CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 1

Transcription

1 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 1 Can Forensic Trace Evidence Provide Useful, Timely, and Accurate Intelligence? Jordan M. Chaplinsky University of South Florida

2 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 2 Abstract Forensic trace evidence is widely accepted by the scientific, judicial, and law enforcement communities as having incredible power for providing suspect identifications, linking trace evidence to its source, and securing guilty verdicts in court. It is also recognized that forensic trace evidence is mostly used reactively, primarily serving judicial purposes instead of security and policing purposes. A recent movement towards an intelligence-led policing (ILP) model has prompted many law enforcement practitioners and researchers to determine if forensic trace evidence can be used proactively, in a manner consistent with the principles of ILP. Case studies show the potential for forensic trace evidence to provide accurate and timely intelligence, a necessary component of ILP. But, widespread use of forensic intelligence has yet to be seen. Obstacles must be removed in order to facilitate the use of forensic trace evidence to produce intelligence. The court system must give law enforcement more authority to distribute forensic science resources for intelligence purposes, not just court purposes. Law enforcement must use a forward thinking approach to forensic trace evidence that demands forensic science resources are utilized in investigating both major and minor crimes. This approach will increase the number of traces collected, which will increase the probability of matching offenders or linking crimes through forensic databasing.

3 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 3 On the night of March 1, 1932, a kidnapper climbed into the second story nursery of the home of aviator and American hero Charles Lindbergh and abducted his 20-month old son. The only clues found at the crime scene were a ransom note demanding $50,000, a chisel, and a homemade wooden ladder. Two months after the kidnapping, the Lindbergh baby was found dead. An intense nationwide manhunt followed. Investigators attempted to trace the ransom money that had been paid to the kidnapper, but failed to locate a single matching serial number. After unsuccessfully tracing the ransom money, investigators began looking into the forensic evidence collected at the crime scene, specifically the homemade ladder. Arthur Koehler, a wood technologist, was asked by the New Jersey State Police to examine the ladder and determine if it might provide clues about the maker. Koehler spent four days studying and dissecting the ladder into its different parts. He numerically labeled each piece and noted every mark he discovered. Each mark was photographed, measured, and studied under a microscope to determine any peculiar consistencies or irregularities that could provide Koehler with information about the wood used to construct the ladder. Koehler sought to determine how the ladder was made, what type of wood was used, and where the wood was purchased. After four days in the lab, Koehler made the following observations: 1. Four different types of wood were used to construct the ladder. The North Carolina pine used in the ladder was usually never sold outside of the Atlantic States, suggesting to Koehler that the kidnapper lived near the same region where the abduction took place 2. Wood from two ladder rails was planed in a mill that used a defective cutter. 3. The defective cutter enabled Koehler to determine the speed at which the lumber was fed through the planer. He determined that the plane cutter had eight knives because a knife defect caused an identical impression to occur at an exact distance from one to the

4 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 4 next. Using the distance from one defect to the next, Koehler calculated the speed of the plane to be that of a belt driven plane. Koehler sent letters to lumber mills that carried North Carolina pine and requested information about the type of planer they used. Only 23 lumber mills in the Atlantic area matched Koehler s specifications of a belt driven plane with eight knives. Samples from the 23 mills were collected and Koehler found an exact match between the wood from the ladder rails and the wood sample collected from a lumber yard located in Bronx, New York. Knowing the wood was purchased in the Bronx; investigators shifted their resources and targeted this area. Over 250,000 pamphlets were distributed to businesses in New York City. These pamphlets contained the serial numbers of the ransom money that was given to the abductor and the investigators were hopeful that the abductor could be caught passing the money. Their targeted efforts proved successful. Bruno Hauptmann, a German woodworker living in the Bronx, was caught passing the ransom money to a Gas station nearly two years after the kidnapping. Hauptmann was found guilty and executed just two years later (Saferstein, 2006). Arthur Koehler s scientific work proved vital to the capture and subsequent conviction of Bruno Hauptmann. His work serves as an early example of scientific analysis used not only as post-arrest support for a criminal trial, but it also serves as an example of scientific analysis used to steer the direction of an investigation. Working off of Koehler s scientific findings, the investigation was led out of New Jersey and directed out of the state to the Bronx. Without Koehler the investigation was widely dispersed throughout the entire Atlantic region; with Koehler the investigators were able to concentrate their resources to a specific location. Koehler used scientific processes to provide information, then he analyzed this information to yield a location to target, finally the investigators heavily policed this location and caught the kidnapper. Over 70 years later, the criminal justice system finally developed a name for this process:

5 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 5 Intelligence-led policing. J. H. Ratcliffe (2008) defines intelligence-led policing as A business model and managerial philosophy where data analysis and crime intelligence are pivotal to an objective, decision-making framework that facilitates crime and problem reduction, disruption and prevention through both strategic management and effective enforcement strategies that target prolific and serious offenders (Ratcliffe, 2008, p. 89). Problem Identification The criminal justice system views intelligence as the amalgamation of information and analysis. In the above example, Koehler applied forensic science to produce information about the trace evidence collected at the crime scene. Koehler analyzed this information and the result was intelligence. This particular type of intelligence is what many now call forensic intelligence. Forensic intelligence is any intelligence produced as a result of analyzing trace evidence. Trace evidence is based on 19th century scientist Edmond Locard s (1920) exchange principle which states, Whenever two or more objects come in contact with one another, there is an exchange of materials between them (Locard, 1920). For example, a tool mark is a trace left behind when a screwdriver is used to pry open a window. Forensic trace evidence has been used in the courts for decades. However, forensic trace evidence used to provide intelligence for security and policing purposes is nonexistent in most jurisdictions. It is essential to determine if forensic trace evidence can serve as an intelligence tool. Also, it must be ascertained whether the intelligence provided by forensic trace evidence is accurate, timely, and useful.

6 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 6 Renowned chemist, Dr. Paul Kirk, once famously said, Wherever he steps, whatever he touches, whatever he leaves even unconsciously, will serve as silent witness against him. Not only his fingerprints or his footprints, but his hair, the fibers from his clothing, the glass he breaks, the tool mark he leaves, the paint he scratches, the blood or semen he deposits or collects. All of these and more bear mute witness against him. This is evidence that does not forget (Chisum & Turvey, 2000). The last sentence of this quote is significant because it differentiates forensic trace evidence from other types of evidence such as witness testimony or eyewitness identification of the perpetrator. The difference between trace evidence and witness testimony is that forensic trace evidence can be qualitatively and quantitatively measured by scientific process. Witness testimony is based on a human recollection of events, the quality of which cannot be measured, nor can a numerical value account for the degree of correctness. Contrarily, trace evidence can be measured and compared with other known samples, samples that can be precisely measured and assigned a value that gives scientists the ability to find matching samples, and the margin or error when the match is found. Problem Identification A non-profit organization called The Innocence Project has spent the last 20 years proving that erroneous witness testimony and weak circumstantial evidence has wrongfully imprisoned 268 people in the United States alone. Seventeen of the wrongfully imprisoned people served time on death row. The project has secured the exoneration of all 268 people through DNA testing. Furthermore, in 117 of these exonerated cases, the true perpetrators were eventually identified. The leading cause of these wrongful convictions was eyewitness misidentification testimony.

7 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 7 Nearly 75% of these wrongful convictions was due to eyewitness misidentification ( The Innocence Project, 2011). Through their relentless efforts, the Innocence Project has proved the importance of scientific evidence over witness testimony. In each of these cases, the Innocence Project was able to compare a DNA sample from the incarcerated person to trace DNA found on evidence collected from the original crime scene and prove that no match existed. The contribution of DNA evidence to the criminal justice system is invaluable. For 17 people, DNA trace evidence saved them from execution. It can only be imagined how many more people have been wrongfully imprisoned due to a lack of scientific evidentiary support, and how many perpetrators are never captured or sentenced because forensic trace evidence was never explored. The work performed by the Innocence Project reveals the power of forensic trace evidence to convict or to exonerate in circumstances where reliance on human testimony proved futile. As such a powerful tool, forensic trace evidence should be explored in all areas of the criminal justice system to provide useful information, not just in a criminal trial. If 75% of wrongful conviction exonerations were due to eyewitness misidentification, then how many hours are spent interrogating the wrong suspects, and how many misguided leads are followed because of a faulty human account? Merging forensic trace evidence with the principles of Intelligence-led policing could help facilitate the process of using forensic intelligence for policing and security purposes. Link to ILP A key component of intelligence-led policing is data analysis and crime intelligence used in a framework that embraces crime reduction, disruption, and prevention. Therefore, forensic trace evidence can serve as the data to be analyzed in an intelligence-led policing framework. Data

8 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 8 can be collected about various types of forensic traces and the sources of these traces. For example, bullets fired from the same gun can be matched by unique impressions, called striations, left by the barrel or firing pin when the bullet is fired through the gun. Shoe marks discovered at a burglary can be scanned into a forensic database and matched to identical shoe marks contained in a forensic database. Additional sources of trace evidence commonly discovered at crime scenes are automobile paint, fingerprints, tool marks, clothing fibers, and blood. All of these sources serve as unique clues about the perpetrator. Most importantly, when these traces are inputted into a forensic database, whether international or local, they can provide investigators with information about any identical matches that are found. Every database match of trace evidence gives investigators more data. When multiple trace evidence matches are found, the matches can be arranged by the time the crime occurred or where the evidence from the crime was found. Geographical and temporal information based upon identical trace evidence sources can be analyzed to yield important intelligence such as the physical crime locations and the time the crimes occurred. A series of crimes that is linked by identical trace evidence is called crime linkage. Crime linkage is the intelligence product most beneficial to investigators when trace evidence data is analyzed. Once the crime linkage is analyzed, management can begin the decision-making process regarding the tactical deployment of resources in attempt to disrupt or prevent further crimes from occurring. Literature Review Scholarly research has produced a collection of examples where forensic trace evidence was successfully merged with principles of intelligence-led policing. A study conducted by Margot and Ribaux (2003) discovered that due to a lack of resources, only a minority of vehicle theft cases were being searched for fingerprints. They suggested that because vehicle thefts are performed at such a high-volume by individuals or groups, a managerial strategy that deploys

9 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 9 forensic science resources to all occurrences of vehicle-thefts will provide more links, thus providing managers with more locations to target. Their research focused on a Swiss police department using intelligence-led policing principles by allocating more resources to the collection of fingerprints from high-volume crimes like vehicle thefts. The police department anticipated an increase in perpetrator identifications if they more frequently deployed forensic science resources. In one particular case, the Swiss police matched a fingerprint in their national database, but the offender identity was unknown. By thinking outside of the box, they submitted the fingerprint to foreign cities outside of Switzerland, which resulted in the identification of the offender (Margot & Ribaux, 2003). In another study by Margot & Ribaux (2003), the police identified a series of burglaries by forensic links. DNA evidence, as well as shoe mark comparisons, confirmed that a series of 20 burglaries over a three week period had been committed by the same offender. The investigators created a geographic profile with the corresponding time of all 20 offenses. From this data the investigators performed an analysis. They inferred that the movement of the geographic location of offenses over time suggested that the offender was traveling by train and sleeping in hotels. Their inferences were validated after arresting the offender in the precise region they targeted. The police were able to disrupt the serial offender from committing more burglaries. A study by Baylon et al. (2010) argued that the collation of DNA has immense potential for informing decision makers from a strategic to an operational level on serial offending patterns. Knowledge on criminal careers, the mobility of offenders, and an understanding of the current crime series are various forms of intelligence that DNA can bring (Baylon et al., 2010, p. 15). The Swiss law enforcement developed a forward-think proactive strategy that necessitated the collection of forensic evidence at high-volume crime scenes. After obtaining forensic data, the information was analyzed, which resulted in a usable intelligence

10 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 10 product. With this intelligence, a tactical strategy was implemented that targeted a specific location. The unknown offender was caught, preventing future vehicle-thefts from being committed. According to a National Institute of Justice study (n.d.), processing DNA obtained from minor offenses, like burglary and auto-theft, can help solve other more serious offenses like sexual assault and murder ( National Institute of Justice, n.d.). A Florida State study found 52% of murder and sexual assault database entries matched with individuals who had prior burglary convictions. Therefore, the deployment of forensic evidence resources proves valuable not only in solving minor crimes; it also serves as a proactive approach of collecting forensic data on past and future offenders of serious or violent crimes. The Florida State study showed that over half of murder and sexual assault database submissions matched with individuals with prior burglary convictions. Imagine how many more murder entries can be matched to unsolved burglaries. Many wonder how many more matches could be made if forensic evidence was collected at every crime scene. Burrows and Tarling (2004) created the Pathfinder Project, a year long study which answers the above question. The study sought to determine effectiveness of increased forensic examination at crime scenes to produce more database identifications. Furthermore, the research compared high quality evidence like fingerprints and SGMPlus DNA, which is the required standard for database entry, with lower quality forensic evidence such as Low Copy Number DNA, shoe marks, and tool marks. This additional research showed the value, or lack of, in processing crime scenes for even the most degraded LCN DNA evidence, and evidence that is inherently difficult to measure and store electronically, such as shoe marks and tool marks. The project spanned the course of one year in seven police divisions within the United Kingdom. The

11 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 11 researchers recorded the following information: 1. Number of crime scenes visited by law enforcement 2. Number of scenes where forensic material was recovered 3. Type of material recovered 4. Material yielding a usable profile 5. Material checked against national database samples 6. Material providing a match or identification During analysis, forensic material was divided into two groups: conventional or enhanced. Fingerprints and SGMPlus DNA were labeled as conventional forensic activity. LCN DNA, shoe marks, and tool marks were labeled as enhanced forensic activity. The results of the Pathfinder Project showed that fingerprints (28%) were most likely to be recovered from a crime scene, and tool marks (2%) were the least likely to be recovered. LCN DNA was collected at 12% of crime scenes, while SGMPlus DNA, the standard requirement, was only recovered at 6% of crime scenes. However, SGMPlus DNA led to a database identification or match in 44% of samples recovered, and the degraded LCN DNA only produced a 12% identification when submitted to databases. Additionally, less than a fifth of recovered LCN DNA samples were even able to yield a profile, the information necessary for identification. Overall, out of 612,000 crime scenes that received forensic support, only 11.6% resulted in perpetrator identifications through forensic evidence collection. This number may appear insignificant, but additional information pertaining to the research shows that the numbers are much more substantial. For example, of the evidence obtained, 17% eventually led to the detection (identification and conviction of the suspect) of other cases. Additional analysis showed that on average a burglary or auto crime offense detected by means of forensic identification typically

12 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 12 yields 1 additional detection for every 2 offenses detected (Burrows & Tarling, 2004, p. 221). Therefore, an obvious approach to detect more crimes is to visit more crime scenes in search of forensic evidence ( Her Majesty s Inspectorate of Constabulary, 2000). Discussion & Analysis The examples and research previously mentioned clearly convey role of forensic evidence within the framework of intelligence-led policing. However, the current forensic science contribution to the intelligence-led policing model is not always as visible. Another study by Baylon et al (2010) provided three reasons why the widespread use of forensic evidence as a tool for intelligence-led policing has yet to materialize (Baylon et al., 2010). First, the general conception of forensic science is that it is primarily for use in court. There is an apparent conceptual gap between the current forensic science practices, and what is demanded by the intelligence-led policing model. Finding the balance of forensic science resources allocated to security and justice is not a simple task (Brodeur & Shearing, 2005, p ). The balancing act has become even harder as many in the forensic science community call for the sole focus on serving the courts. Another factor that stymies the culmination of forensic trace evidence and intelligence-led policing is the overall lack of forensic intelligence awareness. Crime analysts and senior officers are among those in the policing community who completely overlook forensic science in many cases. Forensic evidence is progressively recognized as a powerful tool in providing intelligence, yet many decision makers overlook its potential (Ribaux, Walsh, Margot, 2006). This same lack of intelligence awareness exists in the forensic community as well. There are many instances where poor quality traces are not tested or stored within databases because the criminal-law perspective dictates that only high quality evidence, which would be admissible in court, should be tested and stored.

13 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 13 Conclusion Forensic trace evidence is increasingly recognized for its ability to provide intelligence. Forensic intelligence was essential in the two Swiss examples mentioned earlier. In each case, the intelligence that was derived from forensic evidence allowed managers to allocate resources in order to disrupt future crime from occurring. The Pathfinder Project demonstrated how a department wide intelligence-led approach to the collection of forensic evidence at all crime scenes can lead to more database identifications, which may lead to more arrests. While the collection of trace evidence at a crime scene is seemingly reactive, the expanded trace evidence collection serves a more proactive purpose. This broad deployment of forensic resources works within a forward thinking framework, which assumes that collecting forensic evidence for minor crimes and suspect-less crimes will provide more data for future use, even if the evidence provides no immediate case support. Scientists have long since been able to produce accurate testing of forensic trace evidence. The question of whether forensic intelligence is accurate depends heavily on the crime analyst who interprets, analyzes, and collates the data to yield the intelligence. In contrast, the question of whether forensic intelligence is timely depends heavily on the ability of the scientist to perform tests at a fast pace in order to quickly disseminate the results to the investigators or crime analysts. While certain forensic tests can be performed by a simple microscope comparison, other tests, even when automated, take a long time to complete. Additionally, many crime laboratories are backlogged with evidence samples for criminal trials that have priority over poor quality evidence samples from a suspect-less minor crime. There are many barriers currently obstructing the widespread use of forensic intelligence. Utilizing forensic trace evidence in order to produce intelligence would require a major paradigm shift on the part of the court system, scientists, and decision-making officers. The judicial system

14 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 14 would have to apportion forensic science services so that law enforcement could have an equal access to forensic science services for intelligence support. Next, Scientists would have to view trace evidence in a context where degraded evidence with the potential to intelligence is as equally important as high-quality evidence to be used in court. Finally, decision-making officers and managers must employ a forensic evidence collection strategy that requires trace evidence to be collected at all crime scenes. Furthermore, all forensic trace evidence discovered must be submitted for testing regardless of the evidence quality. Removal of these three obstacles will facilitate the use of forensic intelligence in a wider capacity than currently being used. References Burrows, J., & Tarling, R.. (2004). Measuring the impact of forensic science. Science and Justice, 44(4), Brodeur, J.P. & Shearing, C.D. (2005). Configuring security and justice. European Journal of Criminology, 2(4), Chisum, W.J., & Turvey, B.. (2000) Evidence dynamics: Locard s exchange principle & crime reconstruction. Journal of Behavioral Profiling, 1(1). Retrieved from

15 CAN FORENSIC TRACE EVIDENCE PROVIDE USEFUL, TIMELY, AND ACCURATE INTELLIGENCE? 15 Girad, A., Ribaux, O., Walsh, S.J., Margot, P., & Mizrahi, S.. (2003). Forensic intelligence and crime analysis. Law, Probability and Risk, 2(1), Retrieved from Her Majesty s Inspectorate of Constabulary. (2000). Under the microscope: thematic inspection report on scientific and technical support. London, UK: Home Office Locard, E.. (1920). L enquete criminelle et les methodes scientifiques, Paris, France Margot, P., & Ribaux, O.. (2003). Case-based reasoning in criminal intelligence using forensic case data. Science & Justice, 43(3), 2-9. Ribaux, O., Walsh, J., Margot, P.. (2006). The contribution of forensic science to crime analysis and investigation: forensic intelligence. Forensic Science International, 156, Saferstein, R. (2006). Criminalistics: an introduction to forensic science, (9), Upper Saddle River, NJ. Pearson Prentice Hall. "The Innocence Project - Facts on Post-Conviction DNA Exonerations." The Innocence Project. Web. 11 Apr Retrieved from U.S. Department of Justice, NIJ. (n.d.). DNA in minor crimes yields many benefits in public safety, (NIJ publication No ). Washington, D.C.: Office of Justice Programs. Retrieved from Justice, 44.4(217-22).