Forensic Investigations

An Introduction

Brent E. Turvey,Stan Crowder

• Publisher: Academic Press
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9780128007181
• Topic: Law
• Subtopic: Forensic Science
• Index: Law

The terms forensic investigator and forensic investigation are part of our cultural identity. They can be found in the news, on television, and in film. They are invoked, generally, to imply that highly trained personnel will be collecting some form of physical evidence with eventual scientific results that cannot be questioned or bargained with. In other words, they are invoked to imply the reliability, certainty, and authority of a scientific inquiry.

Using cases from the authors' extensive files, Forensic Investigations: An Introduction provides an overview of major subjects related to forensic inquiry and evidence examination. It will prepare Criminal Justice and Criminology students in forensic programs for more specialized courses and provide a valuable resource to newly employed forensic practitioners. Written by practicing and testifying forensic professionals from law enforcement, academia, mental health and the forensic sciences, this work offers a balanced scientific approach, based on the established literature, for broad appeal.

The purpose of this book is to help students and professionals rid themselves of the myths and misconceptions they have accumulated regarding forensic investigators and the subsequent forensic investigations they help to conduct. It will help the reader understand the role of the forensic investigator; the nature and variety of forensic investigations that take place in the justice system; and the mechanisms by which such investigations become worthy as evidence in court. Its goals are no loftier than that. However, they could not be more necessary to our understanding of what justice is, how it is most reliably achieved, and how it can be corrupted by those who are burdened with apathy and alternative motives.

• A primary text for instructors teaching forensic courses related to criminal and forensic investigation
• Written by forensic professionals, currently in practice and testifying in court
• Offers applied protocols for a broad range of forensic investigations
• Augments theoretical constructs with recent, and relevant case studies and forensic reports
• Based on the most recent scientific research, practice, and protocols related to forensic inquiry

Chapter 1

Forensic Investigations

A Primer

Brent E. Turvey¹, and Stan Crowder^{2 1}Forensic Criminology Institute, Sitka, Alaska, United States and Aguascalientes, Mexico ²Kennesaw State University, Georgia, GA, United States

Abstract

The forensic investigators understand what they need to do to identify, document, collect, and preserve forensic evidence of all kinds and to do so in a fashion that ensures its reliability and admissibility. They also understand they will be challenged, from all sides, which they embrace because this is how it should be. It also means they are capable of giving courtroom testimony to explain the nature of their evidence and why it should be trusted by anyone.

The forensic investigator serves as one component within the overall forensic investigation, ensuring evidence with the requisite integrity to allow forensic examinations. They are not necessarily scientists, and they are not necessarily experts qualified to make interpretations. However, they must have sufficient good character to give sworn reports, affidavits, and testimony. In this way, their work serves to establish or refute the elements of the crime, otherwise referred to as the corpus delicti.

The overall forensic investigation is vital to the mission of truth seeking, because the forensic evidence does not lie. Moreover gathering and examining forensic evidence is the only way to ensure that false information is exposed, and ultimately kept from the gates of justice. The forensic evidence, the forensic investigator, and the forensic examinations are all linked in the service of these objectives.

Keywords

Corpus delicti; Data integrity; Forensic; Forensic investigation; Forensic investigator; Forensic science; Forensic scientist/forensic examiner; Investigation; Investigator

Chapter Outline

Corpus Delicti

Forensic Necessity: Everybody Lies

The Forensic Investigator

Forensic

Forensic Science

Forensic Scientists/Forensic Examiners

Investigators/Investigations

Forensic Investigators

Data Integrity

Forensic Investigations: The Big Picture

Forensic Facts Versus Political Reality

Conclusions

Endnotes

References

The terms forensic investigator and forensic investigation are part of our cultural identity. They can be found in the news, on television, and in film. They are invoked, generally, to imply that highly trained personnel will be collecting some form of physical evidence with eventual scientific results that cannot be questioned or bargained with. In other words, they are invoked to imply the reliability, certainty, and authority of a scientific inquiry.

This can be a good thing, the authors would agree, when there are well-educated and properly trained professionals involved in the process. Primarily because everyone lies—some intentionally and some unintentionally, gathering and examining physical evidence is the only way to ensure that lies are exposed and kept from the gates of justice. As a mechanism for this effort, the forensic investigator is meant to be an objective truth seeker.

There are some problems, however. First, not everyone knows what these terms actually mean, so their use can be inappropriate or even misleading. This means there are those in the justice system using these terms to create a false impression about what has or will be done with the evidence.

Second, not everyone involved in the justice systems wants the facts or evidence on the record. As one gains experience with criminal investigation and the courts, one learns there are those who would prefer certain evidence not be documented, examined, or made public. Motives vary, including apathy, incompetence, politics, and fear of consequences (e.g., jail time, civil liability, or both). For those that might not appreciate the severity, or the reality of the problem, they need but reference the public facts relating to any one of the following national conditions:

• the existence of tens of thousands of unexamined rape kits in police custody (Reilly, 2015)¹;

• the frequency and timing with which law enforcement dash cams have been intentionally switched off, usually at key moments during police contact with civilians (Rubin, 2014);

• the frequency and timing with which officer body cams and audio have been intentionally disabled by those wearing them—to deliberately prevent a record from being created (Main & Dumpke, 2015);

• the intentional destruction of “decades of records” that detail law enforcement misconduct and disciplinary actions (Berg, 2015);

• the frequent refusal of law enforcement agencies to open criminal investigations into illegal steroid rings involving their own, and to mandate officer drug testing (see Crowder & Turvey, 2015).

• the continuous stream of cases involving police and prosecutorial misconduct related to lying about, hiding, or destroying evidence that should have been collected, preserved, or merely turned over to opposing counsel during criminal and civil proceedings (Kosinksi, 2015; Volokh, 2015).

For example, one of the authors (Turvey) testified as an expert during a sexual assault case in the State of Oregon². The case involved negligent failure to collect, document, and test an array of physical evidence—let alone to attend or process the alleged crime scene in any real fashion (among many other investigative and forensic shortcomings). The judge in that case ruled that the police had no duty to conduct a forensic investigation at that level, and that there was subsequently no need for testimony from anyone to explain (and make a public record of) these deficiencies before the jury. The judge further ruled that the police had no duty to conduct a thorough investigation in accordance with policies outlined by the State of Oregon's Attorney General's Sexual Assault Task Force; and no duty to consider or collect evidence that might tend to bear on the defendant's innocence. Once an accusation of rape was made, the police were within their duties to assume it was true and move forward without considering the physical evidence. The author, testifying before the court under oath, asked the judge whether he intended to explain this ruling to the jury. And then the author asked why the state employed forensic scientists and operated crime labs if law enforcement had no such duty—what was the point if they could simply ignore all of the physical evidence? The judge did not answer, as was his privilege.

Such examples are just the tip of the iceberg, but they demonstrate how common the problem of evidence suppression is, even among those who swear an oath to ensure its identification and investigation.

These concerns have been ever present motivators in the authors' casework and teachings. They have also served to drive the completion of this project. Our belief is simple: as more people understand what a forensic investigation is, and what it requires, there will be fewer capable of abusing or ignoring the evidence that it puts on the record. We understand that this will take some explaining. And those readers who do not yet fully understand the landscape of what we have experienced in the justice system are about to.

The purpose of this textbook is to help students and professionals rid themselves of the myths and misconceptions they have accumulated regarding forensic investigators, and the subsequent forensic investigations they help to conduct. This text will help the reader understand the role of the forensic investigator; the nature and variety of forensic investigations that take place in the justice system; and the mechanisms by which such investigations become worthy as evidence in court. The goals are no more lofty than that. However, they could not be more necessary to our understanding of what justice is, how it is most reliably achieved, and how it can be corrupted by those who are burdened with apathy and alternative motives.

Corpus Delicti

The investigation of reported crimes is the statutory and jurisdictional province of law enforcement agencies; the agency in charge depends on which laws have been reported broken and where³. Nobody else has the legal authority to respond, interview witnesses and suspects, collect evidence, or make arrests in these cases. Consequently responding law enforcement agencies have a duty of care—an obligation to be competent custodians of the criminal investigations they initiate and any evidence that supports or refutes allegations of criminal activity against accused suspects.

Investigators may not assume what happened based on the statements of one party; they may not assume that a crime has actually occurred until the facts have been established; and they must impartially place the cuffs on anyone they determine has broken the law when their investigative work is complete. As explained in Bryden and Lengnick (1997, pp. 1230–1231):

As with all crimes, the police decide whether a reported rape actually occurred, and attempt to determine who committed it. If they want the case to go forward, they “found” the complaint and transmit the file to the prosecutor's office… The police must investigate, a task that cannot easily be combined with offering the emotional support that the victim needs. The detective presumably wishes to avoid an injustice to a wrongly accused individual. In addition, for reasons of professional pride, he does his best to avoid looking naive by falling for a story that turns out to be false. Experienced investigators also know that m...