Follow the Evidence

Far too often people fail to look deeply enough at what evidence may tell them. They may see fingerprints as telling them who touched something, or firearms to tell them if a firearm shot the projectile recovered. But there is much more that evidence may tell, if one asks the criminalist for more than basic answers.

Consider the latent fingerprint. Obviously, identifying its source, or more often in review work, verifying the original examiner's work, is important. But a latent may tell much more. With a properly documented latent fingerprint, it may be analyzed to determine the action that led to its deposition...was it the result of a hand facing in or out of a window, for example. Was it one act, or a hesitating act, or involve slippage, or some other factor. Perhaps such information may have no value to a case, but other times, it way be very important to determining the role of the party responsible for it. At the entry to a burglary, a latent which can be determined to have been made from the inside of the point of entry, especially if it is pointing out, when the originator has legitimate access to the location, may argue against guilt. In one of the most egregious incidents of an investigator planting evidence, the examiner noted that the latent was too clean, unnaturally perfect - and as a result found that the "latent" had actually been manufactured by an investigator from a fingerprint card to frame the "suspect."

In firearms cases, the evidence bullet is often too badly damaged to effect an identification with a firearm. However, it may still have sufficient detail to permit elimination. Or, it may have sufficient detail top permit its use as a reference to general rifling characteristic files; here, the class characteristics of a huge variety of models of firearms are stored. By careful measurement the examiner can establish number of lands and grooves, direction of twist, and width of lands and grooves. This information may then be researched against a general rifling characteristic file, and a list of firearms that may be the same model generated. This is especially valuable if a suspect firearm is known, as the lack of appearance on the list may well speak to elimination, even though the presence of the firearm on the list does not speak to identification, as it will just be one of thousands that share these same class characteristics.

Careful technical review may well have mitigating value. For example, possession of one blasting cap or an entire case of high explosives is the same under the law. However, an explanation of the difference in destructiveness of them will educate the court to the wide dissimilarities of the two. 

A review of the actual crime scene may reflect otherwise missed aspects of an incident. In a shooting, is the damage consistent with the firearm and trajectory? The criminalist may attempt to reconstruct or even recreate the scene, to determine if the results using the same elements as were purportedly used in an incident can be replicated. 

For counsel, to learn that the evidence argues against the story upon which the theory of the case is powerful evidence of, if not lack of guilt, that at least there are serious questions as to the basis of the accusation. Conversely, if the criminalist's work does sustain the existing case, it provides counsel with the knowledge that the opposing case is built on a strong foundation, and permit counsel to pursue a different strategy.

It is neither counsel nor an investigator's role to know what to ask for. Instead,  they should make a more open ended request of their forensic specialist. If the question is to verify the work of previous criminalistic analysis, then that is what the consultant is being contracted to deliver. Rather, ask the consultant to review for the purpose of verification previous analyses, but also ask the consultant to review the evidence itself, and to determine what other information it may reveal of value. It will add some time to the work of the criminalist, and perhaps some other expense...but it may also provide important information for inclusion in the case preparation.

Why?

Why provide private forensic services? Isn't it akin to being a paid whore? What need is there for it?

Some background. I came from the police side of forensic science services. A bit different from the crime lab side, as I came with a gun and arrest powers. But my initial training in the field was that of criminalistic ethics. As a fingerprint specialist, as a crime scene investigator, I was taught my loyalty was to the evidence. Find the evidence, and permit it to speak factually. My fellow practitioners of the age all shared that ethic. Many had suffered for  not wavering to support a case...transfers, lack of promotion, looked down upon by investigators and administrators. But they could always hold their heads high, knowing they were doing the right thing, and being shown right over time for it.

Criminalistics is thing police work. Therein lies its strong advantage; a physical examination of the evidence should produce similar results. Some types of evidence are more open to interpretation than others, and this may lead to differences of opinion, but this is the rarer side of the field. DNA is DNA, chemical analysis is chemical analysis, a fingerprint is a fingerprint, a toolmark is a toolmark. Quality may vary, and some results may require a more experienced or skilled practitioner, but given equals, the same results should be reached.

Facts of life. No one is perfect. We all make mistakes, some minor, some glaring. Some people are smarter, more talented, more imaginative, more energetic than others. Not everyone is pure of heart and mind. There have been a variety of folks passing off intentionally skewed results to ensure a conviction, warranted or not. And then there is the gradual (or perhaps not so gradual) loss of ethical and moral standards of the past 30 years.

The American criminal justice system is especially unique in its provisions for the accused to review and challenge testimony. It is a protection we enjoy more than any other citizenry on the Earth. The Founding fathers recognized that people make mistakes, and that charlatans  can slip into the system.

The private examiner is an important safeguard. Whenever physical evidence can be examined impartially, it provides an important check for our system. It is quality control - verifying quality work as much as rooting out substandard or fallacious work. Indeed, the independent examiner helps to increase the credibility of the law enforcement or crime lab specialist, and ultimately increases their prestige among the entire legal community.

Yes, a good private examiner may be responsible for an accused having charges dropped or being acquitted. Why? Because there was something that was not well done about the original work. If not incompetence or fraud, it should be a learning point for those involved.

But one more point; some day the person on trial may not be some career criminal. It may be any one of us, and if not a case of guilt, could be due to poor interpretation or evil intent on the part of someone in the system.  When this happens, any one of us wants to know there is a check and balance there, able to ensure that the evidence is accurate and correctly interpreted.