Free Paper Example on Protocol of Evidence Collection

Introduction

Crime scene investigation is essential in establishing the circumstances that preceded a crime. It also aids in the identification of the people responsible for a particular crime. According to Ribaux et al. (2006), investigating a crime scene entails documenting the crime conditions and recognizing the physical evidence. In most of cases, a law enforcer in charge of protecting and searching a crime scene has a substantial role to play in determining whether physical evidence can solve and prosecute a violent criminal situation. Investigators take photographs of a crime scene, and physical measurements, identify and collect forensic evidence, and gather a chain of evidence for use in prosecuting the suspects (Ribaux et al., 2006). The evidence gathered includes fingerprints, blood, and other bodily fluids, hairs, fibers, and fire debris, to mention a few. Therefore, this analysis identifies exceptions to search of evidence without a warrant, packaging trace evidence, techniques of handling traced proof, and special considerations of investigations when a motor vehicle and aircraft are present.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Exceptions to Seizure of Evidence without a Warrant

The Fourth Amendment provides guidelines on searches and arrest warrants. The constitutions section requires that all searches and arrests be conducted only in situations where there is a search or arrest warrant, often issued by a neutral judge (Ballou, 2006). However, there are some exceptions to these guidelines, meaning that officers search an individual or surroundings without a search warrant only in defined circumstances. First, police do not need the contract to conduct a guarantee when working an authorized arrest (Ballou, 2006). In such situations, law enforcement can search or inspect an individual, the surroundings, and vicinities. The warrantless search enhances the safety of an officer. Besides, it allows for the securing of evidence that could be destroyed. A law enforcer is entitled to search and seize any contraband item found on a person or surroundings during an arrest.

Secondly, warrantless search and seizure are permitted when an individual grants consent. Ballou (2006) asserted that support is essential and practical when applied to situations. Permission must be voluntary and free for it to be valid. However, the prosecution should prove that the defendant freely agreed and consented to the search. Thirdly, a warrantless search is permissible when evidence of criminal activity is in plain view (Ribaux et al., 2006). Law enforcers do not need a warrant to obtain evidence that can be viewed at a crime scene only if they are at the location legitimately. For this claim to be significant, three requirements should be met. They include the fact that police should be in the vicinity legally. They must observe an item of criminality in plain view. A connection ought to exist between contraband and criminal conduct (Ribaux et al., 2006). Lastly, the courts created an exception that enforcers can search vehicles without a warrant if an officer has plausible cause to believe that a car has illegal commodities. Therefore, these four exceptions allow police officers to obtain evidence or search a person without a warrant.

Packaging Trace Evidence Using a Pharmacist's or Druggist's Fold

After gathering the evidence found at a crime scene, the evidence is protected. Investigators package the pieces of evidence separately to prevent damage and contamination. In particular, dry trace evidence is placed in a druggist's fold, small folded papers. Others may prefer to use canisters, plastic bottles, and bags. They are sealed and transported to a laboratory for forensic analysis. Placement of the dry trace evidence in a pharmacist's fold helps in preventing contamination. The primary objective of gathering and packaging evidence in a druggist's fold is to avoid changes in the evidence from when the investigators secure it from a crime scene and when a crime laboratory receives it.

For physical substantiations to be permissible in court, the prosecution must prove a chain of custody. Ballou (2006) argued that every individual who handled the proofs from the collection stage to the moment it appeared in court should indicate it. The court should know the individual who had custody of the evidence at each stage. Storing the dry pieces of evidence in a druggist's fold is a precaution to prevent cross-contamination.

How Investigators Handle Trace Evidence Stuck on an Object at the Crime Scene

At a point of investigation, fibers, hairs, and other tiny fragments can help in explaining what happened. Such pieces of evidence are referred to as trace evidence (Rossy & Ribaux, 2014). Notably, trace evidence is transferrable when two objects touch each other and when a movement disburses small particles. Paint is an example of trace evidence that can be transferred from one place to another and can be employed to reconstruct an event (Rossy & Ribaux, 2014). Careful handling and collecting materials from a crime scene can lead to collecting vast information of where a sample originated from (Rossy & Ribaux, 2014). Trace evidence is of importance in a crime scene investigation.

Fibers are an example of trace evidence that can cling to other hair and fibers. When collecting the evidence, an investigator should consider brushing off the yarn. However, care is a requirement since samples with fibers are prone to cross-contamination. The typical collection methods of fibers and hairs are tweezers, vacuuming an area, and sorting materials in the laboratory. Other techniques of gathering trace evidence stuck on an object are through tape lifting. However, collecting some evidence using adhesive tapes is unsuitable due to the destruction that might result from the adhesives. Tape lifting is standard for the collection of glass pieces stuck in a crime scene.

Further, paint collection involves documenting a scene and peeling off the paint. An investigator should excise small amounts of color from a source and ensure that one gathers all layers. The samples aid investigators in testing and assessing the movement at the time of a crime. In a situation where removing and extracting a stuck object from a surface could destroy the evidence gathered, investigators can opt to take photographs of the crime scene. In such a case, a crime scene remains under the law enforcers' custody until the completion of an investigation to avoid instances of tampering.

After investigators locate a piece of trace evidence, various factors should be considered. They include the regularity of material since ubiquitous features may not be useful. According to Rossy and Ribaux (2014), only trace evidence unique to an investigation is essential. However, the lack of trace evidence in a crime scene denotes extensive cleanup by a crime perpetrator. The methods employed to gather trace evidence if dependent on the nature of the evidence. As seen, tweezers and handpicking are usable if the evidence is fiber or hair. In another instance, an investigator could shake an item over a container or paper. However, it does not allow for the documentation of the exact location of evidence. Some products could be stuck such that shaking them off may not dislodge them. In that case, brushing becomes necessary during the data collection process.

Special Considerations a Crime Investigator Can Take

In a criminal investigation, a criminal investigator or technician assesses a vehicle or vessel. The primary function of the crime scene investigator is to document and collect physical evidence. The evidence present is dependent on the criminal act committed. A burglary may collect fingerprints to identify a person who gained entry to a vehicle. The first step of the investigation includes identifying the car and its contents. The next step is thoroughly documenting the vessel as seen, which could be done by a series of photographs. The photos should start with the exterior and should depict any forms of damage and accessories. Technicians should photograph the interior beginning with the front driver's area, trunk, rear seat, glove box, ignition area, and dashboard. The next step will be conducting an organized search, which entails finding items of evidence not observed during the first examination. A technician should employ caution when searching under the seats and hidden areas. The investigators do not want to stick to using bare hands when searching under seats and risk being pricked by a needle, which could ruin the evidence present. Instead, a small mirror or light should be used to check the areas to avoid the risk of exposure.

The other special considerations that an investigator should consider in a crime scene with motor vehicles and aircraft are taking photographs to assess the evidence found are location and relationship. When collecting evidence, an investigator should start with weak evidence. Evidence becomes fragile when exposed to certain environmental elements, movements, and improper handling (Rossy & Ribaux, 2014). Investigators could opt for a DNA analysis that is collected by swabbing samples of the steering wheel, door handles, and seat belt buckle. Such considerations will help ensure that complete investigations are effected on motor vehicles and aircraft present in a crime scene, allowing for the exclusive gathering of evidence.

Conclusion

Crime investigation is an essential component of the criminal justice system. Effective prosecution of a case in court requires complete gathering and analysis of evidence present at a crime scene. Crime investigators should follow various components when collecting evidence. Multiple techniques are necessary when handling trace evidence present at a crime scene and, mainly, the pieces of evidence stuck on an object. Precautions should be ensured to avoid contaminating trace evidence. Currently, investigators have adopted the practice of packaging in a pharmacist or druggist's fold to prevent contamination of pieces of evidence. The conclusion derived from this analysis is that crime investigation is sensitive and requires abiding by measures to avoid contaminating samples hence causing their destruction.

References

Ballou, S. (2006). Review of: Crime scene investigation methods and procedures. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 51(2), 457–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00101.x

Ribaux, O., Walsh, S. J., & Margot, P. (2006). The contribution of forensic science to crime analysis and investigation: Forensic intelligence. Forensic Science International, 156(2–3), 171–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.12.028

Rossy, Q., & Ribaux, O. (2014). A collaborative approach for incorporating forensic case data into crime investigation using criminal intelligence analysis and visualisation. Science & Justice, 54(2), 146–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2013.09.004