needs to be investigated to determine the proper response.
rough (preliminary) sketch
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
A sketch made at the scene that is not drawn to scale and may contain extraneous items and show measurements.
scale
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
Any measuring device or indicator relating distance on a sketch to real­world distance.
smooth ( inished) sketch
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
A sketch made from a rough sketch that is drawn to scale, does not show any measurements, and usually omits extraneous items.
voice spectrograph
(http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/Gaensslen.5453.18.1/sections/cover/books/G
An instrument that converts a person’s voice pattern into an electronic graphic format. Voice spectrographs can be compared to see whether they represent the
same speaker.
Web Resources
Crime Scene Investigation A Guide for Law Enforcement:
https://www.nist.gov/sites/default/ iles/documents/forensics/Crime­Scene­Investigation.pdf
(https://www.nist.gov/sites/default/ iles/documents/forensics/Crime­Scene­Investigation.pdf)
Crime Scene Investigator Network: Resources for learning about crime scene investigation:
http://www.crime­scene­investigator.net/index.html (http://www.crime­scene­investigator.net/index.html)
FBI Cyber Crime website:
http://www. bi.gov/about­us/investigate/cyber (https://www. bi.gov/investigate/cyber)
Information on digital evidence investigations from the Scienti ic Working Group on Digital Evidence:
http://www.swgde.org (http://www.swgde.org/)
ISO quality manual:
https://asq.org/quality­resources/iso­9001­quality­manual (https://asq.org/quality­resources/iso­9001­quality­manual)
Landscape Study on 3D Crime Scene Scanning Devices (Forensic Technology Center of Excellence):
http://www.rieglusa.com/pdf/landscape­study­on­3d­crime­scene­scanning­devices.pdf (http://www.rieglusa.com/pdf/landscape­study­on­3d­crime­scene­
scanning­devices.pdf)
A Simpli ied Guide to Crime Scene Photography (National Forensic Science Technology Center):
http://www.forensicsciencesimpli ied.org/photo/Photography.pdf (http://www.forensicsciencesimpli ied.org/photo/Photography.pdf)
National Institute of Justice Technical Work Group guides:
https://www.nij.gov/topics/law­enforcement/investigations/crime­scene/guides/pages/twgs.aspx (https://www.nij.gov/topics/law­
enforcement/investigations/crime­scene/guides/pages/twgs.aspx)
National Institute of Justice’s guide to crime scene processing for law enforcement of icers:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdf iles1/nij/178280.pdf (https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdf iles1/nij/178280.pdf)
U.S. Department of Justice Internet resources on computer crime and intellectual property:
http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime (https://www.justice.gov/criminal­ccips)
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
This PDF is available at http://nap.edu/12589
SHARE
   
Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path
Forward (2009)
DETAILS
348 pages | 6 x 9 | HARDBACK
ISBN 978-0-309-13135-3 | DOI 10.17226/12589
CONTRIBUTORS
GET THIS BOOK
FIND RELATED TITLES
Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Science Community; Committee
on Science, Technology, and Law; Policy and Global Affairs; Committee on
Applied and Theoretical Statistics; Division on Engineering and Physical
Sciences; National Research Council
SUGGESTED CITATION
National Research Council 2009. Strengthening Forensic Science in the United
States: A Path Forward. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
https://doi.org/10.17226/12589.
Visit the National Academies Press at NAP.edu and login or register to get:
– Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of scientific reports
– 10% off the price of print titles
– Email or social media notifications of new titles related to your interests
– Special offers and discounts


Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the National Academies Press.
(Request Permission) Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences.
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward
STRENGTHENING
FORENSIC
SCIENCE
I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S
A P A T H F O R WA R D
Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Science Community
Committee on Science, Technology, and Law
Policy and Global Affairs
Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS   500 Fifth Street, N.W.   Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the
councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for
the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Contract No. 2006-DN-BX-0001 between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Institute of Justice. Any opinions,
findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of
the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies
that provided support for the project.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Strengthening forensic science in the United States : a path forward : summary
/ Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Science Community,
Committee on Science, Technology, and Law Policy and Global Affairs,
Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics, Division on Engineering and
Physical Sciences.
p. cm.
Includes index.
ISBN-13: 978-0-309-13135-3 (hardcover)
ISBN-10: 0-309-13135-9 (hardcover)
ISBN-13: 978-0-309-13131-5 (pbk.)
ISBN-10: 0-309-13131-6 (pbk.)
1. Forensic sciences—United States. 2. Criminal investigation—United States.
3. Evidence, Criminal—United States. I. National Research Council (U.S.).
Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Science Community. II.
National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Science, Technology, and Law
Policy and Global Affairs. III. National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on
Applied and Theoretical Statistics.
HV8073.S7347 2009
363.250973—dc22
2009011443
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press,
500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or
(202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.
edu.
Copyright 2009 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society
of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to
the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare.
Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific
and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy
of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter
of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members,
sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the
federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research,
and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of
Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in
the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its
congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own
initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V.
Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the
Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government.
Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the
Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy
of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the
government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr.
Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of
the National Research Council.
www.national-academies.org
Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward
Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward
Committee on Identifying the Needs of the
Forensic Science Community
HARRY T. EDWARDS, (Co-chair), Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit
CONSTANTINE GATSONIS, (Co-chair), Director, Center for Statistical
Sciences, Brown University
MARGARET A. BERGER, Suzanne J. and Norman Miles Professor of
Law, Brooklyn Law School
JOE S. CECIL, Project Director, Program on Scientific and Technical
Evidence, Federal Judicial Center
M. BONNER DENTON, Professor of Chemistry, University of Arizona
MARCELLA F. FIERRO, Medical Examiner of Virginia (ret.)
KAREN KAFADAR, Rudy Professor of Statistics and Physics, Indiana
University
PETE M. MARONE, Director, Virginia Department of Forensic Science
GEOFFREY S. MEARNS, Dean, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law,
Cleveland State University
RANDALL S. MURCH, Associate Director, Research Program
Development, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
CHANNING ROBERTSON, Ruth G. and William K. Bowes Professor,
Dean of Faculty and Academic Affairs, and Professor, Department of
Chemical Engineering, Stanford University
MARVIN E. SCHECHTER, Attorney
ROBERT SHALER, Director, Forensic Science Program, Professor,
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Department, Eberly College of
Science, The Pennsylvania State University
JAY A. SIEGEL, Professor, Forensic and Investigative Sciences Program,
Indian…