Problems of Crime Scene
Management
Legal Issues
•
•
•
•
•
Are we here legally?
Can we search?
Do we need a warrant?
Where can we search?
What can we take?
Michigan v. Tyler
• January 21st
– Emergency circumstances
– Criminal Investigation
– Scene is left unprotected from 4am until 8am
• February 16
– Re-entry by police
– More photos and evidence collected
Mincey v. Arizona
• Undercover officer shot and killed during raid
• Homicide detectives make a four day
warrantless search of the scene
• Suspect is interrogated in the hospital
• Asks for a lawyer but questioning continues
• “murder scene exception” created by AZ.
Supreme Ct. - unconstitutional
Mincey v. Arizona
• Seriousness of the offense does not itself
create exigent circumstances
• All people were accounted for before the
search began – no emergency existed
• Does the person have an expectation of
privacy in the location?
• Don’t assume this issue has been considered
• Ask about it before you begin your scene work
• Review the warrant before you begin
• Copy of warrant and list of items collected left
at scene
Warrantless Search
• Incident to arrest
– Chimel v. California
– “within his immediate control”
– Where he might gain a weapon or destructible
device
– Prevent the destruction of evidence
– Either officer safety or evidentiary concerns must
exist – but not both
Warrantless Search
• Consent
– Voluntary – not coerced
– Scope of search can be limited
– Written or verbal
– Recorded if possible
– Engage in conversation prior to obtaining consent
– Can the person give consent?
– Common areas
– Withdrawal of consent
Warrantless Search
• Consent
– Motel employee
– Parent consents to minor child
– Minor child consent to parents
– Spouse
– Co-tenant
Warrantless Search
• Plain view
– Police must be lawfully present in a place from
which the object can be plainly seen
– Before an object can be seized the police must
have probable cause that the object is subject to
seizure under the law without further movement,
manipulation or further intrusion on the persons
expectation of privacy
Warrantless Search
• Plain view categories of subjects that can be
seized:
– Property that constitutes evidence of the
commission of a crime
– Contraband, the fruits of a crime or things
otherwise criminally possessed
– Property designed or intended for use or which is
or has been used as the means of committing a
crime
Warrantless Search
• Plain View
– Police must have a lawful right of access to the
object
– Even if the officer can see the object from a place
they are lawfully present, the officer cannot seize
it unless there is a lawful right of access to the
object itself
– Taylor v. U.S. – police look through opening in
garage and see cases containing illegal liquor.
Cannot be seized because it is in a Constitutionally
protected area
– Does seeing it constitute probable cause?
Warrantless Search
• Automobile Exception
– Carroll Doctrine – LEO has probable cause that the
vehicle contains items subject to seizure
– Arizona v. Gant
• Search of auto incident to arrest only if:
• Arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger
compartment at the time arrested OR
• It is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence
of the offense of the arrest
– Inventory
Warrantless Search
• Stop and Frisk
– Terry v. Ohio
• Reasonableness standard established
• Outer clothing search for weapons
Warrantless Search
• Exigent Circumstances/Fresh pursuit
– Police can, without a warrant, seize evidence that
can be easily moved, destroyed, or otherwise
made to disappear before a warrant can be issued
– Emergency aid
– Threat of violence
– Hot Pursuit
– Risk of escape
– Risk of loss of evidence
• If there is any doubt….
•GET A WARRANT!!!!!
3 Significant Problems
• Duties of the first officer(s) to arrive at the
scene
• Exchange of information between
investigators
• Emphasis and recognition of physical evidence
Duties of first responders
• Shut down the area and establish control
– Use whatever is available
– Needs to be done ASAP
• Provide first aid
– Police officer with victim/suspect to hospital
– Statements taken
– Physical evidence collection – chain of custody
• Isolate witnesses/suspects
– Separated – take their ID
Duties of first responders
• Who is who
– Victim? Witness? Suspect?
– Who’s the best witness
• Make arrest when appropriate
– Don’t be premature in this
– Miranda?
• Prevent physical evidence from being
destroyed – accidentally or on purpose
Duties of first responders
• Info out to other units
– May not need everyone at the scene
– Descriptions, direction of travel, destination, items
they may have on them
• Listen carefully to what is being said
– To you and to others they may be talking to
– Watch carefully to see what is not being said
– Body language
• Do I need help with this?
– Know when you are in over your head
• This is the key to this job
Duties of first responders
• Your investigation
– Organization
– Thoroughness
– Caution
• Somebody is going to have all the time in the
world to critique your work
• Most likely to lose evidence early in the
investigation
Duties of first responders
• First responding officers MUST be trained in
recognizing evidence and scene preservation
• Them recognizing the evidence is CRITICAL to
the success of the investigation
L-O-L-O
•
•
•
•
L – Lock
O - On
L - Lock
O – Out
• Develop a theory about what happened
• Remain open to other possibilities
• Support your theory with facts – statements and
physical evidence
• Reconstruct the scene to the extent possible
Exchange of Information Between
Investigators
Statements
Physical
Evidence
Exchange of Information Between
Investigators
• The physical evidence is also talking to you but
it up to you to recognize it
• Detectives and Evidence Techs need to
constantly share information
– During the investigation – scene liaison
– As reports are received in follow up and trial prep
• We limit ourselves if we are not doing this
Emphasis and Recognition of Physical
Evidence
• Many police departments do not emphasize
physical evidence as much as they should
• This includes what is possible from lab analysis
• Crime scene personnel should be training first
responders (Police/Fire/EMS) /Detectives
/Prosecutors
Emphasis and Recognition of Physical
Evidence
• Most cases have problems in the early stages
of the scene investigation
• This field is in constant flux and those in it
need to stay current
Terminology
• FORENSIC SCIENCE—The application of
scientific or technical practices to the
recognition, collection, analysis, and
interpretation of evidence for criminal and
civil law or regulatory issues
Terminology
• Criminalistics
– The scientific discipline directed to the
recognition, identification, individualization and
evaluation of physical evidence by application of
the physical and natural sciences to law/science
matters
Terminology
• Evidence
– That which is legally submitted to a competent
tribunal as a means of ascertaining the truth of
any alleged matter of fact under investigation
before it
– Physical evidence and testimonial evidence
Making the connection
SCENE
SUSPECT
VICTIM
Identification Terminology
• Currently being revised for each forensic discipline (July 2016)
• Latent Print Identification ONLY
• 1. The examiner may state or imply that an identification is
the determination that two friction ridge prints originated
from the same source because there is sufficient quality
and quantity of corresponding information such that the
examiner would not expect to see that same arrangement
of features repeated in another source. While an
identification to the absolute exclusion of all others is not
supported by research, studies have shown that as more
reliable features are found in agreement, it becomes less
likely to find that same arrangement of features in a print
from another source.
Terminology
• Class characteristic evidence
– No matter how much the evidence is analyzed it
can only be placed within a category or group and
cannot be attributed to a single source
• This determination may depend upon the
quality of the evidence
Terminology
• Trace Evidence
– Microscopic evidence or minute amounts of a
particular item
– Hairs, fibers, botanical material, paint…
Terminology
• Transient Evidence
– Evidence which changes over time
Terminology
• Chain of Custody
– Documentation which proves the integrity of the
evidence. Who has had contact with it and what
changes have been made to it from the time it
was collected until it is presented in court.
Terminology
• Locard’s Exchange Principle
– Every contact leaves a trace
Terminology
• Crime Scene
– That location where a violation of law has
occurred
– Primary scene v. satellite scene
Goals of Physical Evidence
• R-I-P
• Reconstruction
• Identification
• Probable Cause
Reconstruction
• Recognizing and interpreting the physical
evidence in an attempt to sequence events
• Using the presence, location and position of
items at the scene to reconstruct events
Identification
• Identification of suspect(s) and linking them to the
scene
• ANY statement made by the suspect is critical
SCENE
SUSPECT
VICTIM
Probable Cause
• Using physical evidence to establish probable
cause for arrest and/or search warrant
• Scene information should be included in the
affidavit for the search warrant
To achieve R-I-P
• Recognize, collect, preserve and analyze the
physical evidence
• Document the scene and search thoroughly
• Consider ALL the evidence
– Exculpatory evidence must be included
– Lock on/Lock out (LOLO)
Expert Testimony
• The judge determines who will be allowed to
testify as an expert
• Judge will determine expertise by degrees,
certificates, certification, experience,
membership in organizations and previous expert
testimony
• Expert witness is allowed to give opinion
testimony
Expert Testimony
• Lay witness can only testify to what they have
first hand knowledge of – what they have seen
or heard
• The weight given to the expert’s testimony by
the judge or jury will depend upon the experts
background, demeanor and ability to explain
themselves
Expert Testimony
• The opinion given by the expert can be
ignored during deliberations
• Preparation
• Presentation
• Know the case inside and out
• Preview the courtroom
Frye Standard
• "Just when a scientific principle or discovery
crosses the line between the experimental and
demonstrable stages is difficult to define.
Somewhere in this twilight zone, the evidential
force of the principle must be recognized, and
while courts will go a long way in admitting
expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized
scientific principle or discovery, the thing from
which the deduction is made must be sufficiently
established to have gained general acceptance in
the particular field in which it belongs." 54 App.
D.C., at 47, 293 F., at 1014
• What is a Daubert Hearing?
• A term from a civil case entitled: Daubert v.
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 113 S. Ct. 2786
(1993)
• The opinion governs the admissibility of
scientific evidence in Federal court and many
state and local jurisdictions which have
adopted it.
•
• Daubert Opinion States that:
• • the Federal Rules of Evidence superseded “general
acceptance” tests for admissibility of novel scientific
evidence;
• • the rigid “general acceptance” test, which arose from
Frye v United States, 293 F2d. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), is at
odds with the liberal thrust of the Federal Rules of
Evidence.
• Daubert Opinion States that:
• the trial judge must still screen scientific evidence to
ensure it is relevant and reliable;
• “the focus, of course, must be solely on principles and
methodology, not on the conclusions they generate;”
• and, factors the court should consider include:
– testing and validation
– peer review
– rate of error
– “general acceptance”
Relevant
• "Relevant evidence" is defined as that which
has "any tendency to make the existence of
any fact that is of consequence to the
determination of the action more probable or
less probable than it would be without the
evidence." Rule 401.
Reliable
• The primary locus of this obligation is Rule
702, which clearly contemplates some degree
of regulation of the subjects and theories
about which an expert may testify. "If
scientific, technical, or other specialized
knowledge will assist the trier of fact to
understand the evidence or to determine a
fact in issue," an expert "may testify thereto."
(Emphasis added.) The subject of an expert's
testimony must be "scientific . . . knowledge.“
• Proposed testimony must be supported by
Has the theory/technique been
tested?
• Ordinarily, a key question to be answered in
determining whether a theory or technique is
scientific knowledge that will assist the trier of
fact will be whether it can be (and has been)
tested.
Has it been subjected to peer
review and publication?
• Another pertinent consideration is whether
the theory or technique has been subjected to
peer review and publication.
• But submission to the scrutiny of the scientific
community is a component of "good science,"
in part because it increases the likelihood that
substantive flaws in methodology will be
detected.
What is the error rate?
• Additionally, in the case of a particular
scientific technique, the court ordinarily
should consider the known or potential rate of
error and the existence and maintenance of
standards controlling the technique's
operation,
• This raises the question of whether it refers to
the error rate of the methodology or the
individual examiner
Is it “generally accepted” within
the scientific community?
• Finally, "general acceptance" can yet have a
bearing on the inquiry. A "reliability
assessment does not require, although [509
U.S. 579, 14] it does permit, explicit
identification of a relevant scientific
community and an express determination of a
particular degree of acceptance within that
community."
• Widespread acceptance can be an important
• To summarize: "General acceptance" is not a
necessary precondition to the admissibility of
scientific evidence under the Federal Rules of
Evidence, but the Rules of Evidence especially Rule 702 - do assign to the trial
judge the task of ensuring that an expert's
testimony both rests on a reliable foundation
and is relevant to the task at hand. Pertinent
evidence based on scientifically valid
principles will satisfy those demands.
Why is this important?
• …and so it begins:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Motion to Exclude
Motion to Suppress
Evidentiary Admissibility Hearing
Daubert Challenge
Frye Hearing
(Your State Law) Evidentiary Challenge
Crime Scene Reconstruction
• One method is Event Analysis
• Incident – based on events
• Events – based on segments
• Event segments – based on evidence
• Sequence the events to the extent possible –
based on recognition and interpretation of the
evidence
The Process
• Collect data
• Establish event segments
– Based on data/evidence/observations
• Establish which event segments are related to
each other
• Sequence the related segments
– Establish a flow for the event
• Consider ALL possible sequences
• Sequence the individual events
• Create a flow chart to lay out the sequence
Evidence Evaluation
• What is it?
• What function did it serve?
• What does it tell us about timing and
sequence?
• How is each piece related to one another?