Gardner

PRACTICAL CRIME SCENE PROCESSING AND INVESTIGATION

Second Edition
Second Edition

Second
Edition
Ross M. Gardner
Ross M. Ga
PRACTICAL
CRIME SCENE PROCESSING
AND I NVESTIGATION
Second Edition
 CRC SERIES IN
PRACTICAL ASPECTS OF CRIMINAL
AND FORENSIC INVESTIGATIONS
VERNON J. GEBERTH, BBA, MPS, FBINA Series Editor

Practical Homicide Investigation: Tactics, Procedures, and Forensic Techniques,

Fourth Edition
Vernon J. Geberth
The Counterterrorism Handbook: Tactics, Procedures, and Techniques,
Third Edition
Frank Bolz, Jr., Kenneth J. Dudonis, and David P. Schulz
Forensic Pathology, Second Edition
Dominick J. Di Maio and Vincent J. M. Di Maio
Interpretation of Bloodstain Evidence at Crime Scenes, Second Edition
William G. Eckert and Stuart H. James
Tire Imprint Evidence
Peter McDonald
Practical Drug Enforcement, Third Edition
Michael D. Lyman
Practical Aspects of Rape Investigation: A Multidisciplinary Approach,
Fourth Edition
Robert R. Hazelwood and Ann Wolbert Burgess
The Sexual Exploitation of Children: A Practical Guide to Assessment,
Investigation, and Intervention, Second Edition
Seth L. Goldstein
Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic
Techniques, Second Edition
Vincent J. M. Di Maio
Friction Ridge Skin: Comparison and Identification of Fingerprints
James F. Cowger
Footwear Impression Evidence: Detection, Recovery and Examination,
Second Edition
William J. Bodziak
Principles of Kinesic Interview and Interrogation, Second Edition
Stan Walters
Practical Fire and Arson Investigation, Second Edition
David R. Redsicker and John J. O’Connor
The Practical Methodology of Forensic Photography, Second Edition
David R. Redsicker
Practical Aspects of Interview and Interrogation, Second Edition
David E. Zulawski and Douglas E. Wicklander
Investigating Computer Crime
Franklin Clark and Ken Diliberto
Practical Homicide Investigation Checklist and Field Guide
Vernon J. Geberth
Practical Aspects of Munchausen by Proxy and Munchausen Syndrome
Investigation
Kathryn Artingstall
Quantitative-Qualitative Friction Ridge Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and
Advanced Ridgeology
David R. Ashbaugh
Practical Criminal Investigations in Correctional Facilities
William R. Bell
Officer-Involved Shootings and Use of Force: Practical Investigative Techniques,
Second Edition
David E. Hatch
Sex-Related Homicide and Death Investigation: Practical and
Clinical Perspectives, Second Edition
Vernon J. Geberth
Global Drug Enforcement: Practical Investigative Techniques
Gregory D. Lee
Practical Investigation of Sex Crimes: A Strategic and Operational Approach
Thomas P. Carney
Principles of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: Theory and Practice
Stuart James, Paul Kish, and T. Paulette Sutton
Cold Case Homicides: Practical Investigative Techniques
Richard H. Walton
Practical Bomb Scene Investigation, Second Edition
James T. Thurman
Practical Analysis and Reconstruction of Shooting Incidents
Edward E. Hueske
Tire Tread and Tire Track Evidence: Recovery and Forensic Examination
William J. Bodziak
Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene
Reconstruction, Third Edition
Tom Bevel and Ross M. Gardner
Serial Violence: Analysis of Modus Operandi and Signature Characteristics
of Killers
Robert D. Keppel and William J. Birnes
Practical Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction
Ross M. Gardner
Handbook of Forensic Toxicology for Medical Examiners
D. K. Molina
Practical Crime Scene Investigations for Hot Zones
Jacqueline Fish, Robert N. Stout, and Edward Wallace
Practical Forensic Digital Imaging: Applications and Techniques
Patrick Jones
Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition
Ross M. Gardner
PRACTICAL
CRIME SCENE PROCESSING
AND I NVESTIGATION
Second Edition

Ross M. Gardner

Boca Raton London New York

CRC Press is an imprint of the

Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
CRC Press
Taylor & Francis Group
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300
Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742
© 2012 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business

No claim to original U.S. Government works

Version Date: 20111122

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-4398-9778-2 (eBook - PDF)

This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reasonable efforts have been
made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and publisher cannot assume responsibility for the valid-
ity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors and publishers have attempted to trace the copyright
holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to copyright holders if permission to publish in this
form has not been obtained. If any copyright material has not been acknowledged please write and let us know so we may
rectify in any future reprint.

Except as permitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or uti-
lized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopy-
ing, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the
publishers.

For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www.copyright.com (http://
www.copyright.com/) or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923,
978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organization that provides licenses and registration for a variety of users. For
organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by the CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged.

Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for
identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at
http://www.taylorandfrancis.com
and the CRC Press Web site at
http://www.crcpress.com
 To my wife of 35 years, Karen. She has always remained patient
and understanding when I disappear into writing mode.
and
The men and women of the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command,
past, present, and future, for their dedication to excellence.
Table of Contents

Series Note xvii

Foreword xix
Preface xxi
Acknowledgments xxvii
Contributing Authors xxix
About the Author xxxi

1 Introduction 1
Police Goals and Objectives 2
Evidence Defined 7
The Interpretive Value of Evidence 8
Good Crime Scene Examinations and Scene Integrity Issues 13
Investigative Ethics 18
Summary 21
Suggested Reading 22
Chapter Questions 22
Notes 22

2 Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 25

Class and Individual Characteristics 26
Fingerprint Evidence 28
Serology and Biological Evidence 30
Trace Evidence 37
Hairs and Fibers 38
Glass 39
Paints and Polymers 42
Soils 43
Gunshot Residues (GSRs) 44
Firearm and Ballistic Evidence 44
Tool Mark Evidence 50
Impression Evidence 51
General Chemical Evidence 54
Document Evidence 55
Computer Forensics 56
Forensic Pathology 57
Summary 58
Suggested Reading 58
Chapter Questions 59
Notes 59
ix
x Table of Contents

3 Actions of the Initial Responding Officer 61

Specific Objectives of the Initial Response 61
Documenting Initial Information 62
Officer Safety 63
Emergency Care 64
Secure and Control the Crime Scene 70
Release the Scene to Appropriate Authorities 75
Summary 76
Suggested Reading 76
Chapter Questions 76
Notes 77

4 Processing Methodology 79
Basic Activities of Scene Processing 80
Assessing 80
Observing 80
Documenting 81
Searching 81
Collecting 81
Processing/Analyzing 83
A Processing Model 84
The Adapted USACIDC Processing Model 85
Step 1: Initial Notification 85
Step 2: Coordination, Assessment, and Team Call-Out 85
Step 3: Conduct Initial Observations 85
Step 4: Deal with the Deceased 86
Step 5: Photograph the Scene 87
Step 6: Document Overall Observations 87
Step 7: Sketch the Scene 88
Step 8: Conduct a First Recheck 88
Step 9: Release the Body 88
Step 10: Collect Items of Evidence 90
Step 11: Conduct a Second Recheck of the Scene 90
Step 12: Conduct a Third Recheck of the Scene 91
Step 13: Check beyond the Scene 91
Step 14: Conduct an On-Scene Debriefing of the Investigative Team 91
Step 15: Release or Secure the Scene 91
Step 16: Process and Package Evidence 92
Step 17: Conduct a Formal Debriefing 92
Summary 92
Suggested Reading 93
Chapter Questions 93
Notes 93
Table of Contents xi

5 Assessing the Scene 95

Debriefing the Responding Officers 95
Scene Scope and Boundary Assessment 98
Scene Integrity and Contamination Control 98
Managing Access 103
Defining Team Composition 105
Crime Scene Search Considerations 108
Search Patterns 113
Circle or Spiral Search 113
Strip and Line Search 114
Grid Search 115
Zone Search 115
Point-to-Point Search 118
Personal Protective Measures and Hazard Identification 118
Biohazard Risks 119
Structural Hazards in Fire and Explosion Scenes 121
Chemical and Inhalation Hazards in Fire and Explosion Scenes 122
Inhalation, Chemical, or Fire Hazards from Scene Processing Techniques 122
Chemical and Bioterror Hazards 123
Considerations for Mass Crime Scene and Mass Casualty Situations 124
Pre-Event Considerations of Crime Scene Supervisors 125
Practical On-Scene Considerations for the Mass Scene 127
Managing the Media 128
Summary 129
Suggested Reading 132
Chapter Questions 132
Notes 132

6 Crime Scene Photography 135

What Makes Good Photographs 136
Recurring Problems in Crime Scene Photography 138
Identification Problems 139
Orientation Problems 140
Confusion Problems 140
Incomplete Documentation 142
Types and Purpose of Crime Scene Photographs 142
Overall Photographs 142
Corner or Side—You Decide 143
Evidence-Establishing Photographs 148
What’s in a Name: Evidence-Establishing vs. Mid-Range Photos 151
Evidence Close-Up and Forensic Quality Photographs 153
The Road Mapping Method of Photographic Documentation 156
A Basic Methodology to Crime Scene Photography 172
Camera Control Issues 175
Video Photography 178
xii Table of Contents

Summary 180
Suggested Reading 181
Chapter Questions 181
Notes 181

7 Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 183

Essential Sketch Elements 183
Variations of View in Sketches 186
Methods for Crime Scene Mapping 190
Rectangular Coordinates 192
Triangulation 194
Baseline Coordinates 197
Polar Coordinates 201
Triangulation or Rectangular Coordinates on a Grid 207
Triangulation on a Baseline 212
Technology in Support of Crime Scene Mapping 213
Total Station Mapping 213
Scan Station Mapping 217
Summary 220
Suggested Reading 221
Chapter Questions 221
Notes 221

8 Narrative Descriptions: Crime Scene Notes and Reports 223

Investigative Notes 223
Crime Scene Reports 228
Introduction Section 229
Characteristics of the Scene 229
Conditions of the Scene 231
Environmental Conditions 233
Factors Pertinent to Entry and Exit 234
Scene Documentation 234
Collection of Physical Evidence 235
Search for Latent Fingerprints or DNA 235
Additional Examinations 236
General Considerations 236
Summary 237
Suggested Reading 237
Chapter Questions 237

9 Basic Skills for Scene Processing 239

ROSS M. GARDNER
WITH CONTRIBUTIONS BY DON COFFEY, JEREMY JOHN, AND
TOM ADAIR
Applying Light Technology 239
Table of Contents xiii

Shortwave Ultraviolet Light (180 to 254 nm) and Reflected Ultraviolet

Imaging Systems (RUVIS) 242
Longwave Ultraviolet Light (365 to 415 nm) 245
Near-UV and Violet/Blue Light (415 to 485 nm) 246
Crime Scene Search with Blue Light (485 to 530 nm) 246
Orange-Red (570 to 700 nm) 246
Infrared (700 to 2,000 nm) 246
Heat Energy and Thermal Imaging (12,000 nm) 250
Choosing an Alternative Light Source 251
Recovering Fingerprints 254
The Science of Fingerprints 254
Classification vs. Identification 256
AFIS Fingerprint Systems 257
Collecting Fingerprint Evidence 258
Surface Characteristics 259
Porous Surfaces 260
Nonporous Smooth Surfaces 261
Nonporous Rough Surfaces 262
Special Surfaces or Conditions 264
On-Scene Fingerprinting Techniques 265
Cyanoacrylate Fuming (Superglue Fuming) 266
Basic Brush-and-Powder Techniques 268
Small-Particle Reagent 272
Adding Machine Paper Technique for Human Skin 274
Crystal Violet Solution for Adhesive Tape 276
Fingerprints in Fire Scenes 277
Casting Impression Evidence 278
Rubber Casting Compounds 279
Electrostatic Dust Lifting Devices 281
Dental Stone Casting Techniques 284
Snow Prints 290
Gelatin and Other Adhesive Lifters 294
Summary 296
Suggested Reading 297
Chapter Questions 297
Notes 298

10 Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 299

ROSS M. GARDNER AND MICHAEL MALONEY
Internal Ballistics 300
Terminal Ballistics 302
External Ballistics 304
Bullet Defect Verification through Chemical Evaluation 304
Defining the Bullet Impact Angle Based on Defect Shape 306
Direction of Fire 311
Use of Trajectory Rods and Lasers to Demonstrate Bullet Flight Paths 316
xiv Table of Contents

Describing Zones of Possibility 324

Trajectory Analysis Documentation 326
Summary 327
Suggested Reading 328
Chapter Questions 328
Notes 328

11 Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 331

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis 331
Theory and Underlying Principles of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis 331
The Pattern Diversity Principle 332
The Principle of Stain Shape and Vector Correlation 334
The Physically Altered Bloodstain Principle 339
Methodology of BPA 339
Classifying Bloodstain Patterns 339
Documenting Bloodstain Patterns 351
Presumptive Tests for Bloodstains 353
Luminol Enhancement of Latent Bloodstains 355
Fluorescein Enhancement of Latent Bloodstains 357
Amido-Black Enhancement of Latent Bloodstains 358
Infrared Photography 358
Summary 358
Suggested Reading 361
Chapter Questions 361
Notes 362

12 The Body as a Crime Scene 363

ROSS M. GARDNER AND MICHAEL MALONEY
Examination of the Corpse In Situ 363
Assessing 363
Observing, Documenting, Searching, and Collecting 366
Examination of the Corpse at the Morgue 369
Examination of a Live Individual 369
Understanding Basic Mechanisms of Injuries 371
Summary 381
Suggested Reading 381
Chapter Questions 381

13 Special Scene Considerations 383

Fire Scenes 383
Fire Patterns 384
Problems Associated with Fire Scenes 389
Fire Scene Methodology 390
Landfill Recoveries 394
Problems Associated with Landfill Recoveries 394
Table of Contents xv

Landfill Recovery Methodology 396

Buried and Scattered Remains 399
Buried Bodies 399
Scattered Remains 405
Entomological Evidence Associated with Bodies 407
Summary 408
Suggested Reading 410
Chapter Questions 410
Notes 410

14 The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 413

A History of the Concept of Crime Scene Reconstruction 416
The Underlying Principles of Crime Scene Reconstruction 418
Crime Scene Reconstruction Methodology 420
Scientific Method Used to Resolve a Specific Investigative Question 421
Event Analysis: Reconstructing Entire Events 423
Step 1: Collect Data, Establish Likely Events 425
Step 2: Establish Event Segments from the Data Available 426
Step 3: Define Associated Event Segments 430
Step 4: Order and Sequence the Associated Event Segments 431
Step 5: Audit the Information 434
Step 6: Determine and Final-Order the Events 434
Step 7: Final Flowchart of the Overall Incident Based on the Event and
Event Segment Sequence 435
Summary 436
Suggested Reading 437
Chapter Questions 437
Notes 437

Appendix A: Crime Scene Equipment 439

Appendix B: Risk Management 445

Series Note

This textbook is part of a series entitled “Practical Aspects of Criminal and Forensic
Investigations.” This series was created by Vernon J. Geberth, a retired New York City
Police Department Lieutenant Commander, who is an author, educator, and consultant on
homicide and forensic investigations.
This series has been designed to provide contemporary, comprehensive, and pragmatic
information to the practitioner involved in criminal and forensic investigations by authors
who are nationally recognized experts in their respective fields.

xvii
Foreword

I feel very comfortable in saying that criminal investigators throughout our law enforce-
ment community universally agree that the importance of quality crime scene investi-
gations cannot be overemphasized. Criminal investigators must be able to identify and
collect items of evidentiary value left at the crime scene in order to better piece together
events surrounding the crime and to identify perpetrators and sometimes victims.
It is essential then that crime scene personnel take all means necessary to ensure the
integrity of evidence collected in order to avoid legal restrictions that may prevent the
introduction of such evidence at trial or the development of a solid case for prosecution.
The content of this book speaks to issues in crime scene processing that are important,
addressing techniques and applications that apply. It tells you what you need to know, what
you need to do, and how to do it.
The methods and procedures used in crime scene processing, as presented here by
Ross Gardner, combine the collective knowledge of other experts and practitioners in
the field, as well as his own practical experiences garnered over more than two decades
of work as an active criminal investigator and some 4 years as a police chief. I had the
pleasure of serving as his executive manager for 6½ years during his special agent inves-
tigator tenure.
I am convinced it is essential that all officers and investigative personnel have a solid
understanding of professionally accepted crime scene protocols in order that their agency
can take full advantage of today’s sophisticated laboratory techniques and technologies.
This book can play a significant role in helping responsible, concerned individuals realize
that objective.

Eugene R. Cromartie
Deputy Executive Director/Chief of Staff
International Association of Chiefs of Police
Major General (Ret.)
U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Commander

xix
Preface

Over the life of the first edition of this book I have been humbled by its acceptance and
success. I set out in 2003 to write a practical guide of what to do and how to do it in a crime
scene. I was confident I came close to the mark, having spent over 23 years in crime scene
investigation, but I still wondered if I achieved a product that was useful and easily under-
stood to the majority of those involved in the field.
As it gained acceptance across the country, I specifically looked at those using it in the
classroom for my best feedback. Mind you, many of these individuals held master’s degrees
in forensic science. They worked in the lab and field all day long and then served as adjunct
professors at night. These were individuals who were not fooled by prose and judged mate-
rial based on content. No easy crowd to please, but if I met their mark as teaching practi-
tioners, then I felt I had met my mark of success. Based on the feedback I received, I met
the mark of the majority and for that I am proud, but as with all endeavors I have listened
to them as well and sought to make this document better. Just as there is no perfect crime
scene investigation, there is no perfect crime scene investigation book. So I continue to
challenge myself to keep this document timely, clear, and technically correct. As you will
see, I sought out some extremely competent and skilled contributing authors to assist me
in that endeavor.
Of course there were the typical naysayers. Although few and clearly uninformed, I
even listened to them, when they had valid criticism. I was probably most amused, how-
ever, when I was labeled “jack of all trades and master of none.” An individual, who I
learned had been “present” in a couple of crime scenes over his AFIS career but had never
been responsible for actually processing a scene from beginning to end, offered this tag.
Lacking true crime scene experience, little did this antagonist understand that his label
effectively defines easily two-thirds of the role of the crime scene investigator. Competent
crime scene investigators are masters of their trade, processing crime scenes. But they are
also expected to be a jack of all forensic trades, knowing and generally understanding all of
the different fields of forensic science, in order to appropriately collect evidence in a usable
form for the laboratory scientist. That is by no means an easy task.
An interesting sidelight of this jack of all trades issue was the publication in 2009 of
the National Academy of Sciences report “Forensic Science in the United States: A Path
Forward.” I was asked by the NAS to preview the draft and offer comments. Be aware, this
document is not a scientific report. Over half its authors were lawyers. At the very least,
70% of the citations offered in the report are legal opinions, but it is represented as science
in every court. One might not agree with how they achieved the conclusions, but they
certainly offered some valid criticisms. The recommendations offered by the NAS were
commonsense and well-established thoughts in the minds of most forensic science practi-
tioners. We should all agree with their desire to see forensic science become more critical
of itself, more professional, and more standardized. What the NAS failed to recognize
was that the weakest link in the chain of criminal justice is the crime scene investigator.
If evidence is not collected and collected properly, it serves no function in defining the
xxi
xxii Preface

truth. Yet, they offered no directed recommendations on how to resolve the training and
development of crime scene investigators. This is the problem for forensic science in the
United States. Even if the NAS fails to understand that, we as police professionals must
recognize and act on it. There is no more excuse for failing to properly process a scene of
crime—none at all. Programs abound to teach basic skills. Professional associations such
as the International Association of Identification have crime scene certification programs.
If you wish to be competent, then you have the means at your disposal to be competent. We
all have a responsibility and are all part of the resolution of this problem. This book is my
personal effort at a resolution; I hope it serves your needs.
This isn’t a book about crime laboratory techniques. It won’t go into depth about the
G-C-A-T order in DNA or discuss how mass–gas spectrometry works at the crime lab.
This isn’t a book about criminal investigations. It doesn’t have chapters on burglary or sex
crimes, discuss how to develop functional investigative timelines, or talk about interviews
and interrogations. This isn’t a book about behavioral science; there will be no in-depth
discussion of serial vs. mass murders, nor differentiating of organized vs. disorganized
crime scenes.
The subject of this book is crime scene processing—practical proven methods and pro-
cedures to be used at any crime scene. It includes concepts and investigative procedures
that anyone charged with the responsibility of processing a crime scene should understand.
These methods and techniques are field proven by people who have been using them, not
someone who simply read about it in a book once. To teach these methods, we will deal
with forensics, investigative procedures, and myriad other subjects. Nevertheless, the focus
will remain on what crime scene investigators do, how they actually do it, and how to
decide in what order they will do it.
I make no claim that these ideas and concepts are my personal brainchild. The proce-
dures described here are the consolidated knowledge of the literally hundreds of mentors,
peers, and instructors I’ve encountered over my career. From municipal departments to
federal agencies, from Scotland Yard to the Finnish Bureau of Investigation, each of the
individuals I’ve encountered has added in his or her own way to our collective understand-
ing of functional crime scene procedures. These are proven techniques, methods I have
taught and employed in day-to-day criminal investigations throughout the years. They are
the real deal and they work. I certainly intend for this book to serve as a functional refer-
ence for those new to crime scene processing. I expect it will be used as a handy refresher
for those engaged in crime scene processing as a part of their daily duties. Unfortunately,
there are also many participating in the process who simply put have never been taught the
basics. Hopefully this book will aid those individuals as well. The contents are a knowledge
base of many capable and competent subject matter experts.
If one were to choose the entertainment industry as his or her subject matter expert, as
many lawyers do, it would appear that crime scene processing is simple, absolute, and writ-
ten in stone. Accordingly, any dummy can do it perfectly, each and every time. As these
sources would have it, evidence should never be damaged or destroyed through processing
techniques and nothing would be degraded. Of course this logic has one major problem:
Hollywood producers aren’t bound by any rules associated with reality. Amazingly enough,
Hollywood rules and many lawyers seem content to say, “Well I saw it on CSI, so that is
how it’s done.” I liken this thinking to the old joke about incest and the resulting DNA in
a family tree. Every time a lawyer watches CSI, his or her understanding of forensics and
crime scene practices becomes more and more warped. Yet every time that lawyer opens
Preface xxiii

his or her mouth in court, he or she presents himself of herself as somehow “in the know.”
That is amazing in and of itself, because across the years I’ve spent a lot of time teaching
lawyers (defense and prosecution) about forensics and crime scene practices, and I am con-
tinuously flabbergasted to find that few receive any in-depth training on police practices or
forensics in their formal education. They are left to learn about crime scene practices and
forensics on the fly! Nevertheless, lawyers continuously espouse comments, concepts, and
opinions about how it’s really supposed to be done. As a result, a number of myths about
crime scene processing abound. It is important that we debunk a few of these myths.
First and foremost, there is no one-and-only right way to process a scene. There is a
clear and specific purpose for why we process the scene; that is to collect as much evidence
as possible in as functional and pristine a condition as possible. By achieving that, we hope-
fully define more effectively what did or did not happen in the situation being investigated.
Every action we take is directed toward accomplishing this purpose. There is certainly a
basic sequence of effort directed at the crime scene. Investigators routinely assess, observe,
document, search, collect, and analyze the scene, in that order. So there are rules to the
game, just not hard-and-fast rules. If there are rules, then there are clearly wrong things
to do in a crime scene. Yet no two scenes are the same, and every scene presents unique
problems that must be overcome. Competing interests routinely occur in the process, and
that presents contradictions that the crime scene investigator must overcome. In the end
it is only by considering the overall purpose, the sequence of effort, and by understanding
the associated forensics that the scene investigator is able to reach an appropriate decision
on what to do. Even then there is no guarantee that his or her decision will be right, given
the 20/20 hindsight available at trial.
An equally important myth to debunk is the fact that there are no perfect crime scenes
or perfect crime scene processors. The scene begins to degrade from the moment the event
begins, throughout the course of the crime, and continues right through the arrival and
processing by police and forensic scientists. It is impossible for the scene to do otherwise.
Granted, every procedure we discuss is directed toward collecting the evidence and its
associated context in as pristine a condition as possible, but scene degradation is a fact of
life. We use every mechanism available to limit this degradation, but we must accept that
it will occur.
These myths negatively impact the way crime scene investigators operate and are often
used as a distracter at trial. Far too often crime scene investigators say, “Oh the scene was
disturbed; there is no reason to even try to process.” That kind of thinking is ridiculous.
There may be scenes that are so disturbed that little, if anything, of value will be found.
But until the crime scene investigator tries, he or she doesn’t know what he or she will find.
Lazy investigators routinely use this excuse to keep from doing their job. At trial the myths
come into play as well, where crime scene investigators are put on the defensive because
something was damaged or lost through the processing. Why be defensive? Embrace the
reality and tell it like it is: “We tried something; it failed. Would you have preferred, Mr.
Lawyer, that I have not tried at all?” This answer can’t be used as a routine excuse for poor
procedures or haphazard effort on our part, but just the same, we can’t allow unknowledge-
able people to get away with painting the Hollywood version of crime scene processing to
the court. Hollywood’s version of crime scene investigation is fantasy and always has been.
What drives the Hollywood hype is, however, rooted in forensic science. Edmund
Locard’s Principle of Exchange states simply: “Every contact leaves its trace.” With every new
advance in technology, forensic science increases its ability to do more with the evidence.
xxiv Preface

Things unimaginable when I first stepped into a crime scene are commonplace today, such
as recovering and identifying DNA from mere touching. Each change increases our ability
to prove Locard far more accurate than perhaps he ever thought possible. Although the
technology is in constant change, the underlying process of dealing with the crime scene
hasn’t changed much at all. Documentation, collection, and analysis still require the same
basic skills. Between the time this book is sent to the publisher and the day it is published
there is no doubt that some new fingerprinting method or forensic technique will be forth-
coming. For that reason, this book won’t concentrate on every specific technique available.
It will concentrate on the basic procedures that do not change with time and on the basic
techniques and skills necessary at most crime scenes.
When I said these procedures could be used at any crime scene, I meant that in every
respect. From the household burglary to the triple-axe murder, it is not whether we should
apply all of these techniques to every crime we investigate, but rather a function of whether
we can. I guarantee that if you could apply all of these procedures and practices to each
and every crime you investigated, your solve rates would astound you. Between 1980 and
1999, while serving in the USACIDC, our organization routinely had a 69% solve rate on
felony property crimes worldwide. Why? Not to say it was the only factor, but there was
a simple rule that the agents lived by: lift all latent prints found and submit all lifts to the
crime lab. It didn’t matter that you thought it was smudged or that it was only a partial
finger. All prints were collected, sent to, and evaluated by the crime lab. Burglary or mur-
der, it didn’t matter. As a result, we solved crime. It was anything but a secret; we simply
had the resources to conduct fingerprint evaluations at that level. But that is an oddity.
Imagine asking your county or state lab to provide you the same service. You’d get laughed
out of the building. Now it’s: “Is it AFIS quality? If not, then sorry.” Whether investigative
resources, money, or time, resources drive the investigative train. In a perfect world where
resources were not at issue we could apply these methods across the board at every scene
and be far more successful at identifying and stopping criminals.
Unfortunately we live in a far from perfect world. Sure, at the homicide scene we pull
out all the stops, employ all the gadgets and gizmos. But I guarantee that the smash-and-
grab at a local business or the fast food robbery will not get the same level of attention.
Resource driven, the crime scene supervisor has to make hard decisions about exactly what
he or she will or won’t do. In order to make those decisions intelligently, those process-
ing scenes of crime must understand forensics. They must be a forensic science jack of all
trades, yet at the same time they must also be a master of their own, knowing the underly-
ing purpose behind crime scene techniques and using proper procedures.
Even in an imperfect world there must be some standard of what minimal scene pro-
cessing entails. Once defined, that standard must be met. Are a couple of Polaroid photo-
graphs and no attempt to lift latent prints at the fast food robbery really sufficient? Perhaps,
if you feel testimonial evidence is more reliable. This book will not presume to define that
standard in detail. Through discussions of photography, sketching, evidence collection,
and report writing, it will certainly suggest where that minimum standard may lie. In the
end, given the resources available and the crime encountered, each crime scene investiga-
tor or supervisor must objectively evaluate his or her effort and set that standard for his or
her own organization and community.
Once you get past the Hollywood hype, past the limitations of our organizations, and
past the drama queen lawyers of the courtroom, this business is really quite simple. Crime
scene investigators seek to establish what happened and provide the justice system with
Preface xxv

factual information on which to base justice decisions. We have no sideline agendas, no

master to serve but the truth. When it is all said and done, the crime scene investigator
simply has to look in the mirror and ask: Have I done my job to the best of my ability? Have
I secured and documented the evidence that might help prove the facts more effectively to
the judge and jury? If the answer is yes, then we can all sleep well. If not, then perhaps we
need to work a little harder at enhancing our skills and abilities.
Acknowledgments

This book is a compilation of knowledge gained over 37 years of involvement in law enforce-
ment. No one person can take credit for the ideas; I certainly cannot, as no one person
defined them. They are the combined knowledge of many years of service by thousands of
dedicated, often anonymous people. This book is a testament to their excellence.
If we are honest with ourselves, we have to accept that any skill or success we achieve
in life is very much a product of those who mentored and chose to teach us. I simply
cannot begin to mention all of the outstanding police officers and criminal investiga-
tors I have encountered over the years who took an interest in me. But I recognize that
my success is very much a product of their effort. Each and every one of you has my
heartfelt thanks.
I certainly owe a great debt of gratitude to the men and women of the U.S. Criminal
Investigation Command—supervisors, peers, and subordinates alike, who through the
years taught, cajoled, and beat proper techniques into me. Jim Smith, Tom Coster, Phillip
McGuire, Bob Jones, John Jones, Bill Middleton, Willie Rowell; the names are endless of
outstanding criminal investigators who shared their experience and knowledge as crime
scene experts. I still believe and uphold that part of my agent’s oath that said, “I shall at all
times seek diligently to discover the truth deterred neither by fear nor prejudice.” Nothing
in my career has given me greater pride than being counted among the individuals who
share the title of USACIDC special agent.
Along the path I also encountered a vast number of experts outside of the CID, like
Detective Investigator Wichanski and Detective Sergeant Vickery of the Metropolitan
Police Academy in the United Kingdom. Both were dedicated and capable criminal inves-
tigators sharing their knowledge with students at the Scenes of Crime Officer Course at
New Scotland Yard. There is no doubt in my mind that they set a fire in me at an early age,
one that would continuously fuel my desire for excellence in the investigative organizations
I worked for. This book is very much a product of the beliefs and ideas they put into play
in 1985.
I also owe a debt of gratitude to all of the individuals who specifically assisted in creat-
ing this book. My specific thanks go out to the following individuals for assisting me:

Tom J. Griffin and Chris Andrist, Mass Crime Scene Handbook, for their outstanding
insight and knowledge on mass scene situations.
John Anderson for his encouragement and support of the project.
Special Agent Mike Hockrein, St. Louis FBI. As a foremost expert in gravesite recov-
ery, Mike gave significant input and reviewed critical sections of the text to ensure
it defined the best methods.
Captain Tom Bevel (Ret.), Oklahoma City PD, for his review of the bloodstain pattern
and crime scene analysis sections. Tom has always been a mentor and supporter
and I have learned immeasurably from my association with him.

xxvii
xxviii Acknowledgments

Sergeant Steven Ray, Corporal Rex Duke, and Officer Faith Case, Lake City (Georgia)
Police Department, for their assistance in creating photo figures used in the docu-
mentation chapters.
Detective Sergeant Bruce Wiley and the San Jose Police Department for their insight
in dealing with landfill recoveries. SJPD’s experiences and success in dealing with
this complex scene will serve us all.
Special Agents Don Houseman, Mike Maloney, and William Herzig of the Naval
Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), who have always supported and assisted
me in every endeavor.
Bud Veazey, Fox 5 News, Atlanta, and Pete Scott, Atlanta Journal Constitution, for
their insight into journalism operations.
Cele Rossi of the Montgomery County (Texas) Sheriff’s Office for her insight and
feedback. Cele reviewed many a revised section of the 2nd edition and will one day
be the heir apparent for the future of this book.
Casie Parish of St. Edward’s University and Christine Ramirez of the Texas Forensic
Science Academy, Texas A&M University. Both ladies offered me invaluable feed-
back and recommendations on areas to beef up in the 2nd edition.
Jim Gocke, David Alford, and Sirchie Laboratories for assistance in revising the
RUVIS section and for the excellent figures they provided.
Tony Grissim for his feedback on technology aids such as the Leica Scan-Pro.
Jeff Borngasser of the Oregon State Central Point Crime Laboratory for his excellent
photographs using the IR camera and his assistance in building my knowledge of
IR photography technique.
Colonel Petra Hennop, South African Police Service Crime Laboratory, for her assis-
tance in revising the DNA collection discussion.
Iris Dalley for her invaluable assistance in locating Poser models and adjusting figures.
Jan Johnson for her feedback on how to better the book for the International
Association of Identification’s crime scene certification program.
Bo Pang Aldrin and Labino Labs for their support in allowing me to work with their
excellent ALS equipment.
And of course my contributing authors, Michael Maloney, Tom Adair, Donald Coffey,
and Jeremy A. John, whose assistance I could not have done without.

A number of individuals provided photographs and figures to help demonstrate or

explain the techniques, and I hope I have not forgotten anyone. My thanks go out to: Herb
Leighton, Maine State Police; Roy Heim, Tulsa Police Department; Brian Steel, Steel PC;
Special Agent Don Hayden (Ret.); Kelly Fite; Kim Duddy and the Washington State Patrol
Crime Lab; Ranger John A. Martin, Texas Rangers; Nikon Inc.; SA Laura Nielson, Oakland
FBI ERT; Special Agent Steve Chancellor (Ret.); Detective Craig Gravel, Captain J. Becker,
and the Oklahoma City PD Crime Scene Unit; Kelly Fite, Atlanta, Georgia; DA Wes Lane,
Oklahoma City; Mike McGuffey, Covington PD; Tom Faith, Totally Ballistic; and David
Dustin, Dustin Productions.
Contributing Authors

Michael Maloney is a partner in Bevel, Gardner and Associates and serves as the senior
instructor for death investigations and sex crimes for the Federal Law Enforcement Training
Center (FLETC) in Brunswick, Georgia. He served as a special agent for the Naval Criminal
Investigative Service (NCIS) for 14 years, his last 10 years as a senior forensic consultant. Mr.
Maloney holds a Master of Forensic Sciences degree from George Washington University
and completed a 1-year fellowship in forensic medicine with the Armed Forces Institute of
Pathology. He has processed and reconstructed significant crimes, including the terrorist
attack on the North Arabian Gulf Oil platforms during Operation Iraqi Freedom, two mass
execution sites while serving with the International War Crimes Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia, as well evaluating the events surrounding the death of 24 Iraqi citizens in Haditha,
Iraq. In 2008 he was the recipient of the August Vollmer Award presented by the International
Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP). Mr. Maloney is a member of the Association for Crime
Scene Reconstruction, International Association of Blood Stain Pattern Analysts, International
Association for Identification, and American Academy of Forensic Sciences.

Don Coffey is the chief, Latent Print Branch, U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory
in Forest Park, Georgia. Mr. Coffey is an IAI-certified latent print examiner and foot-
wear examiner with 22 years of experience. In total he spent 37 years in the U.S. Army,
serving in the Military Police Corp, as a special agent CID with the U.S. Army Criminal
Investigation Command (USACIDC) and as a forensic examiner at the U.S. Army Crime
Laboratory in Atlanta, Georgia. Mr. Coffey holds an AA and BS degree in criminal jus-
tice, University of Maryland and Thomas Edison State University, and is a graduate of the
Scotland Yard Senior Examiner Course.

Jeremy A. John is a latent print and footwear examiner at the U.S. Army Criminal
Investigation Laboratory in Atlanta, Georgia, where he has served since 2004. Mr. John is
an IAI-certified latent print examiner and footwear examiner. Mr. John holds a BS degree
in sports biology, with a minor in chemistry from Springfield College, as well as a Master
of Forensic Sciences degree from George Washington University. He has instructed vari-
ous agencies within the Department of Defense on various topics of evidence handling and
processing techniques for footwear, tire impressions, and latent prints.

Tom Adair is a former senior criminalist with the Westminster Police Department
(CO). Mr. Adair is an IAI-certified footwear examiner, bloodstain pattern examiner,
and senior crime scene analyst. He is a past president of the Association for Crime Scene
Reconstruction (ACSR), Rocky Mountain Association of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts
(RMABPA), and Rocky Mountain Division of the IAI. Mr. Adair is a former member of
SWGTREAD, the IAI Footwear Certification Committee, and co-creator of the Colorado
Forensic Footwear Information Network. He has written more than 60 scientific papers
and continues to conduct and write about forensic-related research.

xxix
About the Author

Ross Martin Gardner worked in law enforcement for nearly 29 years. The vast majority
of that period was spent with the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command, perform-
ing duties as a special agent and command sergeant major. In 1999, Ross retired from the
military to take a position as a chief of police in a small suburban Atlanta police depart-
ment. He served in that position until 2003, when he quit public service to become a full-
time consultant and instructor. Ross is currently the vice president of Bevel, Gardner and
Associates, a forensic education and consulting group.
Ross holds a master’s degree in computer and information systems management
from Webster University, a Bachelor of Science degree in criminal justice from Wayland
Baptist College, and an associate’s degree in police science from Central Texas College.
In 1985 he attended and graduated first in his class from the Scenes of Crime Officers
Course, New Scotland Yard. Between 1988 and 1996 he served as an adjunct professor for
Central Texas College. He is a member of a number of professional associations and has
served in a variety of positions, including president of the Rocky Mountain Association
of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts (RMABPA), president of the Association of Crime Scene
Reconstruction (ACSR), chairman of the Education committee for both the RMABPA and
the International Association of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts (IABPA), and chairman of
the Taxonomy and Terminology Committee Scientific Workgroup on Bloodstain Pattern
Analysis (SWGSTAIN).
Ross is certified as a senior crime scene analyst by the International Association for
Identification and is an active instructor in crime scene processing, crime scene analysis,
and bloodstain pattern analysis. Throughout his career he has taught for police agencies
(national and international), police academies, law enforcement professional associations,
and trial counsel professional associations, and has written a number of articles. He has
qualified as an expert in bloodstain pattern analysis and crime scene analysis in both state
and federal court. Ross co-wrote Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime
Scene Reconstruction, 3rd edition, and Practical Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction
with Captain Tom Bevel (Ret.), OKC PD. In 2007, Ross contributed a chapter to the Wiley
Forensic Encyclopedia.

xxxi
Introduction
1
Crime scene processing is an inherent task and duty associated with most criminal inves-
tigations, for rarely does one encounter a crime without some kind of crime scene. Crime
scene processing consists of an examination and evaluation of the scene for the express
purpose of recovering physical evidence and documenting the scene’s condition in situ, or
as found. The end goal of crime scene processing is the collection of the evidence and scene
context in as pristine a condition as possible. To accomplish this, the crime scene technician
engages in six basic steps: assessing, observing, documenting, searching, collecting, and
analyzing. These steps, and the order in which they are accomplished, are neither arbitrary
nor random. Each serves an underlying purpose in capturing scene context and recovering
evidence without degrading the value of either. Any way you look at it, this is not an easy
task, since the mere act of processing the scene disturbs the scene and evidence. From these
efforts, however, the investigator will walk away with important items of physical evidence
and scene documentation in the form of sketches, photographs, notes, and reports. All of
this information plays a significant role in resolving crime by providing objective data on
which the investigating team can test investigative theories, corroborate or refute testimo-
nial evidence, and ultimately demonstrate to the court the conditions and circumstances
defined by the scene. This is a task that is easily said, but it is not so easily done.
Action without purpose is folly and, simply put, becomes wasted effort. This is true
in any endeavor. Therefore it is imperative that before pursuing the actions an investiga-
tor conducts in the crime scene, the investigator must understand his or her mandate.
Crime scene processing is a duty in every sense of the word. Crime scene processing is not
something the technicians do because “they were told to,” but rather because they have a
responsibility to do so. If the investigator fails to recognize this duty and its ultimate pur-
pose, many of the procedures used at the scene might appear meaningless and therefore
unnecessary. But each has an underlying purpose in seeking to recover both evidence and
scene context. What follows in this chapter is a discussion of the conceptual and theoreti-
cal ideas behind crime scene processing. As we will discover, there is no single “right way”
for crime scene technicians to conduct themselves at a scene, but there are certainly a
number of wrong ways.
No matter what action a crime scene investigator takes, ultimately he or she will be
asked to defend that action in court. Opposite the investigator will be a counsel with little,
if any, understanding of the process or practice of crime scene investigation. What the
counsel is likely to have, however, are excerpts from various references on crime scene
investigation, with no contextual understanding of what they mean. To stand the test of
cross-examination and not allow a counsel to misrepresent these references, the crime
scene investigator must be able to articulate the reasons why a certain action was taken
over some other course of action. Without this ability, the counsel will likely sway the jury
that the police failed in their duty. So it is not enough that a crime scene investigator can
process the scene; he or she must understand the underlying theory in order to weather
such storms in court.

1
2 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Even before we can speak to the conceptual issues of crime scene processing, we must
ask and answer an even more basic question: Why does this duty to society exist? What
is the true function of the police and the investigator in a free society? Many will say, “It
is to see that justice is done.” The police are clearly a significant player in society’s efforts
to seek justice. Yet the police are only one player in a convoluted criminal justice system,
and unfortunately the search for justice in that system is oftentimes confusing. Despite the
confusion of the system, the role of the professional police and crime scene investigator is
really quite clear.

Police Goals and Objectives

The true role of the police, and thus of the crime scene investigator, is very well defined
with little, if any, ambiguity. In a free society, the police have two basic goals:

• The prevention of crime and disorder, and the preservation of peace

• The protection of life, property, and personal liberty

This mandate ultimately defines why police act as they do and why the role of the crime
scene investigator is so important to the criminal justice system. In order to achieve these
two goals, the police apply five basic objectives:

• Crime prevention: Prevention includes the actions and efforts designed to keep
crime from occurring in the first place. Crime is not singularly a police problem;
it is a societal problem. Community programs, youth programs, proactive patrol
techniques, and participation in neighborhood watches are all actions directed
toward preventing crime from occurring.
• Crime repression: When prevention fails, the police seek to repress the criminal
by actively investigating crimes and attempting to identify those responsible. A
criminal investigation is clearly rooted in our crime repression activities. If the
police fail to stop a crime, they must investigate the crime fully and impartially
and, if possible, identify those whom they believe are responsible. Once identi-
fied, the police are then responsible for apprehending the criminals and bringing
them to justice.
• Regulating noncriminal conduct: The police act to control general behavior pat-
terns, such as compliance with city ordinances and traffic regulations, in order to
prevent chaos.
• Provision of services: As any police officer knows, when there is no one else to call,
a citizen will call the police. From helping stranded motorists to looking for lost
children, the scope and breadth of the services provided by police is very broad.
• Protection of personal liberty: This is perhaps the single most confusing aspect of
the police role in society. Police have a mandate to protect citizens from unwar-
ranted police interference of their personal liberties. In effect, the police must
actively control their own behavior to ensure that their methods and practices
abide by the Constitution and the law.
Introduction 3

Crime repression and protection of personal liberty are both related to the criminal
investigation and the processing of the crime scene, and thus they are important objec-
tives. The police must proactively investigate the crimes reported to them and do so in a
manner that is consistent and respectful of the law and the liberties of those they encoun-
ter. Even with these objectives in mind, significant confusion still arises in this mandate,
and it relates specifically to the concepts of duty, truth, and justice.
When presented with grotesque and unimaginable crimes, those responsible for the
investigation almost always feel an extreme sense of urgency and, oftentimes, a very per-
sonal sense of duty to resolve the investigation. Ego or pride, disgust with the kind of
human that would act so inhumanely, or empathy for the victims themselves can build a
stress that few outside of the profession will understand or even recognize. Unfortunately,
overpersonalization of the event in the investigator’s mind can also warp his or her sense
of duty. Remember always that the true duty is to remain professional and objective and
through this foundation of professionalism resolve the investigation. Without objectivity,
police end up acting on emotion, and that can lead to a subjective nightmare.
As for our beliefs on truth and justice, the two words are often bandied about as if they
were somehow synonymous. Truth is simple fact, without regard to agenda and subjective
factors. Truth is the old Joe Friday routine: “The facts, ma’am, just the facts.” The suspect
was last seen with the victim. This is Smith’s fingerprint. The victim’s DNA (deoxyribonu-
cleic acid) is on the clothes of the subject. These are all examples of facts. These facts, alone
and considered out of context, rarely define an absolute truth about crime. It is through
consideration of the totality of these facts that the investigator is able to draw some ulti-
mate conclusion.
Justice, however, is different and a bit more complex. Justice is the process by which
“each receives his due.” It is society, in the form of judges and juries, who defines justice.
They do so using facts and evidence, but as most police officers know, the jury is not always
privy to every piece of information. Whether it is because the police failed to collect it
legally or because some prosecutor does not want to “confuse” the jury, the jury acts based
only on the knowledge and information presented to them. It is also important to under-
stand that in order to be fair, justice considers the needs of three different entities: the vic-
tim, society, and the accused. Thus, for all of these reasons, the course of events suggested
by justice may well be in conflict with those suggested by the pure truth! This presents an
interesting and oftentimes perplexing problem to the investigator. It becomes distracting
to try and understand why the justice system acts as it does, particularly in light of all of
the information the investigator may know. All of these distractions can lead to disillu-
sionment and create significant ethical issues.
Nevertheless, the purpose of the criminal investigation still remains first and foremost
a search for truth, even if the investigator does not always understand or in all cases agree
with the administration of “justice.” The bottom line is that the police seek to objectively
define what happened and who was involved, and to do so in a manner that is lawful
and does not violate the rights or liberties of those being investigated. Furthermore, the
police are expected to seek this truth as objectively as possible without regard to any per-
sonal agenda. As professional investigators, we have as much of a duty to refute an allega-
tion as we do to try and corroborate it. Our master, then, is the truth and only the truth.
Professional ethics demands an absolute adherence to this mandate.
There will certainly be moments when an investigator will be dismayed by what society
thinks justice is, but the investigator must always remain cognizant of his or her specific
4 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

role in seeking justice. Investigators are not, nor have they ever been, the judge or jury.
When the police begin to view themselves as such, the result is something that can only
be characterized as a police state, far from our concepts of democracy. The police must do
their job as intended. If they seek and bring precise and objective information from the
crime scene to the justice system, and if they do so without any agenda beyond seeking the
truth, then the probability increases that true justice will be served.

Case Example: Facts vs. Agenda

In the late evening hours on a rainy December evening, a sheriff-elect returned home
to join his family. He was to be sworn in as the sheriff of a major metropolitan county
within days. He parked his car on a cul-de-sac, as there were two vehicles of friends and
relatives already in his driveway. He began walking east to the residence with several
bags. His son observed this approach from the residence. He reported that as his father
arrived at a point adjacent to the opening between the two cars in the driveway, the
sheriff looked in a direction away from the driveway (to the northwest) and then turned
in the same direction. The son reported hearing a number of gunshots, but he saw no
one in between the cars while making his observations. The son ran for his father’s
weapon and observed nothing further.
At that moment a neighbor, in the house immediately north of the victim’s home,
was looking out her window. She observed a man dressed in black moving from the
north side of the sheriff’s lawn to the south (toward the sheriff’s walkway and drive-
way). Her line of sight prevented direct observation of the vehicles and the drive-
way, but she did hear multiple gunshots and observed a single individual dressed
in black run to the street. There he got into the passenger door of a small two-door
sedan, which drove off. She provided specific information regarding characteristics
of this vehicle.
When the shooting stopped, the family rushed from the residence to find the sheriff
on the south side and at the east end of the driveway, close to the house. The sheriff-
elect died of multiple gunshot wounds.
A crime scene examination was completed and significant evidence located (see
Figure 1.1). Around the car that was closest to the street, police found three 9 mm cas-
ings. The first was beneath the vehicle by the left rear tire. The next was found on the
north side of the vehicle, adjacent to the driver’s door, and the third was located on the
north side, adjacent to the front left tire. Between the two cars in the driveway were the
three bags the sheriff was carrying as he approached the house. Six more 9 mm casings
were located in and around the grass at the south edge of the property. No shell cas-
ings were located east of the second vehicle in the driveway or to the east beyond the
final location of the victim. The sheriff collapsed at the southeast corner of this vehicle.
Three feet east of his position, two bullet fragments were located in the grass.
Of interest as the investigation developed, the mailbox was located to the west of the
residence on the north side of the driveway and sidewalk, and it was surrounded by
large bushes that would provide concealment from observation of anyone approaching
from the street.
Forensic analysis of the casings indicated that the weapon used was a Tek-9 or similar
weapon and that only one weapon had deposited all of the shell casings in the scene.
Introduction 5

Bullet fragments
Victim’s final position

Dropped bags

Victim’s position prior to shots

9 mm shell casings
Mail box and bushes

Victim’s approach

Figure 1.1  The crime scene sketch depicts the location of shell casings and the victim’s posi-
tion as observed by his son. The dropped articles support this positioning. The cluster of 9-mm
casings on the north side of the car in the driveway speaks clearly to the position of the shooter
at the initiation of this assault. This is in clear contradiction to the story provided by the co-
conspirator. (Figure courtesy of Steel Law Firm, P.C.)

The case remained unsolved, with significant media attention and open speculation
focusing on the outgoing sheriff as a possible suspect. A year after the event, a suspect
was arrested in another homicide. The suspect was an ex-deputy with close ties to the
outgoing sheriff, who was rumored to be behind the killing. The DA’s office offered this
suspect a deal to turn state’s evidence in the sheriff-elect’s murder, with one significant
stipulation. The suspect could not be the primary shooter. With that exception, the
suspect would serve one year on all charges, including the subsequent homicide. The
suspect accepted the offer, and from the suspect emerged a tale of conspiracy involving
late-night meetings with the outgoing sheriff in which the primary communications
regarding the conspiracy were written on notes that were then eaten by the parties
involved. This set in motion a conspiracy involving three other men. The ex-deputy
claimed that three of the conspirators approached the home through a tree line from a
frontage road to the northwest of the cul-de-sac. A fourth man remained in the car on
the frontage road, several hundred yards away. The ex-deputy positioned himself near
the residence mailbox, dressed in black. The “real shooter” was positioned between
the two cars parked in the driveway, crouching so as not to be seen. The sheriff-elect
arrived, and as he approached the space between the cars, the shooter stood, shooting
the victim immediately from this position. The ex-deputy and the third conspirator
watched from relatively concealed positions. A second self-confessed conspirator, who
was also granted full immunity with the same stipulation, claimed to have been the
getaway driver for the four. He claimed to have parked on the frontage road, while the
6 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

other three committed the hit. Unfortunately, the two men had a short opportunity to
talk before the second conspirator was interviewed, but even with this assistance, they
couldn’t seem to make up their minds as to who was actually present during the meet-
ing when the entire conspiracy began. One claimed he was alone with the outgoing
sheriff; the second claimed he was present with his friend.
Despite these minor issues, the DA went forward with his “star” witnesses in an
attempt to obtain murder convictions against the two remaining conspirators. He lost
this case completely. The DA then proceeded with a case against the outgoing sheriff for
masterminding the assassination, which he made.
From the beginning, there was clear and specific information available to the DA
based upon the crime scene. The two witnesses independently indicated that the avenue
of attack was from the northwest, which was corroborated by the evidence. The Tek-9,
if held in a normal orientation, will eject its casings to the right and slightly rearward.
The presence of shell casings to the west of the victim’s reported position before the
shooting—and the fact that they were found on the north side of the driveway—clearly
suggested a shooter operating from a point northwest of the victim. If the shooter were
positioned as the ex-deputy claimed, there was simply no logical way to explain the
presence of these casings. They should not have been there. The strewn belongings
and ultimate position of the victim indicated an attempt to flee or take cover from the
attack, in which the victim moved south between the cars on the driveway and then
continued east to his final position. Once again, the clustering of shell casings on the
south side of the second car suggested a weapon being fired from a position west of the
victim. All of this evidence suggested a pursuit that moved from a point northwest of
the driveway and ended with the shooter firing west to east. If the ex-deputy was truth-
ful, the victim would literally have had to run through the shooter, but the ballistics
and pathology failed to support that contention.
The neighbor as a witness was concise. Before the shooting, she placed an individual
on the east side of the mailbox and bushes, which was northwest of the victim. One
man ran from the immediate scene, not three. That person was observed getting in the
passenger side of a car parked on the cul-de-sac, not the frontage road. The victim’s
son was precise in indicating his father looked and turned to the northwest imme-
diately before the shooting began. The initial wounds were directed from the front of
the victim and not his back. There really was little question regarding the crime scene
evidence; the shooter fired on the sheriff-elect from the northwest and pursued him to
his final position.
Given the totality of information available, it was significant that the ex-deputy had
not only placed himself northwest of the sheriff-elect; he put himself in similar clothes
and acknowledged that the car used in the murder was exactly as that described by
the neighbor a year before the deputy was arrested. All of this begs the question: Why
ignore this evidence and accept the clearly incongruent tale of events described by the
ex-deputy?
No objective evidence exists to answer this question. As is often the case, was the DA
simply incapable of understanding the forensic evidence? Just the same, it is apparent
that to call the ex-deputy on the crime scene issues and challenge him based on that
evidence would suggest that he was untruthful. If untruthful in any part of his story,
then any claim of having committed the murder at the order of the outgoing sheriff
Introduction 7

would suffer from a credibility issue. Whatever the case, the truth regarding who shot
the sheriff fell victim to the situation.

The lesson in this example is simple. It shows how logic can be twisted and warped
when we stray from using the truth as the agenda. A rookie crime scene technician could
have seen through the logic errors in the ex-deputy’s story, but ultimately these facts and
evidence were ignored. Remember always that crime scene technicians cannot go about
their business with the same attitude to truth as the law profession does. People’s lives are
significantly affected by the decisions the police make. If there is to be justice, then truth
must underlie all aspects of the investigator’s decision-making process.

Evidence Defined

Evidence can be defined as anything that tends to prove or disprove a fact in contention.
In any investigation, the evidence presents itself as either testimonial or physical. Each is
important, and each plays a role in helping the jury come to a decision of guilt or innocence.
Testimonial evidence is collected through the interview and interrogation of wit-
nesses, victims, and suspects or subjects. It is often illuminating in understanding motives
or in explaining those things found at the scene. But testimonial evidence has a major flaw
in terms of its consideration; human beings offer it and humans are subjective creatures.
Victims, witnesses, and subjects all bring agendas and perceptions to the table. At times,
these agendas and the associated subjectivity include outright lies. Perjury is not unknown,
with individuals presenting alibis for suspects who were otherwise caught on videotape
at the crime scene, or with relatives protecting their own because “I can’t believe Johnny
would do such a thing.”
More often than not, the nature of this subjectivity is far less deceitful. It revolves
around our ability as humans to perceive and remember events. The robbery victim, who
describes the gun forced into her face as “huge,” when in fact it was a .22 caliber, is not
lying to us. From her perspective, the gun was huge! The witness who overhears another
witness describe some detail of a subject, which he himself did not see, may internalize that
information and later change his testimony after convincing himself that he too observed
this trait. How many convictions based on eyewitness identification have been overturned
and proven incorrect through DNA? Are we to believe these victims lied about the identity
of their attackers? This is doubtful. Simply put, if investigators place all of their stock in
testimonial evidence, then they have missed the boat. Victims, witnesses, and subjects are
all capable of distorting facts, sometimes for purpose, other times without even knowing
they have done so. Does that mean we ignore the testimonial evidence? Certainly not, but
the investigator must always recognize the importance of physical evidence in evaluating
testimonial evidence. This is a lesson lost on many in the criminal justice system.
What are the virtues of physical evidence? Physical evidence takes the form of specific
items found at the scene that are often collected for subsequent analysis and presentation.
Sometimes physical evidence is not “collected” at all, it is merely some context (e.g., a table
overturned) that is documented through photography or sketching. In either case, it is
real, it is tangible, and it cannot be denied. The physical evidence never lies. It is what it is,
although we can certainly misinterpret its meaning. That failure, however, is still human in
origin; the fault does not lie with the evidence. Whether it is the ambiguity of the involved
8 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

science or the subjectivity of the officer, jury, or lawyer involved, it is only the human
element that prevents us from understanding the true nature of the physical evidence.
Properly considered, the physical evidence establishes a framework of facts that are irrefut-
able by anyone. The physical evidence creates a scaffold of objective knowledge that will
guide and support the investigator’s overall understanding of the crime being investigated.
This framework will serve as a reference to which the investigator can compare the tes-
timonial evidence, allowing him or her, in many instances, to corroborate or refute the
information presented. When the investigation becomes mired in subjective information,
this objective framework will be a ready reference to return to for clarity. Together, the
physical evidence and any testimonial evidence that ultimately stands the test of time will
allow some level of insight into the overall event.
However, the concept of physical evidence involves more than the mere collection of
things. Each scene encountered tells a story. Each scene demands consideration of issues evi-
dent through observations made by the investigator’s senses of sight, smell, and touch. Thus
a complete consideration of physical evidence demands that investigators be critically obser-
vant. The information available in these simple on-scene observations can be significant.

The Interpretive Value of Evidence

The value of an item of evidence is not based solely on its mere presence in the crime scene.
Crime scene analysis demands that the investigator consider the interpretive value of the
evidence. Crime scenes are often likened to a jigsaw puzzle. The police arrive at a scene
generally devoid of answers but containing numerous artifacts. Each artifact is, in effect, a
piece of a puzzle. Unfortunately, the police do not have all of the pieces to the puzzle, nor
do they have the luxury of referring to a picture on the box containing the puzzle pieces.
The crime scene technician is left to ponder innumerable questions regarding the scene.
For instance, is a given artifact part of the puzzle to be solved, or is it perhaps related to
some event that occurred hours or days before? Just as the addition of each piece to a jigsaw
puzzle brings clarity to the overall picture, the consideration of each artifact in the scene
brings knowledge to the event being investigated. Chisum and Rynearson commented on
this interpretive value of evidence when they noted that “the full meaning of evidence is a
function of time and the item’s surroundings.”1
In other words, the value of evidence is far more an issue of context than it is of mere
content. Merely owning the pieces of the puzzle is not enough. The investigator must be
able to place the pieces in the overall picture. For example, the presence at the crime scene
of a bloody shoe mark that is identified to some specific individual is significant. The abil-
ity to distinguish that shoe mark as having been made at or near the time of a beating by
evaluating the disturbed spatter beneath the shoe mark is of far greater value. In the same
fashion, the physical location of the shoe mark in the scene, which perhaps contradicts an
explanation offered as to why the shoe mark is there, is of equally important value. This
aspect of context and the interrelationship of evidence to the scene and other items is a
major reason why the crime scene technician documents the scene through sketches and
photographs. Lacking the ability to functionally place an item of evidence back into the
scene, the value of these interrelationships would be lost.
Introduction 9

Case Example: Scene Context and Interrelationships

A husband returned home in the middle of the day and discovered his wife beaten
to death. Overwrought, he claimed to have begun attempts at CPR and immediately
notified the police. EMS (emergency medical service) technicians arrived moments
after the 911 call and found him on the floor, bloodied from top to bottom. The scene
investigation and subsequent autopsy indicated that the woman was bludgeoned with
an object that had distinct angled corners. Despite significant effort to locate anything
remotely similar, the police failed to find such an object at the scene. They certainly
failed to locate anything similar that was bloodied. In the examination of the dress
shirt worn by the husband, a number of odd bloody pattern transfers were located,
as seen in Figure 1.2. These patterns clearly indicated that some object with distinct
angled edges, while bloody, was in contact with the husband’s shirt. The angles and
edges of this unknown item had similar dimensions to the angles and edges evident in
the pattern of injury on the victim. The bloody pattern transfer, however, was a posi-
tive and not a negative, so contact with the injury itself could not explain its creation.
The husband claimed that the pattern transfer was simply a bloody mark caused by his
actions while performing first aid.
Although the husband could present reasonable explanations for being bloody, the
pattern transfer was a major contradiction. The police arrived on the scene while he
was still inside, nothing was removed from the scene, and they certainly did not over-
look a bloody weapon. The husband was alone, claimed to have come home alone, and
made no claim of having left the scene for any reason. So nothing could have left the
scene between the time the police were notified and their arrival. Granted, lacking a
recovered weapon, there was no way to verify that the pattern transfer resulted from
a “weapon.” Yet the husband was clearly in contact with a bloodied item that was no
longer present at the scene. The mere fact that the husband was bloodied was certainly
expected and arguably explained in a variety of ways. But the fact that he was bloodied
by something that was no longer present in the scene was significant, because no expla-
nation offered could clear up this contradiction.

Figure 1.2    Bloody pattern transfers on a husband’s shirt. The patterns show he was in contact
with a bloody object. He claims not to have left or altered the scene and to have been alone in
the scene. Yet the bloody object is not present in the scene. If he is truthful, this demands that
someone else altered the scene. But that also demands that the husband was present in the
scene before the alteration. His story cannot explain this contradiction.
10 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

The husband being bloody was not an issue until it was examined in light of the scene
context. In the crime scene, context is everything. It is only through context that we derive
conclusions. Forensic lab analysis may define specific facts about an item of evidence, but
that can only tell us part of the story. Possession of data is meaningless unless we put it to
work and look beyond the tree to see the forest.
In considering this context of the evidence, Chisum and Rynearson offered that such
context can manifest itself in a number of ways. They classified these manifestations as:

• Predictable effects
• Unpredictable effects
• Transitory effects
• Relational detail
• Functional detail2

Predictable effects are those changes to the scene or evidence that occur with some
rhythm or regularity. Based upon this regularity, such evidence provides the investiga-
tor a factual reference or, at the very least, an inference as to the actual time of the crime.
Classic examples of predictable effects are found in forensic entomology, in which the stage
of insect activity at a homicide scene allows the entomologist to establish the approximate
period since death. Other examples include the onset of rigor and livor mortis in the body,
which in a stable environment follows regular and somewhat predictable timelines follow-
ing death.
Unpredictable effects are changes that occur in an unexpected or random fashion.
Unpredictable effects alter the original scene and the evidence. If unrecognized, such
effects can cause significant misinterpretation of the scene. A classic example of an unpre-
dictable effect is found in the entry of police or EMS into a crime scene. Oftentimes they
open doors or turn on lights and then fail to report such actions. The subsequent observa-
tion by the crime scene technicians of these post-incident changes often results in incorrect
premises regarding when the crime occurred or the manner of entry or exit by the perpe-
trator. Other examples include the disturbance of an item of evidence, moving it from one
location to another, or even the haphazard opening of a revolver’s cylinder by the techni-
cian. As Chisum and Rynearson commented, such changes can be disastrous to the overall
investigation, as the original context of the evidence is lost forever.3 The order in which
the investigator processes the crime scene is accomplished in part to prevent creating or
including unpredictable effects in the crime scene documentation and subsequent analysis.
Transitory effects manifest themselves at the crime scene in a number of ways.
Oftentimes they are fleeting. Unlike the body, the gun, or the bloodstains, transitory effects
fail to stand out to the investigator. It is only through deliberate observation that transitory
effects are noted. Examples of transitory effects include the heat of a burning or burnt cigar
or cigarette, the presence of ice in a glass, or odors of chemicals or colognes that are pres-
ent when the first officer arrives. A technological example of a transitory effect is the heat
signature of a tire on a roadway. When evaluating significant crashes or fatality accidents,
a handheld thermal imaging device allows the crime scene technician to differentiate new
and old tire marks on a roadway. Ultimately, time and environment will destroy any tran-
sitory effects present in the scene. Failures to observe, smell, or feel such evidence in the
early stages of the scene will result in the loss of such information. Many of the actions and
Introduction 11

processes we expect first responders to accomplish and make note of upon arrival at the
scene are directed toward identifying such evidence.
Relational details manifest themselves through the investigator’s ability to physically
place items in the scene. Examples of relational details would include the presence of a void
pattern on a wall surrounded by spatter, a clustering of shell casings on grass, the pres-
ence of a weapon in close proximity to the victim, the recognition that a gunshot wound is
distant vs. close. Through relational details, the investigator is able to establish a correla-
tion between various objects. Significant in our understanding of relational detail is the
belief that the item was actually at a given location at the time of the event. Those arriv-
ing at the scene or those processing the scene often displace easily moved items, chang-
ing and destroying the relational information. In an exterior crime scene, the position of
small items can be changed as a result of wind, rain, or water flow. The crime scene sketch
and associated measurements allow the scene investigator to document these relational
details. It is rare that the scene processor will recognize every relational aspect that may
subsequently be at issue during trial. This is one reason that the measurement and fixing
methods such as triangulation and baseline techniques should be applied to all items of
evidence, not just those the scene processors think are important at the time. These mea-
surements are often seen as laborious and unnecessary, but without them, information to
prove or disprove a relational detail may be lost.
Functional details manifest themselves in the operating condition of items in the
scene. Is the weapon capable of operating in a normal fashion? Was the clock alarm
set for a specific time? Did the deadbolt operate normally? All of these are functional
details. Each tells the investigator something about what was possible or impossible
given that specific item. Functional details assist the investigation in a variety of ways.
They can disprove specific allegations (e.g., “I dropped the gun and it just went off”) or
help define when the crime occurred (e.g., the alarm was set to go off automatically at
5 a.m.).
Using Chisum and Rynearson’s five effects is a functional and appropriate method
of evaluating the information and evidence present in the scene. The author, along with
Bevel, offered an additional approach to evidence observations when discussing crime
scene reconstruction.4 When considering each item observed in the scene, the investigator
should ask four questions about that evidence:

• What is it?
• What function did it serve?
• What relationship does it have to any other items of evidence or to the scene itself?
• What does it tell us about timing and sequencing aspects?5

How an item is used in the scene is not always congruent with what the item actually
is or what it was designed to do. Just as important, recognizing the nature of the item will
assist the investigator later when he or she begins looking at relationships and decides
whether the item is foreign to the scene. Knowing this prevents the investigator from
wasting investigative effort at some future point. The first consideration then is to identify
the item, if possible, and consider its use, function, or purpose in the scene. Consider the
example of an empty wax paper roll that is found in the kitchen area of a suspicious fire.
A wax paper roll in a kitchen is not unexpected. This is certainly an item one would find
in many kitchens. Is it merely a pre-incident artifact left by the kitchen owner? That is
12 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Scenes (s)

EVIDENCE

Subject (s) Victim (s)

The Evidence Linkage Triangle

Figure 1.3  The forensic linkage triangle reminds us that items of evidence are used to estab-
lish specific links or relationships between the suspect(s), the victim(s), and the scene(s).

certainly possible. If true, the item lacks evidentiary value and will likely be left without
further examination or processing for fingerprints. Pursuing the “What function did it
serve?” question forces the investigator to examine other possibilities. The fact that the roll
is empty and located in an area between two sources of low burn is of interest, since wax
paper is an effective “trailer” that allows the arsonist to spread fire in a scene with little
if any subsequent residues. The nature of this residue is such that it might easily be over-
looked. The consideration of the wax paper as an arson trailer and any subsequent effort
to resolve the issue may result in locating additional evidence. Considering why the item
was present in the scene changes the investigator’s perspective about the item from one
of a pre-incident artifact of no importance to one in which the item may have significant
evidentiary value.
Most crime scene investigators have heard of or seen the forensic linkage triangle in
one form or another (Figure 1.3). The function of the forensic evidence linkage triangle is
to remind the investigator that each item discovered must be considered a mechanism for
linking the scene, the victim, or the suspect in some form or fashion. Ultimately, every
piece of evidence is considered against this concept to determine whether any links exist
and if they are of evidentiary value. The nature of these links may or may not serve to illu-
minate investigative issues. This is particularly true in our consideration of trace evidence.
For example, in a suspected domestic homicide that occurs in the victim’s residence, the
presence of fibers consistent with the clothing of a suspect spouse has little evidentiary
value. Both had access to the home and routinely interacted with each other; therefore
transference of fibers would be an expectation. On the other hand, in a stranger rape, in
which the suspect is located hours later and fibers consistent with the victim’s sweater are
located on the suspect’s clothing, this link has obvious evidentiary value. Every item of
evidence must be considered to see if some link between the three entities is possible. If
the links exist, the investigator must then consider whether it has evidentiary value or is
explainable through some other innocent mechanism.
After considering relational issues, the last question deals with timing and sequenc-
ing aspects. Timing and sequencing are two distinct concepts. Timing aspects allow us to
place the time of the crime in some form or fashion. Sequencing aspects help the investiga-
tor decide in what order the crime occurred.
Introduction 13

Some classic examples of timing aspects at a crime scene are meals that are in prepa-
ration or completed; the condition of stomach contents of homicide victims; and alarms,
clocks, or timers that are set but have yet to go off. The pathologist will often provide
significant timing aspects through the consideration of body temperature or the evident
stages of livor and rigor mortis. All of this evidence suggests the relative or actual time
of the crime.
Sequencing aspects tell the investigator in what order certain events occurred as the
crime proceeded. Crimes are not instantaneous events. Criminals must approach the scene,
act within the scene, and then depart. The consideration of the various items of evidence
will lead to a definition of what are often referred to as time snapshots of the crime: specific
moments when specific actions occurred. One of the most critical elements of crime scene
analysis is the process of logically ordering these snapshots in order to understand how
the events proceeded. It is sequencing information that allows the investigator to do this.
Sequencing information can present itself in almost any format. Examples of sequencing
information include the disturbance of a bloodstain pattern by a shoe mark or handprint,
the order in which a series of items are layered on the floor, or the manner in which radial
cracks emanate from a series of bullet holes in pane glass. Each example allows the inves-
tigator to understand the order in which specific events occurred. By considering all of
the sequencing information, the crime scene investigator is able to objectively sequence
a majority of the actions composing the crime. Together, timing and sequencing aspects
provide significant information to the criminal investigation, and neither type of informa-
tion should be overlooked.
Each of the approaches described allow investigators to evaluate the evidence and
information they find within the scene. By identifying Chisum and Rynearson’s effects,
or by pursuing the four questions (What is it? What function did it serve? What relation-
ship does it have? What does it tell us about timing and sequencing?), the investigator adds
clarity to the overall understanding of what the scene represents. Crime scene technicians
cannot simply be garbage collectors. They must know what they are looking for, and they
must understand what each piece of the puzzle tells them. As important as it is to the job
to understand what we are looking for in the crime scene, it is equally important to under-
stand what we are trying to prevent from occurring while at the crime scene. This leads to
consideration of the question, “What does a good crime scene examination entail?”

Good Crime Scene Examinations and Scene Integrity Issues

Every action taken in the crime scene has some level of destructive effect on the scene.
This is a given and something that cannot be escaped. Scene degradation occurs from the
moment the crime begins and continues until the last officer turns off the lights and leaves
the scene. Actions of suspects, witnesses, the first responding officers, EMS, the environ-
ment, and certainly those of the crime scene processor will result in the disturbance and
alteration of the scene. Given this understanding of the inevitability of scene alteration,
the basic goal of any processing methodology is to limit the damage and recover as much
evidence and context from the scene as possible. No one has yet defined the one and only
right way to process a crime scene, but any good processing methodology will demand the
following five basic ingredients:
14 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

• Knowledge
• Skills and tools
• A methodical approach
• Flexibility
• A coordinated effort

First and foremost, those responsible for examining the crime scene must understand
what they are trying to accomplish. Knowledge on the part of the crime scene investiga-
tor is critical. As previously discussed, the scene processor is more than just a collector of
things; the investigator must seek the interpretive value of the evidence. By understanding
what he or she is looking for, what the lab can do with the evidence, and what questions
should be asked, the investigator will not overlook information and evidence. The weakest
link in forensic science lies with the crime scene investigator. Investigators do not need to
be experts in every forensic science, but they must understand the nature of the different
types of forensic evidence they may encounter in a scene and how that evidence must be
collected and preserved to be of value.
Beyond knowledge, the processor must also have the skills and tools required to
recover evidence. Having the tools alone isn’t enough; the crime scene investigator must
maintain a level of competency for all of the equipment. Examples of skills and tools that
may be necessary include competency with the available camera equipment, the ability
to conduct fingerprint recovery under a variety of conditions, or the casting of various
impressions.

Case Example: Tools Alone Are Not Enough

Figure 1.4 shows an attempt at a trajectory analysis. The situation involved a young
woman who had been shot once in the head producing a perforating wound. The
bullet passed from the left side of her temple, out the opposite temple, and into a
couch cushion. Investigators were unconvinced of the story told by her boyfriend
of a self-inflicted injury. They had trajectory rods available to them and proceeded
to use them to demonstrate the path of the bullet. As the figure demonstrates, they
violated two basic rules in analyzing wound paths and trajectories. First and fore-
most, they introduced a rod into a wound at the scene. This violates pretty much
every standard of practice known today. The introduction of the rod into a wound
has significant potential to create its own path, particularly through macerated brain,
rather than following a bullet wound path. The two holes in the skull certainly pro-
vide two known reference points, but even at the morgue this behavior is gener-
ally considered bad practice. This relationship can be better demonstrated through
demonstrative evidence at a later date, using the defect positions as defined by the
medical examiner. The second mistake becomes evident where the rod intersects the
couch cushion. The cushion is a pliable surface and given an approximately 8-pound
weight pushing down and slightly forward against the rod, the cushion can be seen
bunching up. The trajectory defined by the path of the bullet through the cushion,
which was probative, is deflected by the weight of the head against the rod and the
photograph is unreliable as a true trajectory. Simply put, in the wrong hands even
good tools and equipment can make for bad practice.
Introduction 15

Figure 1.4   Crime scene tools are only functional in the hands of a skilled and knowledgeable
crime scene investigator. In this situation, the investigator put a trajectory rod through the
victim’s wounds and into the pliable couch cushion. The investigator’s first mistake was plac-
ing a rod into a wound. This simply isn’t done on scene and is rarely done even at a morgue by
a Medical Examiner. The second mistake was not recognizing that the rod in the cushion was
deflected by the head and did not demonstrate the true trajectory.

Crime scene equipment must be maintained and its proper use understood by the
crime scene investigator. Otherwise these tools amount to nothing more than expensive
junk.
An additional consideration is that whatever approach is used to process the scene must
be methodical. To be methodical, the method must be all-encompassing and purposefully
regular. Without a methodical approach, steps are often forgotten or overlooked. Some
processors find the use of investigative checklists a functional means of maintaining this
regularity. An outstanding example includes Geberth’s Practical Homicide Investigation
Checklist and Field Guide.6 As good a tool as checklists are, rote compliance with a check-
list can be as dangerous as not using one. Therefore, the scene investigator must maintain a
level of flexibility in dealing with each new scene. Flexibility on the part of the investigator
is critical. Each scene is unique and presents its own challenges. The investigator will have
to make hard decisions when presented with fragile evidence or competing or contradict-
ing interests. For example, basic crime scene methodology tells us that we should photo-
graph the entire scene before collecting evidence. But what if the evidence is a shoe mark
in the soil outside a burglary homicide, and the investigator realizes a storm is moments
from breaking? If a downpour occurs, the evidence will be destroyed, so the investigator
must act promptly to preserve or collect the mark before that happens. The investigator
must always recognize when it is necessary to break from routine in order to achieve the
desired end result.

Case Example: Flexibility and the “Wrecking Crew”

Late in winter in Alaska, a body was located in the woods. It lay supine in a snow bank,
with portions of the head showing above the snow. As normal excavation techniques
progressed, immediate investigative concerns were noted due to the fact that a blood
flow was observed moving up the nose of the victim. The final position of the victim
was clearly not the only position of the victim subsequent to wounding. The initial
16 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

excavation resulted in identification of the individual, who had been reported missing
several months before. With obvious concern as to the likely movement of the body
after wounding (suggesting a dump site or subsequent scene alteration), processing
continued.
When all the snow had been removed, it was apparent that the body would not be
easily recovered. A number of freeze and thaw cycles had occurred in the months after
the individual’s disappearance, and the body now lay in a thick layer of ice. This layer
encased the entire body and clothing, and it was 4 to 6 in. in depth. In an effort to free
the body, heavy-duty heaters/blowers were used to loosen the ice all around the bound-
ary of the body. Following several hours of effort using the heaters, as well as attempts
to chisel around the body, the investigators were no closer to freeing the body than they
were before. The heater was damaging the clothing on the body to the point of burning
small sections that were exposed too long.
As evening fell and the temperature dropped, it was clear that some extraordinary
method was needed. Part of the overall problem lay in the fact that the body itself was
a block of ice, frozen solid by long-term subarctic exposure. The crime scene inves-
tigators, partly out of studying the situation and partly out of desperation, chipped
a deep hole along the high side of the body, large enough to insert a long-handled
2-in. flat-bladed pick. The blade of the pick was then forced into this hole, and outward
leverage was applied to the handle. To say the least, a number of raised eyebrows were
observed, and guffaws heard as the technique was applied. Where the body had refused
to budge through all the prior attempts, in a matter of seconds a slight pop was heard.
The body popped from the grip of the ice, intact and none the worse given the odd
method of retrieval. The two investigators, although vindicated in their method, were
subsequently tagged as the “wrecking crew.”

As in the example, occasionally the investigator will be presented with a problem that
defies normal practice and procedure, an issue or situation that is not mentioned in any
textbook. Nevertheless, some action must be taken, and the crime scene investigator can-
not be afraid to take a calculated risk. Flexibility in practice allows the investigator to see
through the problem and find a solution.
Last but certainly not the least of the necessary ingredients for a good scene examina-
tion is the need for coordinated effort. A scene examination conducted without coordinated
effort is unlikely to achieve the desired result. Each team member and those assisting in
the processing must know what every other team member’s responsibility is. Coordination
ensures that all actions are taken in the proper order and that important aspects of the
scene examination are not sacrificed without prior consideration.
If the investigator is to achieve the goal of crime scene processing, which is the col-
lection of the evidence and scene context in as pristine a condition as is possible, then
these five basic ingredients of good scene examination practice must be combined with
an understanding of basic scene integrity concerns. The crime scene technician’s methods
must consider three specific scene integrity issues:

• The addition of material to the scene

• The destruction of material in the scene
• The movement of material in the scene
Introduction 17

Addition of material results in what are referred to as post-incident artifacts. In effect,

the authorities end up creating evidence that was not there to begin with. These post-
incident artifacts can obscure the investigator’s understanding of the crime and are often
used successfully by defense counsel to cast doubt about the guilt of a suspect or to support
some alternative theory about the event. Examples run the gamut of shoe marks to blood
trails. Officers, EMS technicians, supervisors, almost anyone can end up adding artifacts
to a scene. Individuals walking in from a wet exterior may leave shoe marks on floors and
carpets, intermixing with the shoe marks of concern. EMS or first responders who attempt
first aid often create blood trails and bloodstain patterns through their manipulation of the
body. Hours into a late-night crime scene, it would be unusual not to observe coffee cups
that were not there before processing began. The addition of material is always a concern.
Every contact does leave a trace.7 Therefore, any effort directed at processing the scene must
consider this issue, and investigators should actively seek to eliminate any action that cre-
ates unnecessary post-incident artifacts. At the very minimum, the crime scene investiga-
tor must distinguish between those items that are post-incident artifacts and those that are
actual evidence related to the event. It is this consideration that requires the responding
officers and investigators to ask and determine who did what to the scene prior to their
arrival. Later chapters will discuss isolating the scene and establishing collection points for
evidence and equipment, all of which are directed at preventing the addition of material.
Destruction of material results in the loss of an item’s evidentiary value. There are
numerous examples of the destruction of evidence. Officers arriving at a burglary scene
early in the morning are likely to encounter a dew trail caused by the approach or departure
of the subject. By the time the investigator arrives, it is unlikely this dew trail will remain,
having been trampled by well-meaning officers searching the area. A classic example of
destruction occurs when a homicide victim is placed into the body bag. Prior to this action,
there are often bloodstain patterns on the clothing or exposed skin surfaces. During trans-
port in the body bag, residual bleeding occurs, which contaminates the body bag itself. As
a result, saturation and contact stains end up on the clothing and victim, obscuring forever
the original patterns of interest. Another example of destruction occurs when, by focusing
too quickly on the primary scene, investigators miss evidence on the periphery. As addi-
tional resources arrive in the form of more people and vehicles, this peripheral evidence is
trampled and lost. Many of the investigative beliefs on how and when to deal with fragile
evidence, as well as the necessity of using an established methodology, are directed at pre-
venting the destruction of material in the scene.
Movement of material is the last scene integrity issue. Movement is often the result of
investigative processing techniques, but when such movement is unchecked and unrecog-
nized, it clouds the investigator’s understanding of the crime scene. In effect, movement
of material significantly changes the relational aspects observed by the crime scene inves-
tigator. A classic example of movement of material occurs when an officer encounters a
weapon. SWAT officers often demonstrate a special penchant for kicking weapons from the
hand of a suspect, despite the apparent fact that the suspect is dead. Consequently, by the
time the investigators arrive, the weapon is 15 ft from the suspect. If no one takes respon-
sibility for this action, it leaves open the argument that the suspect was shot after giving up
and putting down the weapon. Similarly, patrol officers have been known to take a suicide
weapon from the vicinity of the body and place it on the opposite side of the room. The
investigator arrives and, without recognizing this change, perceives what was a suicide as
a likely homicide. The opening of doors, the opening and closing of window shades, the
18 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

turning on or off of lights and appliances, all of these actions change the scene. It is not
uncommon in the photographic documentation of a crime scene to observe a single item
in various locations. Counsel will use these contradictory photographs to challenge the
appropriateness of the crime scene processing or to claim that the resulting false relational
links prove some alternative theory. The arrival of police and the haphazard processing of
the scene create many of these unnecessary movement actions. Each unrecognized move-
ment creates false relational links. The crime scene investigator must know when these
changes were made, by whom, and for what reason. A golden rule for the crime scene
investigator is simply, “Know who did what.”

Case Example: The Compassionate Officer

Police officers checking a remote campsite discovered a woman strangled and sexually
assaulted. Investigators were called to the scene and, upon arrival, found a scene clearly
in disarray, with the body lewdly displayed and the ligature still in place around the
victim’s neck. The woman’s upper body was exposed as well, and her legs were spread
and positioned open with the knees bent up and off the ground. This position was
clearly a posthomicide act by the perpetrator. Oddly enough there was a small piece of
clothing that was neatly folded and placed across the vaginal area. Given the disarray
of the scene and the disrespect shown to the victim subsequent to her death, this item
made no sense in the overall picture.
Scene processing continued in a normal fashion, but the clothing modestly placed
across the victim’s crotch remained a significant issue, particularly given the placement
of the body. While interviewing the first responding officers, one of the younger officers
admitted his role in altering the scene prior to the arrival of investigators. He was dis-
mayed and disgusted by the perpetrator’s actions at leaving the victim as she was. He
felt it his duty to offer her, in death, some modicum of modesty. Therefore he chose to
place the clothing over her crotch before the world arrived and saw her as he had found
her. In his eyes it was only proper and appropriate that she be given this respect.

It is often a specific action taken by a responder at the scene that changes the scene. As
in this example, the change may not have been necessary, yet it did occur. The crime scene
investigator always seeks to identify and understand why these changes happen. By under-
standing the three scene integrity issues as they relate to the techniques and approaches of
scene processing, and by applying the five basic ingredients to good scene examination, the
crime scene investigator is more apt to make good, defensible decisions when faced with
difficult choices at the scene.

Investigative Ethics

The investigator’s role in repressing crime was defined as simply conducting objective
investigations. This is done in an effort to define who did what, and why. The crime scene
is clearly a source of significant information in this pursuit, and the crime scene techni-
cian or crime scene investigator is likely to remain actively involved in any future trial
associated with the event investigated. How does the investigator maintain objectivity and
remain true to the profession throughout the search for justice?
Introduction 19

First and foremost, it is important to understand that the investigator has no personal
stake in what he or she finds in the scene. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle once wrote a line in
which his fictional character Sherlock Holmes states, “I can only find evidence Watson. I
cannot change it.”8 This is a true statement about the crime scene investigator. Until we
look, we do not know what we will find. Once we find it, we cannot ignore it simply because
we do not like what it tells us. But more importantly, the crime scene investigator really
should not care what he or she might find. If the goal is truth, then how that truth plays out
is of little consequence to the investigator. Sure, investigators will all have pet theories and
suspicions, but if they are true to their profession, then they will remain open and objec-
tive, certainly willing to consider new evidence. Investigators must report their findings
objectively and truthfully to whomever needs to know, no matter how those facts impact
on their personal beliefs.
This idea of neutrality is often lost in the profession of policing because of the close
association of the police with the DA’s office and the desire of the police to protect the
citizenry from “bad guys.” Rookies are often heard commenting that “my job is to put
people in prison.” Granted, the police are the ones who initially deny individuals their
freedom through arrest. But in no book on law enforcement will the investigator find
“putting people in prison” to be a responsibility of the police. This is a function of jus-
tice, not law enforcement. The job of law enforcement has always been to bring people
to justice. The nuances between these two statements, although perhaps minor in form,
are major in context. The failure of police to recognize those differences often leads to
significant failures in the justice system.
Will investigators believe in the guilt or innocence of the individuals they investigate?
One would hope so. Otherwise, why would they send cases forward to the DA’s office?
Belief in the involvement of some individual in a crime is not a bad thing, so long as that
certainty does not cause the investigator to sway from procedures or alter testimony. What
we don’t know as investigators can always hurt us, and simply put, investigators rarely
know everything about how or why an event occurs. The author was once involved in a
case in which an alleged police expert argued that the police had only the responsibility
to investigate a crime to the standard of probable cause. Once that standard was achieved
and the suspect arrested, it was then the duty of the DA’s office to carry on the investiga-
tive process. It is important to note that probable cause is not the investigative standard.
Granted, the police can arrest at that level, but the professional investigator’s standard has
always been to investigate to the point of beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the standard of
the court, so why would we pursue anything less? Truth is only achieved through detailed
study and analysis. Investigators may not achieve that standard in every investigation,
simply because they lack specific evidence to really know everything they want to know.
Nevertheless, it must remain the standard they pursue.
The investigator will never have every piece of the investigative puzzle. To prevent
that lack of knowledge from affecting their role in the criminal justice system, inves-
tigators must follow good investigative ethics. Such investigative ethics demand that
investigators collect and document the evidence as they find it. The investigator can-
not pick and choose what to report. Just because a particular item of evidence does not
conveniently fit into the pet theory of the hour does not mean that it is unimportant or
unrelated. This is a particular concern in the early stages of the investigation, when many
initial subjective theories abound.
20 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Investigators must consider all viable theories until they are excluded. They cannot pro-
ceed with tunnel vision. Excluding an alternative theory, such as one supported by an alibi,
may work out fine in the early stages of the investigation, when no one is there to challenge
the investigator. Sooner or later, however, someone—most likely a defense counselor—will
force the investigator to consider those alternative theories. The wrong time to deal with
and rationally argue for or against such a theory is while testifying at trial. The investigator
should have considered whether a theory or alibi is viable long before the state enters into
trial. If the crime scene investigator is truly objective, there will be few if any alternative
theories presented by counsel that have not been taken into consideration. Granted, that will
not prevent counsel from raising issues, but the investigator cannot effectively argue such
theories for the first time while sitting in the witness chair. The environment of a courtroom
is far too emotional and far too antagonistic for on-the-spot objective evaluation.
Another critical aspect of investigative ethics is the need to treat all facts the same. The
investigator cannot differentiate in how he or she documents the information obtained. It
is rare that there is not some form of exculpatory information present in the crime scene,
something that suggests someone other than a particular suspect is responsible. These con-
tradictions are expected and they are nothing to be afraid of. Investigators must report
exculpatory information and not subjectively exclude it from their report. Once again,
investigators do not know what the scene will tell them, and they have no personal stake in
what the evidence ultimately says. So nothing defined by the scene is bad.
The last consideration of investigative ethics is that investigators can never let any law-
yer, defense or prosecution, tell them what they know. Investigators must factually and
objectively report the information that they have obtained. How the lawyers choose to use
the information is their business, but they do not get to define what the investigator knows
or what he or she has found.
In a book directed at law enforcement officers, it would seem unnecessary to state
that altering testimony, engaging in perjury, or creating false evidence is clearly outside
the scope of an investigator’s duty. Unfortunately, the fact is that this message must be
made, and it is a message that we must make again and again at every level of law enforce-
ment. Perhaps as a result of some warped sense of duty or out of sheer frustration and
disillusionment with a justice system that seems to make no sense at times, crime scene
investigators and analysts have altered evidence, manufactured evidence, and failed to
testify truthfully. Although still rare, these failures call in question the integrity of every
single law enforcement officer. As a result, even an honest mistake becomes the fodder
of conspiracy theories by lawyers out to make a buck through civil suits or groups out to
further some agenda.
There was once a very basic attitude in law enforcement: “Better that 10 guilty men
go free, than one innocent man go to jail.” That belief seems for some reason to have gone
by the wayside. Our fears over the inhumanity we see day to day and our desire to stop
it, and the ever-growing chasm between law enforcement and the citizens we serve, may
have indirectly affected our beliefs. Despite the confusion, despite the chaos of our system,
and despite the personal dilemmas we face daily, investigators must always remember that
small integrity and objectivity failures will ultimately lead to larger integrity and objectiv-
ity failures. It can never be stated too loudly or too often that investigators must remain
objective and true to their profession.
Introduction 21

Summary

The system of justice may be convoluted, but the role of the crime scene investigator in that
system is straightforward. The investigator seeks to establish the truth regarding a given
event or crime by objectively pursuing this truth without regard to any other agenda.
Truth is defined by the collection of evidence, factual information that allows us to
draw some conclusion about an event. The crime scene investigator realizes the signifi-
cance of physical evidence in defining this truth. Unlike testimonial evidence, physical
evidence does not lie. We as humans may well misinterpret what the physical evidence is
telling us, but that is our own fault. Physical evidence will aid both the investigator and the
jury in corroborating or refuting much of the testimonial evidence. Used properly, physical
evidence establishes a foundation of objective information that few, if any, can refute.
To understand why investigators take the steps they do in collecting this physical
evidence, one must understand the underlying conceptual ideas behind crime scene
investigation. Oftentimes the investigator is faced with competing interests and dif-
ficult choices. Whatever action he or she takes must be defensible in court. It is not
enough to have taken the action; the investigator must articulate why. Understanding
these principles allows the investigator to make difficult decisions when faced with con-
tradicting requirements.
The collection of items at the scene, the mere ownership of physical evidence, is not the
end-all of crime scene processing. The crime scene investigator must realize the interpre-
tive value of evidence, which depends on the context in which the evidence is found. This
context is manifest in five effects or details: predictable effects, unpredictable effects, tran-
sitory effects, relational details, and functional details.9 The consideration of each manifes-
tation adds additional information to our understanding of the crime and brings us closer
to the truth.
In pursuing this context or the interpretive value of the evidence, the investigator must
also ask several questions about each item of evidence found. What is this item and how
was it used? What relational links will this item establish between the scene, the subject,
and the victim? In what way will this item define the time of the crime or sequence the
actions associated with the crime? Once again, by looking at more than mere content and
by considering the context in which the evidence is found, the investigator will find that far
more information is available in seeking the truth of the matter.
However, in pursuing the end result of the crime scene processing—the collection of as
much physical evidence in as pristine condition as possible—it is imperative that investiga-
tors realize there are many means to this end. There is no one right way to process a crime
scene. When evaluating methods, the investigator must consider that any good process-
ing methodology will include five key ingredients. These are knowledge on the part of the
investigator, the skills and ability to accomplish what the knowledge defines must be done,
and a methodical approach that defines in what order it will be done. Flexibility, or the abil-
ity to adapt to the requirements of a given crime scene, is another key ingredient. The fifth
ingredient is the need for coordinated methods, where the efforts of all participants mesh
to maximize the information extracted from the crime scene. When these five ingredients
are combined with an understanding of the three scene integrity issues, the investigator
can functionally and reasonably choose between different courses of action at the scene.
The investigator knows that his or her methods must prevent, whenever possible, the addi-
tion of material into the crime scene, the destruction of material in the scene, and the
22 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

movement of any material in the scene. Each in its own way will damage the investigator’s
understanding of the crime or event being investigated.
Finally, with all of these issues in mind, the investigator recognizes the need to have a
strong sense of ethics. Crime scene work often presents significant personal ethical dilem-
mas. Any of several factors—a sense of duty, a belief in the guilt of a particular individual,
or simply disgust with a system that often allows half-truths to be presented to the jury—
can warp the investigator’s purpose. Investigators must never allow such issues and their
associated dilemmas to cause them to stray from their professional duty, which is to remain
an objective seeker of truth.

Suggested Reading
Bevel, T., and Gardner, R.M., Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene
Reconstruction, 3rd ed., Chap. 14, Crime Scene Reconstruction, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2008.
Chisum, W.J., and Rynearson, J.M., Evidence and Crime Scene Reconstruction, Section III,
Reconstructing Crime, Rynearson, J.M., Ed., Shingletown, CA, 1989.
Gardner, R.M., and Bevel, T., Practical Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL, 2009.
Nordby, J.J., Dead Reckoning: The Art of Forensic Detection, Chap. 1, Method—the Andrews Case,
CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2000.

Chapter Questions
1. What is the basic goal of crime scene processing?
2. The police utilize five basic objectives in seeking their goals of preventing crime
and disorder and protecting the life and liberty of their fellow citizens. Which
two of the five objectives are more closely related to the crime scene investigation
and why?
3. Why is physical evidence more objective than testimonial evidence such as eyewit-
ness accounts?
4. The interpretive value of evidence is a function of what?
5. Chisum and Rynearson (1989) identified five ways in which context manifests
itself in the crime scene. What are they?
6. Bevel and Gardner (2008) defined four questions that the investigator should ask
about evidence. What are they?
7. Describe and explain the forensic linkage triangle.
8. Any good crime scene examination requires five key ingredients. What are they?
9. Describe and explain the three crime scene integrity issues that the investiga-
tor considers.
10. What is the standard that the investigator uses when pursuing a solution to crime,
and why is this standard necessary?

Notes
1. Chisum, W.J., and Rynearson, J.M., Evidence and Crime Scene Reconstruction, Rynearson, J.M.,
Ed., Shingletown, CA, 1989, p. 93.
2. Ibid., p. 93.
Introduction 23

3. Ibid., p. 94.
4. Bevel, T., and Gardner, R.M., Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene
Reconstruction, 2nd ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2001.
5. Ibid., p. 36.
6. Geberth, V.J., Practical Homicide Investigation Checklist and Field Guide, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL, 1997.
7. Saferstein, R., Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Science, 6th ed., Prentice Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1998, paraphrased as presented by Edmund Locard.
8. Doyle, Sir Arthur Conan, The Complete Strand Version of the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes,
Wordsworth Editions, Ltd., Hertfordshire, UK, 1996, p. 982.
9. Chisum and Rynearson, Evidence and Crime Scene Reconstruction, p. 93.
Understanding the Nature of
Physical Evidence
2
Throughout this text, one particular theme will be evident: physical evidence has greater
power and ability than testimonial evidence in defining what happened at any crime. This
is not to say that testimonial evidence should be ignored or excluded, but an understand-
ing of physical evidence will provide an objective foundation for any subsequent theory of
the crime. Physical evidence is what it is, and it is tangible. Presented with DNA (deoxy-
ribonucleic acid) evidence from the scene or a photograph of the condition of the scene,
only a fool would argue that the DNA was not really there or that the scene looked other
than as depicted in the photograph. To gauge testimonial evidence, all we have is our
perception of the individual. Does she appear honest? Did he have the ability to perceive
what he reported? Any witness is capable of unconsciously misperceiving events or, for
that matter, purposely misrepresenting events based upon some personal agenda. This is a
well-established fact in the study of criminal investigation. Understanding this, we do not
exclude testimonial evidence, but we certainly seek corroboration of testimonial evidence
through some objective means. That means is called crime scene analysis, which is the
end result of any effort directed at crime scene processing. The more physical evidence
recovered, the more likely a functional and objective theory of what transpired during the
crime will be forthcoming.
In 1933, Luke S. May commented in his text Scientific Murder Investigation that “before
[the detective or investigator] can successfully conduct a search for evidence, he must know
what he is searching for.”1 Never were more accurate words written, for in order to collect
physical evidence, the crime scene technician must first recognize it. In the past, that was
a relatively easy process. Items such as fingerprints, bloodstains, shell casings, or weapons
stood out at the scene, leaving little doubt that they might serve a function in solving the
crime. But with each new advent in technology, the capability of forensic science increases.
Now, even the slightest trace of evidence (e.g., touch DNA) has the ability to provide clear
and specific information to the investigation.
Before the crime scene technician can expect to process a scene for evidence, he or
she must have a working knowledge of the nature of physical evidence, what a crime lab
can do with it, and how best to collect it. This in no way presupposes that he or she is
expert in every discipline of forensics; lacking this understanding, the technician is likely
to overlook evidence or collect it in an inappropriate fashion. Crime scene examination
is very much a discipline involving, as Bruce Wiley says, “lab rats and field mice.”2 Both
must understand each other’s role; both must work together in order to achieve truth. If
the crime scene investigator fails to collect the evidence, or collects it in an inappropriate
fashion, the laboratory scientist cannot do his or her job. Therefore, it is incumbent in the
job for the crime scene technician to take an interest in all aspects of forensics and to try
to remain current. An effective means of accomplishing this is to get involved in the vari-
ous professional forensic associations and to pursue certifications like those offered by the
International Association of Identification.

25
26 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Class and Individual Characteristics

Not all evidence is created equal. Some evidence provides specific and detailed informa-
tion for the investigation, while other evidence provides only limited assistance. Based on
specificity, the characteristics presented by all physical evidence can be classified in two
categories: class characteristics or individual characteristics.
Class characteristics describe traits or characteristics of evidence that allow the item
to be compared with a group. Tuthill and George defined class characteristics as “char-
acteristics that are common to several objects.”3 Class characteristics serve forensics best
in eliminating possibilities. Depending upon the similarities or differences of the class
characteristics, items can often be excluded as belonging to a group. Class characteristics
may include size, color, common manufacturing patterns, or taxonomic classifications. By
comparing the class characteristics of a questioned item to a known item, should any one
of the class characteristics fail to match, the forensic scientist can effectively establish that
they are not of common origin. For example, consider the recovery of a piece of glass from
a suspect’s clothing. The color and refractive index (the manner in which the glass bends
light) can be compared with a sample of known glass from the crime scene. If the forensic
scientist discovers that either characteristic does not match, then he or she has effectively
established that the two items are not of common origin. On the other hand, if both char-
acteristics match, that does not prove the items are of common origin. In that instance,
they simply cannot be excluded as having come from a common origin. In other words, it is
possible that the suspect glass came from the scene, but it is also possible it came from some
other broken glass somewhere totally unrelated to the scene. Class characteristic evidence
is routinely presented in court, but it must always be properly represented. Class character-
istic evidence is also widely used as a screening mechanism by the forensic scientist.4 As a
screening tool, exclusion at the class characteristic level prevents wasting time and money
on a more detailed examination of other additional characteristics. For example, if screen-
ing of a blood sample finds a specific antigen (a class characteristic) in the known sample
but this antigen is absent in the questioned sample, then the two samples are excluded as
having a common origin. The exclusion is objectively established between the two samples,
and there is no need to pursue an expensive and time-consuming DNA examination.
Individual characteristics make up the second category. Individual characteristics
allow the forensic scientist to compare the item with a specific object or person and include
or exclude it as having originated from that object or person. Tuthill and George define
individual characteristics as “unique,” resulting from natural variation, damage, or wear.5
The classic example of individual characteristic evidence is the fingerprint. Fingerprints
result from natural variation in human beings, and no two fingerprints are the same.
Presented with a fingerprint in the crime scene that is compared with a known fingerprint
of an individual, the fingerprint examiner will either include or exclude the individual as
having left the print. There is no in between, no gray area. Of course, if something inter-
feres with the examination, even when dealing with individual characteristics, it is possible
to have a “no conclusion is possible” result. This latter situation is an inconclusive result
due to having insufficient detail to make the comparison.
Individualization, the examination of individual characteristics, is a major goal of
forensics. It is powerful evidence to conclusively state that this blood or this fingerprint
came from this individual. Of course, the power of this evidence is directly related to
the context in which the crime scene technician finds it. Evidence considered outside of
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 27

context is of no value. For instance, DNA is often touted in the press as a panacea for crime
solution, and it is certainly effective evidence. But the presence of matching DNA alone
does not prove a crime. If it did, then every male in the world should shake in fear at the
possibility that his lover might become the victim of a sexual murder and his DNA might
be discovered on the body. If the mere presence of DNA establishes a crime, then we may
as well send the juries home and start rounding up all the husbands and lovers. No matter
what evidence is available, no matter what its characteristics, it is only by considering all
evidence and the context in which it is located that solutions to crime are found. Thus every
piece of available evidence in a scene has function, and the crime scene technician cannot
afford to haphazardly collect or preserve it.
The list of forensic disciplines is a long one, including everything from forensic anthro-
pology to forensic toxicology. This chapter considers some of the more common forms
of physical evidence discovered at the crime scene and evaluated by the forensic scien-
tist, including fingerprint evidence, serological and biological evidence, trace evidence,
firearms evidence, tool mark evidence, shoe and tire impression evidence, document evi-
dence, general chemical evidence, and computer forensics. For further insight, there are a
number of texts available that deal with the full scope and specific processes used in all of
these forensic disciplines.6,7
Before turning to the specifics of the various categories of physical evidence, it is
important to define and describe several concepts that relate to a number of these evidence
categories. These concepts are Locard’s principle of exchange, cross-contamination, and
mechanical fit.
Edmund Locard, a French criminologist, is considered by many to be the father of
the modern crime laboratory. Locard’s principle of exchange8 is stated simply: every con-
tact leaves its trace. Locard believed that whenever two objects came in contact with one
another, material from the first would be transferred to the second, and material from the
second would be transferred to the first. This principle is the underlying theory behind
trace evidence examination. It is directly applicable to our actions in crime scene pro-
cessing and the theories underlying crime scene analysis. One has to wonder if Professor
Locard truly understood just how correct he was. Would he be surprised by our modern
ability to find DNA in minute quantities? Given the technology revolution, the true ques-
tion in forensics today is: How far will technology go in allowing us to recognize these
contact traces?
Cross-contamination is directly associated with Locard’s principle of exchange and
is caused by inappropriate handling of evidence. It is particularly problematic in trace
evidence examinations and serology examinations. By exposing one item of evidence to
another, evidence from the first is passed to the second, and vice versa. Consider the fol-
lowing example. In collecting rape evidence, the investigator often deals with the victim
in the blind, not knowing at first why she is there or what she will say. In many instances,
the victim identifies a perpetrator within a short period, and the investigator may talk to a
suspect on the same day. If the investigator were to set the victim in a particular chair prior
to collecting her clothing, a transfer of fibers from the clothes to the chair would occur.
If the investigator were then to bring the suspect into the same office and set him in the
same chair prior to collecting his clothing, there is a possibility that fibers from the victim’s
clothes could transfer from the chair to the suspect’s clothes. This is cross-contamination.
It is the responsibility of the crime scene technician to isolate evidence and use validated
collection techniques to prevent cross-contamination issues.
28 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 2.1  Mechanical fit is a method of individualization. An item can be associated with a
specific source based on the unique way the two fit together. The unique damage of the metal
razor blade shown in this photograph and the position of the staining on both sides of the break
produce a form of mechanical fit.

Finally, mechanical fit or “fracture matching” is a unique form of evidence. Mechanical

fit is where an item is damaged and pieces are deposited in the scene. These pieces, when
collected, are preserved in their original shape and condition. When the source object is
located and examined, it may be possible to see exactly where the piece broke off from the
original object (see Figure 2.1). Because the breakage is accidental, it is also random, which
makes it possible to individualize a specific piece to a specific item.

Fingerprint Evidence

Fingerprints are one of the most common forms of evidence sought in the crime scene. The
use of fingerprints, as a means of identification, dates back to the seventeenth century. In
the field of forensics, fingerprints have been an integral part of crime solution for over 100
years. Fingerprint evidence provides individual characteristics. An analyst can identify or
exclude an individual print by comparing ridge details and their associated minutiae in the
questioned print with a known inked fingerprint of an individual (see Figure 2.2).
Fingerprints develop in the human fetus at about 12 weeks. To date, no fingerprints
from different individuals have ever been found to match. This is a significant fact, consid-
ering that fingerprint analysis has been studied for over 100 years and that the Automated
Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) routinely catalogs and compares hundreds of
thousands of fingerprints. Fingerprints are classified using the modified Henry system,
developed by Sir Edward Henry in India in 1894. The taxonomy for ridge detail used to
classify fingerprints includes three basic ridge patterns: loops, which make up approxi-
mately 65% of all patterns; whorls, which make up approximately 30% of all patterns; and
arches, which make up the last 5% of all patterns. There are subdivisions within these pat-
terns: plain and tented arches; ulnar, radial, and double loops; and plain, central pocket,
and accidental whorls.
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 29

Latent Fingerprint Inked Fingerprint

14 14
1 1

2 2
13 13
3 3 12
12
4 11
11 4
10
10

5 5
9 9

6
6 7 8 7 8

0 1 2

Figure 2.2  Latent fingerprints are compared with an inked fingerprint of an individual in
an effort to identify or exclude a person as a source. The latent print examiner looks at a vari-
ety of physical characteristics (minutiae) in the print to determine whether there is a match.
(Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)

Fingerprint examination and identification is based on both the ridge detail and the
minutiae present in the patterns. Ridge identification is based on at least 15 different ridge
characteristics, including ridge endings, bifurcations, short ridges, enclosures, ridge dot,
ridge break, angular formations (deltas), overlap, spurs, bridges, trifurcations, crossings,
changeovers, ridge pinch, and loops. In modern forensics, the identification of a finger-
print is no longer based on an arbitrary point system (e.g., finding 8 or 10 similar points).
Edmund Locard first suggested a point system as a guideline, and point systems were rou-
tinely used in fingerprint identification up until 1973. Today, fingerprints are identified
and individualized based upon “finding agreement of individual characteristics—with no
unexplainable dissimilarities.”9
The majority of fingerprints found deposited in the crime scene consist of approxi-
mately 98% water. The remaining 2% is a combination of grease, oil, salts, and amino acids.
In the scene, fingerprints can exist in three basic forms. Latent prints are considered to
be the generally invisible prints created by the deposit of normal body secretions. Patent
prints are fingerprints caused by the deposit of contaminants (e.g., bloody or greasy finger
marks) that are visible to the naked eye. Plastic prints are fingerprint impressions where a
print has been deposited in a soft surface such as wax.
The crime scene effort directed at locating and recovering fingerprints is very much
dependent on what surfaces are examined. The nature of the surface (e.g., porous, nonporous-
smooth, nonporous-rough, or other special conditions) determines what techniques are used.
Chapter 9 provides a detailed discussion of the various surfaces the technician is likely to
encounter and crime scene techniques available for developing prints from those surfaces.
There are several important considerations the crime scene technician should take into
account when processing a scene for fingerprints. First and foremost, the methods for lift-
ing fingerprints on scene represent only a fraction of the techniques available for recover-
ing fingerprint evidence. Using chemical enhancements and a variety of alternative light
30 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

source (ALS) technologies, a crime lab can recover fingerprint evidence in situations where
on-scene techniques could not possibly recover functional evidence. For this reason, in
serious cases the technician should never be in a rush to forego lab examination in lieu of
the speedier on-scene techniques.
A second consideration is that fingerprints are quite enduring. Far too often, techni-
cians arrive on scene and, because someone has touched or moved items in the scene, they
do not even attempt to recover fingerprint evidence. Granted, fingerprints from these post-
incident actions are likely to be recovered, but in and of themselves they will not eliminate
fingerprints from the participants of the crime. Fingerprints have been found in circum-
stances where one would never imagine the possibility of fingerprint evidence existing, for
example, smooth metal objects directly exposed to flame and heat. Nearly every advance-
ment in modern fingerprinting relates to recovering latent fingerprints under difficult situ-
ations and on poor surfaces. When presented with these difficult surfaces, the technician
should coordinate with a supporting fingerprint analyst before presuming that fingerprint
evidence cannot be recovered.
A final consideration is that there really is no way to accurately predict when fin-
gerprints will be deposited. Any number of conditions might prevent a fingerprint from
occurring on a surface that otherwise would be expected to hold prints. Simply put, the
technician should not be surprised by the lack of fingerprints.

Serology and Biological Evidence

Serological and biological evidence present the investigation with both class and individ-
ual characteristics for comparison. Biological evidence can exist in the form of blood and
other body fluids, such as spittle, semen, vaginal secretions, or any other any DNA source,
such as bone or tissue. Prior to the introduction of forensic DNA techniques, wet-bench
serology was directed primarily at class differences in human blood. These class differ-
ences included the specific blood type (A, B, O) as well as variations in blood antigens.
Differentiations in antigen systems were based on the Lewis system, the Rhesus system,
and a host of enzyme markers, including phosphoglucomutase (PGM), erythrocyte acid
phosphatase (EAP), and peptidase A (Pep A). All of these were class characteristics, but
underlying them were a number of studies that set probabilities for finding the particu-
lar characteristic in any given population. Wet-bench serology provided a description of
the questioned blood sample, compared that sample with any known blood samples, and
then offered a backdrop of statistical evidence documenting the frequency of the expected
markers. The statistics developed from this type of examination ranged widely, with the
low end of the range being as few as 1 in 200 (meaning that 1 in every 200 people tested
would demonstrate this particular characteristic in their blood). In other instances, the
examination would offer much higher discrimination, such as 1 in 200,000. Statistics of
this nature were only slightly useful to the fact finder. Regardless of the numbers, the sta-
tistics still provided only a class comparison that was excellent for eliminating suspects but
left the jury to ponder the circumstantial probability when the evidence indicated inclu-
sion in a group.
In addition to evaluating blood in this fashion, serologists have long been able to iden-
tify the presence of sperm and semen by testing for acid phosphatase or by microscopic
examination for sperm cells. They can also determine if saliva is present by testing for the
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 31

presence of amylase or starches, and they can distinguish between other body fluids, such
as urine, vaginal secretions, or fecal matter.
With the onset of forensic DNA evaluations, all of this evidence has taken on a more
significant role, since individualization is now possible as well. The existence of deoxyri-
bonucleic acid (DNA) was first reported in 1868. The structure of DNA was later discov-
ered by Watson and Crick in the 1950s.10 This understanding of DNA structure would
ultimately lead to the most significant scientific revolution in history, changing medicine,
microbiology, and forensics.
It is important to understand that the following discussion of DNA techniques exam-
ines DNA from the nucleus. Nearly every type of cell in the body has a nucleus, including
cells found in skin, organs, bone, and muscle. In blood, however, only white blood cells
have a nucleus. Red blood cells shed their nucleus during their early formation. Each nucle-
ated cell has a single nucleus, and each nucleus holds 23 pairs of chromosomes. At concep-
tion, each parent contributes one-half of these 23 pairs, creating a completely distinct set
of chromosomes in the offspring. Within each of these chromosomes are approximately
100,000 genes that define every trait of the organism. The basic subunits of these genes are
guanine (G), cytosine (C), adenine (A), and thymine (T). These substances always pair in
specific combinations, with G always pairing with C, and A always pairing with T. The
variable combinations and order present in the chromosome (consisting of over 3 billion
base pairs) are the result of natural variation through heredity. With the single exception of
identical twins, every individual’s DNA can be distinguished from the next individual’s.
In 1984, Alec Jefferys, an English geneticist, made a significant breakthrough in his
study of genetics in seal populations. He found a mechanism of mapping variable regions of
the DNA molecule, allowing him to compare the DNA of one source with that of another.
In time, Jefferys recognized the possibilities of his discovery and carried this research into
the study of how genes evolve in humans. After further study and development, a tech-
nique known as restrictive fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) was integrated suc-
cessfully into forensic work in the UK. RFLP was used in 1987 to resolve the homicides
of Lynda Mann and Dawn Ashforth in the town of Narborough, England. This case was
detailed and made famous by Joseph Wambaugh’s book The Blooding.11 As a forensic tool,
RFLP was certainly important. It evaluated several loci, and from this comparison it was
able to provide significant discrimination between samples. Typical discrimination for
RFLP examinations was 1 in 5 million, a far cry from the lower discrimination provided
by wet-bench serology. In many instances, individualization was statistically possible. As
a result, DNA was coined the “genetic fingerprint” by the press and received significant
hype. Having been rushed into the venue of forensics, DNA technology received a signifi-
cant challenge in the late 1980s but ultimately weathered the storm. An offshoot of these
challenges was the development of DNA guidelines, which helped eliminate some of the
poor work demonstrated early on by some labs. Beyond its role as the genetic fingerprint,
DNA significantly broadened the range of samples that could be compared. Previously,
serology was primarily concerned with blood and other body fluids. Using DNA, any sam-
ple that contained nucleated cells had the potential for individualization.
RFLP’s downfall as an investigative tool was its reliance on large and undegraded
samples. The typical biological sample recovered from a crime scene is both small (e.g.,
1 to 2 mm sized bloodstains) and degraded from being exposed to environmental con-
ditions. RFLP required a significant amount of genetic material to make an evaluation,
and since each cell only holds a single nucleus, there is only so much material available.
32 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Nevertheless, DNA analysis using RFLP technology proved to be a windfall to crimi-

nal investigations, allowing science to more effectively include or exclude individuals
accused of crimes.
Given the limitations of RFLP in forensic work, a new technique known as polymerase
chain reaction (PCR) was developed. PCR allowed the scientist to copy the DNA structure
in small samples, quantities too small to allow for RFLP techniques. By making copy upon
copy (literally millions of copies of the original material), enough genetic material was cre-
ated to allow a DNA examination. PCR techniques examined a completely different gene
area than RFLP, known as the HLA DQA1. Unfortunately, the statistical discrimination
produced by PCR under these circumstances was significantly lower than that presented
by RFLP. Although PCR technology allowed evaluation of much smaller samples, it was
not uncommon to have statistical results as low as those found in the old-style serology.
Oftentimes, PCR results ended up being nothing more than an expensively produced class
characteristic, a far cry from a genetic fingerprint.
To resolve this problem, the next major breakthrough in forensic DNA was the devel-
opment of short tandem repeat (STR) technology. STR combined concepts of PCR but cre-
ated statistical discrimination that was higher than that developed through RFLP. Thus both
degraded and small samples could be examined to the point of individualization. STR statis-
tics routinely exceeded 1 in 6 billion, so much so that few laboratories report higher numbers
and simply refer to such a conclusion as identification. With this technology, samples as small
as the amount of saliva deposited by licking a postage stamp resulted in individualizations.
Even with this capability, the advancement of STR technology has been anything but idle.
The most interesting aspect in the advancement of STR DNA technology is that of touch
DNA. STR techniques have advanced to the point that simple contact by an individual with
a surface has the potential to deposit sufficient quantities of cellular material to identify a
complete DNA profile. Thus, for example, a doorknob, bullet casings, or handles of weapons
have the potential to yield DNA profiles simply because they were manipulated by someone’s
fingers. This capability presents itself as both a benefit and a detriment to the investigation.
From the benefit perspective, because DNA analysts are now obtaining complete profiles
from smaller and smaller quantities of evidence, that effectively means individualization is
possible in a greater number of circumstances. Small quantities of DNA, that 10 years ago
would have produced no result at all, now provide a complete profile. This is an obvious
benefit to any criminal investigation. But this ability also means that mistakes by the evi-
dence technician or analyst while handling the evidence poses a greater risk of creating post-
incident artifacts (e.g., their DNA deposit) and perhaps even cross-contamination. Failing
to follow proper crime scene procedures, first responders or curious detectives can touch
an item and deposit traces of their own DNA. Additionally, inappropriate use of tools and
equipment or the inappropriate order in which they might be used presents the possibility of
transferring DNA on a tool or equipment from one crime scene surface to another. Cross-
contamination is clearly the lesser of the two concerns, as research shows that the deposit
of trace amounts of DNA through secondary contact may be possible, but it is unlikely.22,23
Nevertheless, this is a concern in terms of crime scene methodology.

Case Example: Evidence or Post-Incident Artifact?

In the late 1990s, the author was involved in evaluating the Austin, Texas, Yogurt
Shop murders. This was a horrific quadruple murder of four teenagers. The author was
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 33

provided access to the physical evidence, including the clothing of the victims. At the
time of the access, no less than 10 years had passed since the murders. In that time,
multiple teams of prosecutors and investigators had worked on the investigation con-
tinuously. At the time of the examination, the evidence was being held at the DA’s office
in preparation for trial. It was delivered to a conference room for inspection, not an evi-
dence processing room. The DA’s lead investigator, who controlled the evidence, offered
no gloves or table coverings, nor were any present. The author, however, brought appro-
priate table covers, Tyvek, and gloves and followed appropriate procedures while exam-
ining the items to prevent cross-contamination or inadvertent depositions of DNA.
One man from a group of four, believed responsible for the crime, subsequently went
to trial and was convicted of the murders. All seemed in order, until numerous years
later, during a subsequent examination, DNA was located on some of the clothing recov-
ered at the scene. This DNA did not match any one of the four alleged co-conspirators.
To date, even after significant efforts to identify this unknown source of DNA by the
many investigators, analysts, and associated parties, the DNA remains unidentified.
Was this DNA an integral part of the scene and deposited by the killer? That is the
obvious million-dollar question. If so, then the four men thought responsible are not
responsible. Could this DNA have been created as a function of haphazard handling by
one or more of the numerous investigators and prosecutors who were pursuing the case
over the 10-year period? That is certainly possible, specifically when one considers the
nonchalant way in which the evidence was offered for examination. Adding insult to
injury, in the original scene documentation, a “crime scene investigator” in the form of
a DNA laboratory analyst is observed in the scene in jeans and rubber boots. So was the
deposition of the “unknown” DNA a function of an ill-trained crime scene investigator?
That too is possible.
No one can resolve the issue, but consider the consequences. Four children were
murdered and no one has been held responsible for the act. The four families of the vic-
tims do not have justice. Consider the accused. Granted the state released the convicted
parties, but they are still identified on national television by America’s Most Wanted
as the real “killers,” even though that is now questionable. Thus the accused and their
families have no resolution either.
If the DNA in the Austin case was really evidence, it paints a very distinct picture,
far from the version presented by the DA at trial. If this DNA was simply a post-incident
artifact, then that mistake (by whomever) lay waste to the DA’s theory no matter how
correct the DA may have been. This isn’t the first case convoluted and sent into an
uproar by these minute traces, and it won’t be the last. One need only look at the televi-
sion to see the current claim of “foreign DNA” in the Jon Bonet Ramsey case. In the era
of DNA, evidence has to be collected, handled, and maintained appropriately.

Given the current capability of the crime lab to isolate DNA, it is absolutely necessary
that steps be taken to prevent the addition of DNA by investigators, analysts, and other
associated parties. Items should not be handled without gloves. Gloves should be changed
between items. Tyvek is not optional; it should be always worn in a circumstance where
the thought of DNA evidence is being considered. Cross-contamination concerns have to
be considered with regard to the actions taken on scene, and any potential source of cross-
contamination must be eliminated.
34 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Having considered this idea of cross-contamination and post-incident creation of DNA

artifacts, we should also note that DNA is not always transferred. Early efforts by DNA
researchers suggested that some people were “good” shedders of DNA and others “bad” shed-
ders of DNA. Continued efforts actually found that the hypothesis of what made good or poor
shedders of DNA had less to do with the individual and perhaps more to do with the specific
situation.23 So a lack of DNA on an object believed touched or manipulated by a particular indi-
vidual falls into Carl Sagan’s old adage that “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
Where is nucleated DNA found? What kinds of biological samples are of interest to the
lab? The answer to the last question is a matter of current technology, and the crime scene
technician should always be aware of changes and advancements that may affect his or her
actions on scene. In general the following are biological materials that have the potential
to provide DNA profiles:

• Blood
• Bone
• Dandruff
• Hair when the root or scalp cells remain attached to the shaft
• Feces
• Fingernails and the fingernail scrapings
• Fingerprints
• Particulate flesh, skin, or organs
• Nasal and ear secretions
• Saliva
• Semen
• Sweat
• Urine has limited potential to provide a DNA profile
• Vaginal secretions20

Another important advent in DNA technology is that of mitochondrial DNA (mDNA)

analysis. Mitochondria are organelles in each cell. They are the true powerhouses of the
cell, where the production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) occurs. Because of their criti-
cal role in producing ATP, these organelles exist in numbers within each cell, and each
mitochondrion is a source of mDNA. Mitochondrial DNA is not the same as DNA from
the nucleus. It consists of some 16,569 base pairs, forming a loop structure.12 The mDNA
is inherited singularly from the mother. Because of the manner in which it mutates, it can
be compared through a maternal line of related individuals over several generations. Thus,
given a questioned sample of mDNA, such as a hair or bone from a decomposed body, the
mDNA of any maternally related relative can be compared with the sample to determine
if they are related. This kind of evaluation can be particularly effective in missing person
cases, where there is no standard DNA sample of the missing person. In such an instance,
an mDNA sample from a mother, grandmother, or sister can be used instead. The use of
mDNA is quickly gaining popularity in hair analysis. As the text will discuss, typical trace
hair analysis is limited by its ability to discriminate samples, and often only a few ques-
tioned hairs found in the crime scene provide sufficient root material to allow for a stan-
dard DNA analysis. An mDNA analysis, however, is routinely possible with hair, providing
a far more objective exclusion or inclusion of an individual to a questioned hair.
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 35

Biological evidence in the crime scene is routinely encountered in one of two volumes.
There is either a large volume—represented by stained articles, tissues, or fluids—or trace
amounts. The following are general guidelines for the collection of biological samples.
Because of the variations in approaches, the technician should always coordinate collec-
tion techniques with the supporting crime lab.
When presented with volume amounts, the crime scene technician generally collects
the stained articles (e.g., clothing) and, after air-drying the items, submits them for evalu-
ation to the crime lab. In some instances, where a stained item is not of evidentiary value
(e.g., a bloodied chair), a sample of the volume is taken, and the sample alone is submitted
for evaluation. In a dry form (e.g., dried blood), samples can be cut out and placed into a
pharmacist’s fold. The pharmacist’s fold (Figure 2.3.) is then secured and placed in another
envelope that is sealed with tape. If the volume is wet (e.g., a pool of fluid), the technician
moistens a sterile swab with the sample and then air-dries the swab. Once air-dry, the swab
is double-sealed in envelopes or any other suitable container.
At the scene, stained articles such as clothing are collected in whatever fashion is nec-
essary and taken to a drying room. Placing bloodied clothing in plastic at the crime scene
is a necessary evil, since there are no other options. There are no drying chambers on scene,
and the technician cannot hang the clothing on the back porch and wait for it to dry. The
clothing must be contained, as the blood represents a biohazard. If the technician places
the bloody item in paper bags, the bags can become saturated, resulting in inadvertent

1 2

3 4

Figure 2.3  The pharmacist’s fold is an effective way to collect samples of small substances
(e.g., dried blood, paint chips, etc.). It is produced by folding the two outer thirds of a paper in
toward the middle, but at a slight angle. This results in a fold where one end is slightly larger
than the other. The folded paper is then folded in thirds again, but this time lengthwise. The
smaller of the two ends is then inserted into the larger. The pharmacist’s fold prevents particles
from escaping the fold. This is then sealed inside another appropriate container.
36 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

blood contact through the bag to other items. Handling the evidence in this fashion repre-
sents both a biohazard and a potential cross-contamination issue. Of course the clothing
should not be wadded up and simply tossed in a plastic bag. This kind of treatment will
result in post-incident artifacts and may cause cross-contamination of a stain or DNA
from one area of the clothing to another. Poor handling of this nature can result in los-
ing important scene context information. Whenever possible, place the item flat on clean
paper, and then fold the paper in to enclose the clothing without placing cloth against cloth
(see Figure 2.4). Once this is accomplished, the item is enclosed in any viable nonpermeable
container (e.g., a plastic bag) and taken to a drying room or chamber as soon as practical.
There it is removed and allowed to dry completely before being repackaged in paper using
the same technique. Biological samples should never be containerized for the long term in
plastic or nonbreathable containers. No matter how dry the technician thinks the item is,
mold and bacteria can develop and degrade the sample.
Trace amounts of biological evidence represent a greater challenge. First and foremost,
they must be recognized. The use of an alternative light source (ALS), which is discussed in
Chapter 9, may help in locating trace amounts of fluids like saliva or semen. Once located,
samples are collected in the same fashion as volume samples. If possible, the area in which
the trace biological sample is found is collected (i.e., the area cut out or the entire article
seized). If this is not possible (e.g., bite marks on a corpse), a sterile swab is used to collect
as much of the trace sample as possible.
Given the ability of STR to work with extremely small samples, it is imperative that the
technician considers any likely source of contact with DNA in the scene and then considers

1 2

3 4

Figure 2.4  Items such as clothing recovered for serology and DNA evidence should be pack-
aged to prevent blood or other fluids from being transferred from one point on the item to
another. This is accomplished by folding the item in paper, in such a manner that no direct
contact occurs. Once seized at the scene, these items must be returned to a drying room, air-
dried, and then repackaged for shipment to the crime laboratory.
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 37

collecting these items. It is also important that cross-contamination be excluded. Samples

should be collected independently using clean instruments. Technicians should change
gloves in between handling different items, and they should never chance the introduction
of foreign DNA (e.g., by licking the adhesive of an evidence envelope).
“Best practice” DNA collection techniques are a function of the supporting laboratory;
therefore the crime scene technician should always seek specifics on collection from his or
her laboratory in advance of need. Lacking specific directions, the following techniques
are considered acceptable when swabbing surfaces. For typical DNA sources (e.g., blood,
saliva, semen) use Dacron/polyester swabs rather than cotton swabs. Dacron/polyester
swabs are considered better for two reasons. First, the Dacron/polyester swabs hold up
much better than the typical cotton swab, particularly when used to swab rough surfaces.
Even when applying the swab with a smooth and soft touch, which is recommended, using
a cotton swab the technician will see cotton particles dislodge from the swab and be left
behind on the surface being sampled. The cotton strands left behind were the first part of
the swab in contact with the surface and may very well hold the greatest amount of DNA.
So the technician is literally leaving behind evidence. Dacron swabs will not fall apart like
the cotton swab. The second reason for using Dacron over cotton is that Dacron swabs have
no electrical charge, whereas the cotton swabs do. This slight charge can interfere with the
DNA extraction process at the lab.
When swabbing for minute traces and or touch DNA, an effective collection process
is to utilize swabs with a sponge type head. Depending upon sources, some labs prefer the
swab wet with isopropyl alcohol; others say water is fine. The sponge head is very effective
for swabbing large areas and like Dacron will not break down as cotton swabs do. So heavy
scrubbing of an area for these minute traces has no negative effect. The alcohol is said to
evaporate quickly, making it preferable to water. Another effective method for collecting
trace DNA from fabric, material, and other surfaces is to use small adhesives stubs (similar
to Post-it Flags®), standard adhesive tape, or any of the tapes designed for lifting gunshot
residues. Just as adhesive tape is used to collect trace hairs and fibers, the adhesive side of
the tape is applied repetitively to the area in question and then attached to a nonporous
backing and submitted to the lab. The adhesive in the items described above has no nega-
tive effect on extraction of the DNA; however, adhesives associated with fingerprint tape
lifters and other similar products tend to be too adhesive or gum up during the DNA
extraction process.24 These products should be avoided.
The appropriateness of double swabbing for DNA is also highly dependent upon the lab
and the country. Some labs do not double swab, simply because in their mind, you are split-
ting whatever minute traces are present onto two different swabs. This makes recombining
the material more difficult. Other labs suggest double swabbing as a standard practice. Due
to the obvious differences in opinion regarding collection methods, the best advice for any
crime scene investigator is to coordinate with the supporting DNA lab and identify what
that lab considers to be the best practice.

Trace Evidence

Trace evidence consists of a wide variety of materials. The nature of trace evidence is typically
that of class characteristic, but in some odd instances it may provide for individualization.
38 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Trace evidence is encountered in the crime scene in the form of hairs, fibers, glass, paints,
and soil. Using a variety of instrumentation, including the comparison microscope, infra-
red spectrometry, automated refractive index systems, and scanning electron microscopes
(SEMs), the forensic scientist can compare these trace amounts to known samples.

Hairs and Fibers

Using classic trace evidence examination, hairs can be distinguished first by species, and in
the case of human hair, by the general race (Caucasian, Negroid, Mongoloid) as well as the
general location of the body from which the hair originated (head, pubic, facial, axillary).
Examination of the structure of the hair—its diameter, scales, medulla, cortex, and pig-
ment—will allow the hair to be compared with a known hair sample. Hair analysis by the
trace evidence examiner is most often a class characteristic examination. In some odd and
rare instances, such as the use of hair treatments or peculiarities produced by repetitive
dyes, it may be possible to establish individualization of a hair to a known sample. Trace
evidence hair examinations are quickly being replaced by mDNA analysis, because mDNA
provides far more objective data.
Fibers, like hairs, are classified first by their originating source (e.g., naturally occur-
ring, manufactured, or synthetic). Manufactured fibers offer additional areas for discrimi-
nation. Dye and composition peculiarities can be examined through elemental analysis
using an SEM, and optical differences can be evaluated using both microscopy and infrared
spectrometry. Trace evidence analysis of fibers routinely results in class characteristics.
Hair and fiber transfers usually result from contact between people, objects, or cloth-
ing. Depending upon the source, this transfer may be limited in number. It has been sug-
gested that 90% of any transferred hairs or fibers are lost in the first 8 h following the
contact. Thus, depending upon the circumstances, only a small number of fibers or hairs
may be left for recovery. In terms of collection on scene, hairs and fibers should always be
considered fragile evidence. Once the technician spots a hair or fiber, it should immedi-
ately be documented and then collected. Without fail, after seeing a single hair or fiber in
the scene or on a corpse, the technician will step away for a moment only to return and
find the evidence gone. Whether lost due to some incidental contact or because it simply
fell to the ground, fiber evidence routinely disappears. Collect hairs and fibers upon dis-
covery. In instances where there are several trace hairs or fibers, these are best collected
by an instrument such as tweezers and placed into an envelope. The envelope is sealed on
all edges and placed into a second container. The propensity for fibers and hairs to literally
disappear cannot be overstated. Double-seal these items after collection to prevent their
disappearance between the scene and the crime lab. The use of an alternative light source
(ALS) is also effective in locating trace fibers. Any number of fibers may fluoresce under
different wavelengths of light, aiding in their detection by the crime scene technician (see
Figure 2.5).
In some instances, a general search for hairs and fibers is initiated on a surface such
as upholstery, car seats, floors, or other items. The two most common methods for search
and collection are taping and vacuuming. In taping, wide clear adhesive tape is cut in 8 to
10 in. lengths. Holding the two opposite edges, the technician applies the adhesive side of
the tape to the surface in question and lightly applies pressure. This is done in very much
the same way that one uses tape to remove lint from a suit. This single piece of tape is used
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 39

Figure 2.5  An alternative light source (ALS) is an effective tool for searching for fibers. Many
fibers are nearly impossible to see in natural light but will fluoresce under different wave-
lengths of light. In the photo, the small fiber mixed in with the eyebrow of the victim is not
visible. The inset shows the same area when viewed with an ALS. (Courtesy of Special Agent
(Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)

to cover a specific area until its tackiness is reduced. It is then applied adhesive side down
to a piece of transparent plastic (e.g., a document protector) and, if necessary, secured in
place. Using a transparent plastic backing allows the trace evidence examiner to conduct a
visual examination and prevents the tape from sticking, as it would if the technician used a
more porous backing such as paper. The process is repeated as many times as necessary to
cover and collect loose fibers or hairs from the surface in question. Numerous tapings from
a general area (e.g., a chair) can be placed on a single document protector, so long as each
piece of tape is marked so it can be related back to a specific location (e.g., front, back, or
seat). Separate backings should be used for distinctly different areas, such as when shifting
from a passenger seat to a driver’s seat. This prevents any potential cross-contamination
issue. Once collected, the backings should be sealed in paper envelopes, once again keeping
evidence collected from distinctly different areas in separate envelopes.
The forensic vacuum is another matter. Some crime labs hate them, while others sup-
port their use. The problem associated with a forensic vacuum is that the technician gets
it all: dirt, dust, dried Cheese Whiz—anything and everything is picked up along with
the hairs or fibers. When searching for hairs or fibers, the best advice before employing a
forensic vacuum is to check with the supporting crime lab.

Glass

Examination of glass from the crime scene is typically directed at one of three basic deter-
minations: glass type, direction of force, and sequence of force. Type determinations com-
pare a glass fragment with a known glass sample in an effort to determine if it can be
40 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

excluded or included as having originated from a common source. Direction of force deter-
minations evaluate the radial fractures present in the first concentric ring of glass fractures
in an effort to determine in which direction force was applied to pane glass. Shot sequence
determinations evaluate situations where multiple bullet defects in glass are arranged in
close proximity to one another and their radial fractures meet. By considering the termina-
tion points of the radial fractures, it is possible to establish a sequence or order of the shots.
All glass is not the same. A variety of “recipes” are used to make different types of glass,
and even a general style of glass, such as pane glass, is different from sample to sample. As
each batch of glass is produced, it may have a distinct mix of ingredients, slightly different
from that of a previous batch. The temperature variations the glass is exposed to as it is
manufactured can also result in variations in the properties of the glass from one sample
to the next. Basic properties such as color, thickness, and curvature may be evident from
one glass source to another, and each offers a means of visual discrimination between two
glass samples. Optical properties of the glass, specifically the manner in which it allows
light to pass through it, are defined by the various manufacturing variations. This quality
is referred to as the refractive index (RI) and is easily measured in the crime lab on even
the smallest-sized glass fragments. All of these (the various physical properties and RI) are
class characteristics, allowing the examiner to exclude specific glass fragments as having
come from a specific source. As with any class type evidence, a match of the class charac-
teristics simply indicates the two glass samples could be from a single source.
A variety of glass evidence can be found in the crime scene. Pane glass is often fractured
in burglaries or rapes, broken bottle glass may be involved in aggravated assaults, and glass
from automobile lights and lenses may be present in hit-and-run accidents. Fragments of
glass can be found on suspects when they have been in close proximity to pane glass break-
age. As the pane of glass is fractured, the glass does not merely move in the direction of the
force. The pane will reach a point of stress where the glass fails. As failure occurs, the pane
will rebound. In the process, a cloud of oftentimes micron-sized glass fragments is expelled
into the surrounding area, both in front of and behind the point of fracture. Therefore, an
individual breaking the glass is likely to be caught in this glass cloud, and small fragments
can be located in the hair, on the surface of clothing, and in particular in the seams and
crevices of clothing or shoes.
In instances of pane glass breakage, the suspect’s hair should be combed with a clean
comb, seeded with cotton. Anything falling from the hair is caught on a clean examina-
tion paper. The paper along with the comb and cotton are secured using a pharmacist-
style fold and then sealed in another container. The clothing of the suspect is collected as
well, with the suspect undressing over a clean examination cloth. Both the clothing and
the examination cloth are handled carefully during collection to prevent dislodging small
fragments. Any item suspected of holding glass fragments should be thoroughly sealed to
prevent inadvertent loss of the small fragments. When collecting other types of glass for
type determinations, the technician should collect samples of all broken glass in the scene.
Each sample should be marked as to its specific location in the scene as well as a warning
that the item is sharp and fragile.
When presented with lens or light breakage at a hit-and-run accident scene, all fragments
at the scene should be recovered. In addition to comparing the class characteristics of the
particles to any suspect vehicle, it is also possible to individualize the fragments to a suspect
vehicle through a mechanical fit. In this instance, the manner in which a fragment breaks off
from its source may allow it to be placed back in the original item at a specific location.
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 41

Determining direction of force is a simple process and can be accomplished by the

crime scene technician. The trace evidence examiner can always repeat it, but the evalu-
ation is straightforward and anyone properly trained can accomplish it. The purpose of
the evaluation is to establish in which direction force was applied to a pane of glass. By
understanding the direction of force, the technician can often identify staged scenes, such
as those associated with alleged arson and burglary cases. The method of evaluating direc-
tion of force is referred to as the 4R rule. This rule states that ridge lines on radial fractures
are at right angles to the rear.
The first consideration in conducting the 4R rule evaluation is to locate radial fractures
that are within the first concentric fracture. Radial fractures radiate out from a central
point in the fracture. Concentric fractures encircle the central area of the fracture at vari-
ous distances. Together, the radial and concentric fractures create a spider web effect, as
seen in Figure 2.6. The fragments from the inner concentric fracture tend to be pie shaped
with a relatively narrow terminating side on one end. This is not always the case, however,
and in some instances the technician may have to reconstruct the glass on scene or at the
lab in order to locate an appropriate radial fracture. It is important to locate the interior
radial fracture fragments, since evaluating radial fractures found on second- or third-tier
concentric fractures may not be accurate. An obvious consideration in this evaluation is in
knowing what side of the fragment was facing out and what side was facing in. This is best
accomplished on scene by examining the remaining fragments, particularly any remain-
ing in the windowpane. Residues and contaminants from the surface facing inside will
look and feel differently than those facing the outside.
Once an appropriate radial fracture fragment is located and a determination of
inside vs. outside is possible, the technician turns the fragment and looks at it in profile.
Conchoidal fractures will be obvious in the edge of the fragment. These fracture lines will
lie parallel to one side of the glass, and on the opposite side they will lie at nearly a 90° angle
(a right angle). The side of the glass where the conchoidal fractures lie at right angles is the
rear of the glass, the side opposite the force. The side where the conchoidal fractures lie

R1 R1 = Primary radial fractures

C2
C1 R2 = Secondary radial fractures

R1 C1 = 1st concentric fractures

C2 = 2nd or 3rd concentric

fractures

= Examples of fragments
C2 used for direction evaluation.

C1 = Inappropriate fragments
for direction evaluation.

R2

Figure 2.6  An important aspect of evaluating glass fractures is in locating primary radial frac-
tures. These are the fragments made up by the first concentric fracture and the radial fracture
lines extending out from it. The fragments colored in green would be appropriate fragments for
evaluating direction of force. The fragments colored orange would not.
42 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Rear Side - Side Opposite the Force

Right Angle

Side Force Was Applied from

Conchoidal Stress Fractures

Figure 2.7  The 4R rule says that ridge lines on radial fractures are at right angles to the rear.
The ridge lines are the curving conchoidal fractures seen in this side view of a piece of glass.
The red lines have been added to better illustrate the hard-to-see conchoidal fractures. The
fracture lines will be at a right angle to one side of the glass and nearly parallel to the opposite
side. Where they appear at right angles is the side opposite the force.

nearly parallel is the side where the force was applied (see Figure 2.7). The technician may
find it necessary to turn the glass fragment in the light or seek different lighting to see the
conchoidal fractures clearly.
In instances of multiple bullet defects in pane glass or windshields, examination of
the termination of radial fractures will allow, in some instances, a sequencing of the shots.
Additionally, by examining the bullet defect itself, it will be possible to determine in which
direction the bullet was moving. Both of these evaluations are described and explained in
a discussion of trajectory analysis in Chapter 10.

Paints and Polymers

Paint and other polymers are encountered in a variety of crime scenes. Hit-and-run acci-
dent scenes account for a significant number of paint analysis requests. It is also possible
to encounter situations in which trace amounts of paint are deposited on a suspect, victim,
or object during the commission of a crime. In such instances, the investigator may wish
to determine if the paint is similar to some known paint sample. Paint is manufactured in
a wide variety of types for different functions. Above and beyond the color of the paint or
its basic type (enamel, latex, etc.), the ingredients and chemical makeup of the paint may
offer a means of discrimination. In circumstances involving full- or partial-thickness paint
chips, the sequence and layering of the various components (primers, base coats, and clear
coats) can offer a method of discrimination as well. The trace evidence examiner uses a
variety of instrumentation, including fluorescent microscopy, infrared spectrometry, gas
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 43

chromatography, and the scanning electron microscope to look for and differentiate the
various differences between samples.
Paint samples represent the true trace evidence sample, as there is rarely very much
material present. Paint transfers and paint chips should be collected in their entirety. When
recovering a paint transfer on a solid object such as a paint trace on a fender or bumper, the
technician should try to cut beneath the transfer in order to get the full thickness. As a last
resort, the sample can be scraped from the object. Paint chips represent another opportu-
nity to make a mechanical fit; therefore larger paint chips should be collected carefully and
packaged so they are not further damaged. Small chips or scraped transfers can be pack-
aged in clean pill bottles or in pharmacist’s folds.
Known samples of paint are collected from any source the technician believes is
involved in the transfer. If the known standard is recovered using a tool to chip it off,
full-thickness chips should be collected, and the technician should ensure that a sufficient
quantity is collected. If at all possible, it is better to cut a small section from the known
sample to ensure that a complete standard is recovered.

Soils

Soil is a complex mixture of inorganic and organic substances, and it can vary significantly,
even across a single backyard. This variation may not be evident by mere visual examina-
tion (e.g., color or consistency), but it will become evident through analysis of the content
and quantity of the various minerals and substances. The trace evidence examiner looks at
the content of the soil, seeking environmental variations that will allow one sample to be
compared with another. Environmental contamination or unique environmental settings
can lead to variation from sample to sample. One useful approach is to evaluate pollens
contained in a sample. Plant pollens are easily identified by their structure, and the pres-
ence or absence of a specific pollen type in the soil may allow the examiner to exclude the
soil as having originated from a particular source.13
Known samples of soil from the scene can be placed in small, clean, pint-sized paint
cans. Generally, a minimum of ½ to 1 cup of material is suggested for any analysis.14,15
Samples should be taken from a variety of probable contact locations, such as points where
participants walked, fought, or where tires rolled through. If the technician collects foot-
wear or tire impression evidence, soil samples from the immediate vicinity of the marks
should be collected as well. Known samples from the crime scene should be collected as
soon as possible to prevent subsequent contamination or change. The soil should always
be collected to an appropriate depth. For instance, if tire marks at the scene penetrate to
several inches, the technician should recover soil to a similar depth.
Trace amounts of soil may be found on clothing, shoes, or tools used at a crime scene.
Vehicle tires, wheel wells, undercarriages, floorboards, and pedals can also hold trace
amounts of soil.
Trace amounts of soils should always be collected in their entirety and preserved in a
container that will preclude loss. When trace amounts of soil are found on shoes or cloth-
ing, the technician should not attempt to remove the soil. The entire article should be
packaged to prevent loss of any material and submitted for examination. If possible, soil
samples should be allowed to air-dry before final packaging. Situations involving safes or
44 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

safe insulation may be encountered as well. Both trace and known samples of insulation
should be collected and preserved in the same fashion as soil samples.

Gunshot Residues (GSRs)

During a firearm discharge, a significant level of burned and unburned residue is dis-
charged along with the bullet. These residues eject from the barrel, from the cylinder gap
in revolvers, and during ejection of the cartridge in pistols. GSR contains trace amounts of
three primary elements: antimony, barium, and lead. In the past, atomic absorption analy-
sis (AAA) and neutron activation were the primary methods of evaluating whether these
three elements were present on individuals involved in shooting incidents. Crime scene
technicians would routinely swab the hands of victims and suspects who were believed to
have fired weapons and submit these swabs for subsequent analysis. Unfortunately, neither
negative nor positive tests were considered to be of probative value by the forensic scientist.
False positive results were a common occurrence, since the three elements in question were
found in other circumstances. Just the same, for a number of reasons, individuals who had
handled a firearm would test negatively. An additional concern was that the presence of
the residue simply indicated that the individual was in the vicinity of the discharge. The
mere presence of GSR did not effectively place a weapon in the hand of the suspect. At the
present time, AAA evaluations are not typically utilized in the United States. Evaluation
of GSR residues is still possible using the scanning electron microscope (SEM). The trace
evidence analyst still seeks to locate barium, antimony, and lead, but rather than finding
these three elements independently, the SEM seeks unique fused particles that contain all
three elements. This distinction is important, as research indicates that the three elements
will occur together in a single particle only in gunshot residues. There is still a recurring
concern as to what the presence of these elements in a given context proves. Some labs have
assigned minimum threshold levels for the presence of these particles, while others believe
that when they achieve certain thresholds, this is verification of “holding” the firearm. It is
likely that continued research in this area will change the application and direction of this
type of evidence. Given a lack of consensus, the technician should seek the advice of the
supporting crime lab in terms of how and under what circumstances GSR evidence should
be collected. As GSR particles are not easily observed, when on scene, the crime scene tech-
nician may have to conduct a nitrate test on objects such as clothing or bedding in an effort
to identify possible GSRs. Once located, the object is submitted for further evaluation by
the crime laboratory.

Firearm and Ballistic Evidence

Firearms evidence holds both class and individual characteristics. Firearms analysis con-
siders the weapon and any expended casings, bullets, or unexpended cartridges in an effort
to associate these items to one another. Firearms analysis is also directed at examining
gunshot residues (GSRs) on objects and making distance determinations when GSR pat-
terns are present.
It is important for the crime scene technician to understand proper morphology when
describing weapons and ammunition. Excluding black powder weapons and specialty
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 45

b1
B

b2
A
a1
a2

b4

a3
b3

Figure 2.8  Typical cartridge components. Center left is a center-fire pistol cartridge (A). It
is composed of a casing (a1), bullet (a2), and powder charge (a3). Rifle cartridges are similar in
construction to the pistol cartridge. Center right is a shotgun cartridge (B). It is composed of
a metal and plastic casing (b1), shot of varying sizes packed in white polyethylene filler (b2), a
powder charge (b3), and a number of different paper and plastic wadding or shot shell cups (b4).
These act as a spacer between the powder and the shots and filler. Any of the components can
be found in the scene. The spacers and plastic shot cup are also capable of creating secondary
wounds. In close- or near-contact wounding, gunpowder from a weapon can cause stippling,
where particles of gunpowder are embedded in the skin.

weapons or ammunition, the following descriptions are functional for a majority of weap-
ons discovered at a crime scene. The typical ammunition is referred to as a cartridge, a
single and complete unfired unit of ammunition. The cartridge is made up of the pro-
jectile, referred to as a bullet. Bullets are of varying calibers and weights and are most
often described based upon their construction (e.g., full metal jacket, semi-jacketed, hol-
low point, wad cutter). In the case of shotguns, the projectiles are generally made up of a
number of shot pellets or a single lead slug, all of varying sizes and weights, depending
upon the particular ammunition involved. Bullets are seated in the cartridge case or, as
in the case of a shotgun, enclosed by the cartridge case. This casing consists of a metal or
plastic-and-metal cylinder, which holds both the gunpowder and a priming mechanism to
ignite the gunpowder (see Figure 2.8). Cartridges are either center fire or rim fire, depend-
ing upon the location of the primer mechanism. In center-fire cartridges, a small primer
cap is seated at the center and base of the casing. The firing pin of a weapon, upon striking
the primer cap, ignites the primer compound, which in turn ignites the gunpowder. In
rim-fire cartridges, the primer compound is manufactured into the rim of the casing. The
firing pin, upon striking the rim of the cartridge, ignites the gunpowder.
Weapons can generally be categorized as handguns, rifles, and shotguns. Handgun
weapons are short-barrel weapons designed to be fired with one or two hands. The primary
handgun designs are the revolver and pistol. A revolver has a cylinder in which ammuni-
tion is manually inserted. Depending upon the weapon, a cylinder can hold anywhere from
four to seven cartridges. With each pull of the trigger on a revolver, the cylinder rotates to
deliver a cartridge into alignment with the barrel. In order for the cylinder to rotate freely,
there is a slight gap between the cylinder and barrel, referred to as the cylinder gap. The
cylinder gap is important from a crime scene perspective primarily because it will often
create a distinctive gunshot residue pattern. Once fired, casings remain in the cylinder of
the revolver until it is manually emptied. A pistol, on the other hand, has an ammunition
46 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

magazine. Cartridges are inserted into the magazine, and the magazine is inserted into
the base or lower receiver of the weapon. The upper receiver of the weapon consists of a
slide and barrel that move along a tongue-and-groove rail on the lower receiver. To use the
weapon, the user must load the weapon. This is accomplished by inserting the magazine
while the slide is to the rear and then releasing the slide, or by pulling the slide to the rear
after inserting the magazine. The action of the slide, after it is released and moving for-
ward, lifts a single cartridge from the top of the magazine and inserts it into the barrel.
At that point, the pistol is ready to fire. When the trigger is pulled, the cartridge fires and
a bullet is expelled. At the same time, the slide is forced to the rear, and a small extractor
and ejector force the fired casing from the barrel, ejecting it out into the scene. As the slide
returns to its forward position, a new cartridge is lifted from the magazine and fed into
the barrel, once again reloading the weapon. After the initial manual loading, this process
is automatic unless a misfire occurs. Each time the trigger is pulled, a single cartridge will
fire until the magazine is empty.
Rifles are long-barrel weapons designed to be fired from the shoulder. As with all fire-
arms, they are manufactured in a variety of calibers. The term rifling refers to a series of
grooves manufactured in the barrel of the weapon that give the projectile spin. This spin
stabilizes the bullet in flight, making it more accurate. In the development of firearms,
prior to this discovery, all long-barrel weapons had smooth bores. Thus the term rifle was
coined to distinguish a rifled-bore from a smooth-bore weapon. In fact, all modern pistols
and revolvers are manufactured with rifling as well. This rifling on the interior of the barrel
is made up of projections (lands) and depressions (grooves) that will twist either right or
left. Rifle ammunition is designed and described in the same manner as handgun ammu-
nition. Rifles can be magazine fed or manually fed, and they operate on any number of dif-
ferent mechanisms. They can be a single shot (each time the weapon is fired, a casing must
be ejected and a new cartridge manually inserted), a semiautomatic (magazine fed, where
each time the trigger is pulled, a cartridge is fired and another automatically inserted), or
an automatic (magazine fed, where so long as the trigger is pulled, the weapon continues to
fire until the magazine is empty).
Shotguns are long-barrel weapons designed to be fired from the shoulder. They dif-
fer from rifles in that they have smooth bores. Shotguns typically fire a number of lead
pellets rather than a single projectile, although single-projectile ammunition in the form
of shotgun slugs is available. Modern shotgun ammunition consists of the cartridge, the
pellets or projectile, and wadding or shot shell cup. The shot shell cup is a plastic device
that both acts as wadding and helps keep the shot shells from expanding inside the barrel.
Both wadding and shot shell cups will behave as a projectile, but they do not have the same
flight characteristics as the shot and therefore do not carry as far. As with rifles, shotguns
can be manually fed ammunition or may have a magazine. Shotgun magazines consist of
a tubular mechanism located below the barrel. Magazine-fed shotguns operate primarily
by a slide action (a “pump” shotgun) that requires a manual effort to extract the old casing
and reload a new one.
Evaluation of any firearm by the crime lab always begins with an operational check.
Can the weapon be fired as intended or, for that matter, at all? Are all safety mechanisms
operational? What is the trigger pull? The firearms analyst notes any abnormalities, as they
may be important in explaining some aspect of the scene or incident. Firearms by design
and operation create or share a number of class characteristics with the ammunition they
utilize. These class characteristics include the caliber of the weapon; the shape of the firing
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 47

Figure 2.9  Bullet comparisons are accomplished using a comparison microscope. The ques-
tion bullet and a known bullet from a specific weapon are viewed simultaneously (look for the
small vertical line that separates the two images), allowing the forensic firearms examiner
to compare the microscopic striations of each side by side. (Courtesy of Kelly Fite, Atlanta,
Georgia.)

chamber; the location of the firing pin; the shape of any extraction or ejecting mechanisms;
and the number, size, and direction of twist present in the lands and grooves.
Presented singularly with a bullet recovered at the crime scene, the firearms examiner
can identify a list of possible weapons that could have fired the projectile based solely on
the caliber and the number, size, and twist of the lands and grooves present. This can
be valuable information when searching for a suspect weapon, significantly reducing
the number of weapons that must be considered. Once a suspect weapon is located that
matches the class characteristics of the questioned bullet, additional bullets are test fired
from the weapon. The firearm examiner then compares the striations present on the test
bullets with those of the questioned bullet. This comparison is not of the marks left by the
lands and grooves, but rather of smaller striations that lie parallel to the land and groove
marks. Remember that the creation of the lands and grooves is a manufacturing process,
and although they may appear quite smooth, there are microscopic variations in their sur-
faces, which differ from weapon to weapon. Additional variations in these surfaces occur
through normal wear on the weapon (e.g., firing of the weapon) or through poor handling
or cleaning. As the bullet is forced through the barrel, these small variations in the barrel
surface mar the soft lead or copper of the projectile, as seen in Figure 2.9. Comparison of
these microscopic variations allows for exclusion or individualization of projectiles to the
weapon that fired them. Pellets fired from smooth-bore weapons do not hold individual
characteristics, although slugs and shot cups may hold some potential for comparison.
Recovered casings can be examined for a number of marks. As the firing pin strikes
the primer or rim of a casing, it leaves a tool mark with microscopic detail, as seen in
Figure 2.10. In the case of semiautomatic and automatic weapons, the casing is explosively
forced back against the breech of the weapon during operation. This may result in a breech-
bolt mark across the base of the casing. In weapons with ejector and extractor mecha-
nisms, whether fired by the weapon or manually ejected by the operator, the casing will be
marked by the ejector and extraction mechanism. In addition to any class characteristics
presented by these marks, all of these surfaces are likely to hold microscopic variations as
well. Comparison of any one of these marks may allow exclusion or individualization of a
48 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 2.10  Casings are marked in a number of ways by a weapon. The two most common tool
marks on the casing are the firing pin mark and ejector marks. These marks are compared side
by side in the comparison microscope. In this photograph, the two firing pin marks indicate a
match. (Courtesy of Kelly Fite, Atlanta, Georgia.)

casing to a weapon. Casings can be compared to one another, even if no weapon is found to
compare them to. This can lead to recognition if a single weapon or multiple weapons were
utilized. The same is true of bullets. Lacking a weapon, bullets can be compared with one
another, leading to associations. Bullets, however, cannot be compared to casings.
Any projectiles and casings located in the crime scene should be seized and container-
ized. These items should not be marked on directly by the crime scene technician, as this
may mar or destroy microscopic detail. Ballistic evidence should always be individually
containerized and the container clearly annotated as to where in the scene the item was
recovered. Far too often, technicians collect a number of casings and throw them all in the
same container. If multiple weapons are involved in the shooting, significant scene context
can be lost by this action. The container should also prevent the bullet or casing from roll-
ing around or rubbing up against other hard objects, as this may also damage microscopic
detail. Small pill boxes or pill bottles are an effective container for bullets, bullet fragments,
and casings. During recovery, the technician should not place metal tools such as knives
and forceps in direct contact with these items. If bullets must be recovered from inside
wood or other hard objects, specific care must be taken to not inadvertently damage the
item as the technician removes the surrounding material. In the case of shotguns, all shot
pellets and evident wadding should be collected. Because shot pellets do not have indi-
vidual characteristics, they can be packaged together.

Case Example
During a block party involving a large number of individuals, gunfire erupted and
numerous participants were injured and one was killed. When police arrived, they
found casings and bullet fragments scattered about the parking lot from multiple
weapons. The crime scene investigator dropped placards at each of the 43 casings or
fragments and took photographs of these artifacts. Each of the close-up photographs
depicting these 43 placards and artifacts was taken at a distance of 5–6 ft, and even
in digital format, it was impossible to see the base of the casings or read the manufac-
turer’s information. No sketch was produced and no notes were made regarding “what
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 49

Figure 2.11  After collection and individual bagging on scene, at the office all similar casings
were put together. All context was lost, with no ability to establish where any single case had
been found.

kind” of casing was present at each placard. Each of the 43 artifacts recovered were
bagged in individual bags, but without annotation other than placard number. At the
office, the crime scene investigator removed each of the casings and put them together
with every other similar casing (e.g., all Federal 40 caliber) (see Figure 2.11).
All context associated with the ballistics information was lost as a function of this
action. There was no way to put any one of the casings or fragments back in position
across this rather extensive scene. By pure chance, the killing weapon was a Glock 357;
a Glock was recovered in the scene and every single Glock 357 casing was subsequently
associated to this weapon. Lacking the close-up photographs, the 357 casings were iden-
tifiable in the photographs due to the small tapered neck that 375 casings demonstrate.
Thus limited context was present on which to evaluate the conflicting testimonial evi-
dence as to who the killer was and where the killer was positioned while shooting.
Imagine this situation if there were multiple 357 weapons depositing casings in this
scene? The limited context presented by the situation would have been completely use-
less. The assumption that every similar casing was coming from a single weapon was
extreme at best. Remember, context is everything.

At the time of collection, any firearm in the scene must be made safe. This requires
manipulation of the weapon by the crime scene technician. The technician should note the
specific manner in which the weapon is or is not loaded. This includes, as in the case of a
revolver, creating a cylinder diagram. The cylinder diagram demonstrates which cylinder
was beneath the hammer and which specific casing or cartridge was in each cylinder. In
some instances, a variety of different brands of casings or cartridges may be present in a
weapon, providing important sequencing and scene context information.
When presented with a gunshot residue pattern or a shotgun pellet wound pattern on
clothing, skin, or other objects, the firearms examiner can conduct a test firing of the sus-
pect weapon to establish the distance of the weapon from the target when it was fired. These
test firings require using similar ammunition as that used in the event. This is necessary
50 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

because different ammunition may have different types of gunpowder with different flight
characteristics or different amounts of gunpowder. The comparison is accomplished by firing
the weapon into clean paper, from a variety of distances, until a pattern of similar size and
dispersion to the gunshot pattern or shot pellet pattern is created. On occasion, the firearms
examiner will conduct what are known as ejection studies. The purpose of this evaluation is
to determine the distance and direction the weapon will eject a casing when held in any given
orientation. Such studies often have limited value since the casings ejected from the weapon
will roll when they hit the ground or ricochet off walls or other objects. Just the same, the
manner in which the weapon is oriented and the ejection port is facing can alter the position
of the casing ejection dramatically. In certain scene contexts, however, these determinations
of casing position may be of value to the investigative team.
Trajectory analysis is another area of ballistics that involves the firearms examiner, the
crime scene technician, and the forensic pathologist. An examination of the trajectory of a
bullet is possible based upon impacts in intermediate targets, the shape of the final defect,
trace evidence on the bullets themselves (e.g., glass fragments or fabric), and information
derived from the autopsy. Trajectory analysis will often provide specific information to the
investigation. Trajectory analysis is explained in detail in Chapter 10.

Tool Mark Evidence

Tool mark evidence is usually the purview of the firearms examiner, although it is consid-
ered a distinct discipline. Tool mark evidence presents both class and individual charac-
teristics. Tools marks are formed by the interaction of various objects at the scene, creating
three general categories of marks. These include striation, compression, and saw and drill
marks. Striation tool marks are caused when the cutting edge of a tool is brought in contact
with and slid against a target surface. An example is the scraping of a chisel along a door
casing as it is forced into place. A compression mark occurs when a tool is forced into soft
material. The side-to-side leverage of the chisel in the door casing will likely create a com-
pressed tool mark. A hammerhead against wood or gypsum board will create a compres-
sion mark. Tools with opposed jaws, such as bolt or wire cutters, create compression marks
by forcing the tool edges into the target surface, cutting through it in the process. Saw and
drill marks round out the categories.
Tools are manufactured through a variety of means, all of which create class charac-
teristics. Besides characteristics such as size and shape, this may include mold variations
or extrusion and milling marks from machining. These characteristics might be shared by
several or several thousand of the same type of tools. Once the tools are employed, how-
ever, their individual history results in unique accidental variations on the tool edges. As
with many forensic examinations, the tool mark examiner begins with a comparison of
class characteristics and then proceeds to these unique marks.
Tool marks in the crime scene present a challenge. As in the case of striations on a
projectile, the most important tool mark variations occur at the microscopic level. Poor
casting of a questioned tool mark may or may not capture such information. A general rule
of thumb is that whenever possible, the tool mark itself should be collected as evidence.
Casting of tool marks at the scene is accomplished with commercially available products
such as Microsil and Durocast, which are designed to capture the microscopic detail.16 Use
of these materials is discussed in Chapter 9.
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 51

At the crime scene, tool marks can be found in any number of circumstances. The
internal mechanisms of a lock may hold striations from where lock-pick devices scraped
against them. Doors, cash registers, and other objects that have been levered open will
hold both striation and compression marks. Locks, chains, and wiring that have been cut
will hold compression marks from the cutting edges of the tool used. On rare occasions,
compression marks will be evident in bone during an autopsy. These are generally found
in the form of marks caused by blunt force to bony areas (e.g., the skull) or where the tip
of a knife blade was forced into underlying bone in a stab wound. In these circumstances,
it is almost always necessary to recover the bone itself in order to make any comparison.
Saw marks are encountered in everything from simple thefts to homicides in which the
body is dismembered. At the time of recovery, both tool marks and suspected tools must
be protected from additional damage. Protect tool edges and points by covering them (e.g.,
taping cardboard in place to cover the tooled surfaces). This will prevent the creation of
additional marks on the cutting edges through rough handling at the evidence room or
during transport to the crime lab. Once successfully cut from any object at the scene, a tool
mark can be packaged in an appropriate container protecting it from further damage. If
the tool mark cannot be cut out, then the larger object should be seized and the tool mark
covered for protection. Any recovery effort by the technician will likely create additional
marks on the item of evidence. Tool marks on the item should be marked clearly so the
examiner can distinguish between the questioned tool mark and any post-incident marks.
The use of tools at the crime scene also presents several opportunities to encounter
mechanical fit evidence. Oftentimes a perpetrator uses a tool in a fashion totally unin-
tended by the manufacturer. By using the wrong tool or using the tool in an incorrect
fashion, breakage can occur. Tips of screwdrivers and chisels or pieces of saw blades may be
present in the scene. If a suspect tool is later recovered, these pieces offer an opportunity to
make an individualization of the tool to the scene evidence. A second mechanical fit asso-
ciated with tools is based on paint. Many of the tools used in crime are not of the highest
quality, and bargain brand tools such as crowbars may be covered by thick enamel paint.
When employed in the scene, this paint can chip off in large pieces. If the crime scene tech-
nician notes, recovers, and protects these paint chips, they also present an opportunity for
individualization through mechanical fit.
An additional and very important aspect of tool mark analysis is the restoration of serial
numbers. Using a simple process, serial numbers that have been obliterated in metal can be
visualized. The stamping of a serial number results in molecular disruption and change of
the metal beneath the actual serial number mark. Even when the entire serial number has
been removed, these changes may remain in the deeper sections of the underlying metal.
The tool mark examiner will grind down and polish the area where the serial number was,
creating a smooth surface. Once this is accomplished, an acid is applied to the area. As the
acid interacts with both the surrounding metal and the stamped metal, the serial number
will become evident and can be read and photographed, as seen in Figure 2.12.

Impression Evidence

Impression evidence is present at the crime scene in the form of shoe and tire marks, bite
marks, tool marks, and plastic fingerprints. Tool marks and plastic prints have both been
52 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 2.12  A serial number restoration on a weapon. Even after the metal has been filed, the
metal beneath the serial number is changed. The tool mark examiner first files and polishes
the area where the serial number was and then applies a number of different acids to bring out
the number.

discussed and are handled by their respective disciplines. A dentist trained in forensic
odontology evaluates bite marks.
Tire and shoe wear evidence is an independent discipline that evaluates both three-
dimensional impressions, such as those encountered when a tire or shoe leaves an impres-
sion in soft dirt, and two-dimensional patterns, such as shoe marks deposited in grease or
dirt on a hard surface. Tire and shoe marks offer both class and individual characteris-
tics. In tires, tread design, noise treatment, and tread-wear bars are all manufactured class
characteristics that can lead to recognizing the type, brand, and even model of tire leav-
ing the mark. Just as a firearms examiner can look at the characteristics of the lands and
grooves on a single projectile and compare them to a database to identify possible weapons,
a tire examiner can compare the class characteristics in the tire mark to several established
databases, which will offer some indication of the type of tire that made the mark. These
class characteristics are certainly important, but once a tire is sold, the individual history
of each tire is unique. Accidental marks or variations in wear will offer individual char-
acteristics that the tire mark examiner can use for exclusion or individualization of a tire
mark to a tire.
If enough tire marks are present at the crime scene, a variety of characteristics of the
vehicle leaving the marks can be evaluated. This includes establishing the track width of
the vehicle, which is often inappropriately referred to as the wheelbase. Track width is a
measurement of the width across the front or rear axle. Given a dual set of tire marks (e.g.,
left and right side), track width is measured from either the outside tread to an opposite
outside tread or from an inside tread to inside tread. Using this information along with
the tread width of the involved tires, the examiner can establish a track width. Wheelbase
is a measurement from the center of the front hub to the rear hub, the distance between
the two axles. Turning diameter is the diameter of the circle created when the front axle
is turned to its full extent. In seeking these latter evaluations, the best advice is to contact
the tire mark examiner in order to properly record any details that may be required. Each
represents a class characteristic that may be useful in limiting the list of suspect vehicles
that need to be searched for or for excluding a specific suspect vehicle.
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 53

Test Print Enlarged Questioned Print Enlarged

I
W

I
W
I

I = Individualizing characteristic
W = Wear characteristic
C = Class characteristic

Figure 2.13  Shoe mark comparisons include both class and individual marks. Class char-
acteristics may identify a specific brand or model of shoe, but individual marks caused by
the unique history (wear and damage) of a shoe allow the examiner to compare a shoe mark
and associate it to a specific shoe. (Courtesy of Kim Duddy and the Washington State Crime
Laboratory. With permission.)

Shoe marks are evaluated by a number of manufactured class characteristics. Size

and sole shape are both important, but tread design is a significant class discriminator in
shoe marks. As with tire marks, major databases exist displaying the range of tread pat-
terns encountered in footwear, identifying the type and brand of shoe they are associated
with. With even a partial tread pattern, it may be possible for the shoe mark examiner
to focus the search for a suspect shoe to a single brand or model. As with all evidence,
individualization occurs through a combination of accidental damage and wear and tear
to the shoe. Each shoe has a unique history, and the accidental marks created by that his-
tory allow for the possibility of individualization of a shoe to a shoe mark or exclusion of a
shoe to a shoe mark (see Figure 2.13).
Shoe and tire mark evidence is documented at the scene using close-up photography
and oblique lighting. Proper photographs typically offer the examiner greater detail for
comparison than do plaster casts or other lifting techniques. Recovery of tire and shoe
marks at the scene is accomplished through the use of plaster compounds for three-dimen-
sional impressions. For two-dimensional patterns on hard surfaces, lifting media such as
gelatin lifters, electrostatic dust lifters, or rubber lifters are used. The recovery of impres-
sion evidence using these techniques is discussed in detail in Chapter 9.
Bite mark evidence is often encountered in the crime scene as well. Bite marks may
occur on human skin as a result of assaults and homicides, perpetrators may eat food
items in the scene and then leave the uneaten portions, or a perpetrator may clench some-
thing with his or her teeth and subsequently discard it. Food and other objects are seized
54 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 2.14  Bite marks in humans present difficulties in documentation. If a forensic dentist
is not available to document the bite, photographs of the bite mark that include quality scales of
reference are necessary. As with all impression evidence, it is important to hold the film plane
of the camera as parallel as possible to the surface where the bite mark is located.

and preserved by whatever means necessary. These items can be delivered complete to a
forensic dentist for evaluation at a later date. The forensic dentist, however, is best trained
to document bite marks on human skin. If this is not possible, it is imperative that close-
up photographs be taken of the bite with an appropriate scale. The best is an American
Board of Forensic Odontologists (ABFO) scale designed specifically for bite marks (see
Figure 2.14). These photographs should be taken in such a manner that the film plane of
the camera is aligned with the plane on which the bite mark is present. Holding the camera
at odd angles to the surface will create distortion in the photograph that can interfere with
any subsequent examination. Suspected bite marks should always be swabbed for DNA.

General Chemical Evidence

The chemistry section of a crime lab is called on to consider different types of evidence
in a variety of different crimes. They may be asked to conduct examination of suspected
drugs, to identify some unknown substance located in the crime scene, to search for and
isolate accelerant residues in fire scene evidence, to isolate and identify toxins used in poi-
sonings, or to evaluate blood samples for drugs and alcohol. With the efforts now directed
at environmental crimes, chemical analysis may play a major role in identifying contami-
nants dumped or deposited in an environmental crime scene. There really is no limit to
the questions that might be posed about some substance found or associated with a crime.
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 55

Chemical analysis is accomplished using a variety of instrumentation, including gas chro-

matography (GC)–mass spectrometry, UV and infrared spectrometry, as well as a host of
other procedures (e.g., microcrystalline test, pyrolsis).
In the crime scene, evidence that may require chemical evaluation is collected in its
entirety unless there is a significant volume. Unknown dried substances can be packaged
in paper bindles and enclosed in envelopes or other containers. Liquid samples can be
collected using a clean pipette and contained in a sealable glass or plastic bottle. If large
volumes of liquids are present, a sample of 10 cc is usually sufficient for subsequent analy-
sis. Evidence that will be examined for the presence of accelerants is always collected and
sealed in clean, unlined paint cans or glass jars. Plastic is not impervious to petroleum
products, so storing arson evidence in plastic has the potential for the trace amounts of
the accelerant to interact with the plastic, thus eliminating or changing the evidence.17 The
best response for temporary storage is arson bags available from forensic suppliers. When
used, these bags must be double-sealed to prevent any vapors from escaping. Additionally,
these bags can be used as an outer seal for paint cans or other final containers holding sus-
pected accelerants. When seized, suspected accelerant evidence should always be submit-
ted to the lab immediately for analysis.

Document Evidence

The document section of a crime lab is called on to consider and evaluate a number of dif-
ferent types of evidence in order to determine if the evidence is a forgery or a tracing, has
been altered in some fashion, or can be used to recover indented writings.
A forgery or questioned writing examination considers a known writing, such as notes
found at the crime scene, and attempts to identify the writer. This can include extensive
writings or simple signatures. An integral part of any forgery examination is to determine if
the writing is a tracing. Tracings are conscious efforts to copy a known writing. Because the
act of tracing lacks fluid movement, a tracing cannot be identified to any writer. Alterations
of writing can occur as changes in logs and ledgers, the amounts of financial instruments,
or any other imaginable change. Alterations are often evident under an alternative light
source (ALS), since different writing instruments were likely used in creating the original
writing and the alteration. The inks in these instruments may fluoresce at different wave-
lengths, allowing the document examiner to quickly identify the nature of the alteration.
Indented writings are most often recovered using an instrument known as an electrostatic
detection apparatus (ESDA). When examined with the ESDA, indented writings can be
found on documents that were located multiple pages beneath the original writing.
Document evidence is most often encountered in economic crimes, but any crime
scene can present document type evidence. The typical crime scene evidence will include
ransom notes, holdup notes, and alleged suicide notes. When discovered, all questioned
writings are recovered and packaged in paper envelopes. If there is any issue of indented
writings, the document is secured between hard cardboard to prevent damaging or adding
to the indented writing. If a writing tablet is involved, the entire tablet is seized, as indented
writings of drafts or additional documents may be evident on the remaining pages of the
tablet. All document evidence should be protected for fingerprint evidence. Paper is an
excellent medium for creating and retaining fingerprints, even after extended periods of
time and handling. Writing instruments are of interest as well. Any writing instruments
56 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

found at the scene and associated with the questioned document or alleged to have been
used in the writing should be seized.

Computer Forensics

An associated concern of document evidence is the proliferation of computers in society

and the departure of standard machines such as copiers and typewriters. In the past, docu-
ment examiners routinely examined typewritten documents and documents created by
copiers to include or exclude specific machines as having produced them. This capability
still exists, but the need for such examinations is quickly becoming outmoded by the use
of computers.
A forensic computer analysis section is usually a separate and distinct entity in any
crime lab. This section of the crime lab conducts analyses of all types of computer media
and systems when a need arises. Computer crimes run the gamut, including Internet fraud,
pedophile investigations, and hacker attacks. This text is clearly not the venue to discuss
computer crime investigation. Nevertheless, computer forensics is important, and com-
puter evidence is routinely encountered in the typical crime scene. In a master’s thesis in
1991, the author argued that the sheer volume of computer-generated evidence found in
normal investigations, without even considering true computer or Internet crimes, would
soon overload criminal investigators. That belief is now a reality, and the computer foren-
sics section is typically one of the most backlogged in any lab.
Computers are an integral part of our society, and we capture and store both personal
and business data on them. The very documents described in the previous section are now
created on computers and therefore exist not only as physical documents, but also as digi-
tal evidence. But digital evidence is quite different from other forms of physical evidence.
The investigator could tear apart a computer, a disk, or a hard drive and never be able to
lay hands on the evidence. Files exist as invisible magnetic fields on the disk. The reason
computers are so widely used is the ease with which we can store, retrieve, and change
data. Thus an alleged “original” file could have existed in any number of prior conditions
before it was recovered. Any 10-year-old knows how to change the time and date setting
of an operating system, so time and date stamps of files are easily spoofed. Getting rid of
computer files is not as easy as it might seem either. Unless the operator makes a concerted
effort, deleted files are not really deleted; the operating system simply tells the system that
the file is gone and that the disk space occupied by the file is now available for use. Thus
“deleted” information exists on the media if the examiner knows how to find it. Paging
files and disk files write information in memory to specific areas of the disk, and that infor-
mation will remain there until the system resources require that disk space. Computers are
also amazingly inefficient in storing information, often using much larger areas to store
a file than is necessary. These areas are known as slack space, and many systems actually
write data to the slack space at the time the file is created. This is random information
that happened to be adjacent to the file in memory and has nothing to do with the file in
question. Slack space data can provide a context as to when a file was created. The idea
of preserving evidence without alteration is a standard concept associated with evidence
collection; unfortunately, as operating systems have developed, so too has their complex-
ity. A DOS system would open a relatively small number of routine files at system startup.
Windows, on the other hand, reaches out and touches myriad files during startup, writing
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 57

to a number of files on the disk. So the mere act of starting a system has the potential, if not
done correctly, of opening the investigator to challenges of having altered the evidence.
All of the foregoing issues and factors provide a convoluted and difficult context in which
the computer forensic expert must work, but it also opens up the possibility of recovering
a wealth of evidence. Some of the examinations conducted by a forensic computer analyst
include determining content of drives and media, comparing data files, establishing when
a file or action was created or conducted, recovering deleted information and files, and
decrypting password-protected systems, files, or media. Computer-generated evidence can
be found in any situation involving a computer-generated document. A computer may
hold images of individuals or events that are of concern to the investigation or data related
to a criminal enterprise, such as burglaries or frauds. There is no limit to the type and
nature of computer-generated evidence that may be present in the scene.
Lacking training in computer crime, the technician should contact a supporting com-
puter crime team before attempting to seize a computer in the crime scene. They can walk
the technician through an appropriate shutdown procedure. Lacking this ability, the tech-
nician should use the following guidelines and document each step. If the computer is off,
photograph its condition and all peripheral connections. Disconnect the power and then,
using adhesive labels, annotate all connections and cables effectively so the system can be
reconnected in the same configuration at the crime lab. After all connections are labeled,
remove the cables and package them, ensuring nothing is lost. Place clean or unformatted
media into any open drive bays (disks and CDs) and then tape the bay shut. Secure and
protect the system components from rough handling or any source of magnetic energy
(e.g., radio transmitters) and remove them from the scene to a secure and appropriate loca-
tion. Unless it is clearly unnecessary, seize all peripherals such as printers, scanners, and
other external devices.
If the computer is running, the technician must try to ascertain whether a destructive
program is operating. Pedophiles, hackers, and computer-savvy drug dealers have been
known to set up destructive programs that they can initiate easily during a search warrant,
allowing them to overwrite incriminating files. If there is any indication of significant
disk activity with no underlying cause, disconnect the power immediately. If this is not
a concern, photograph the screen and document the nature of any programs running on
the system. After noting the nature of all programs running, disconnect the power cable
from the wall, then label and package the computer as described previously. When discon-
necting a system, look to see if there is an uninterruptible power supply (UPS) in use. If so,
disconnect the power by disconnecting the computer at the UPS.

Forensic Pathology

Forensic pathology is a book unto itself. Chapter 12 attempts to introduce some basic
concepts and terms associated with forensic pathology as well as providing a list of refer-
ences that discuss forensic pathology in detail.18–20 In the context of this book, what is
important is that the investigator understand that not all pathologists are created equal;
they are differentiated by their training. A clinical pathologist generally works at a hos-
pital and is concerned with determining the cause of death (i.e., an objective medical
reason why the body ceased to function). A forensic pathologist is trained in additional
skills, such as patterns of injuries, and speaks to both the cause and manner of death.
58 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

The forensic pathologist also helps establish the interval of death (time since death). The
manner of death is a determination of whether the death is a homicide, a suicide, acci-
dental, the result of natural causes, or undetermined. The forensic pathologist considers
both medical evidence and scene context to make these determinations. If the support-
ing ME (medical examiner) system does not have its own investigators, the crime scene
technician must act as the eyes of the ME and provide him or her with clear and objec-
tive scene data. To serve in this role and to enhance the coordination between the ME
and the scene investigators, it is imperative for a crime scene technician to seek and
receive training in death investigation and patterns of injuries. This training will give
the investigator a better understanding of any information developed by the forensic
pathologist and allow him or her to incorporate that information into any subsequent
crime scene analysis.

Summary

The crime scene technician never knows what kind of evidence he or she will find at a scene.
In order to collect and use that evidence, the technician must first recognize the evidence,
know in what condition it must be recovered, collect it in a usable format, and understand
what the crime lab can do with the evidence. At the most basic level, physical evidence is
distinguished by the specificity of its properties. Items may have class or individual char-
acteristics. A class characteristic allows the item of evidence to be compared with another
group of items and excluded from the group. Lacking exclusion, a class characteristic does
not establish inclusion in the group, only the possibility of inclusion. An example of a class
characteristic is a tread design on a shoe mark. An individual characteristic allows the item
to be compared with another item and to be excluded or included as having originated
with that specific item. Individual characteristics are unique, created as a result of natural
variation, natural wear, or accidental damage. An example of an individual characteristic
is the microscopic striations present on the barrel of a weapon.
There are a variety of different forensic disciplines, each specializing in examining differ-
ent types of physical evidence. Any one of the disciplines might be of critical importance in
answering questions of concern to the investigator or the judge or jury. No single area of evi-
dence stands alone, and all of the various items of evidence must be collected and evaluated.
The typical evidence encountered in a crime scene includes fingerprints; biological evidence,
including any item involving DNA; trace evidence such as hairs, fibers, soils, paints, and glass;
tool marks; ballistic and firearms evidence; impression evidence from tires and shoes; as well
as general chemical evidence. A forensic scientist or criminalist examines each category of
evidence in an effort to define objective scientific knowledge about the item. Whenever pos-
sible, the forensic specialist uses the class and individual characteristics common to that cat-
egory of evidence to establish or exclude an association with some other item of evidence.

Suggested Reading
DiMaio, V.J.M., and Dana, S.E., Handbook of Forensic Pathology, Landes-BioScience, Austin, TX, 1998.
DiMaio, D.J., and DiMaio, V.J.M., Forensic Pathology, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1993.
Fisher, B.A.J., Techniques of Crime Scene Investigation, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2000.
Understanding the Nature of Physical Evidence 59

James, S., and Nordby, J.J., Eds., Forensic Science: An Introduction to Scientific and Investigative
Techniques, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2002.
Ramirez, C., and Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL, 2011.
Spitz, W.U., and Fisher, R.S., Medicolegal Investigation of Death, Charles C. Thomas Publishing,
Springfield, IL, 1980.
Tuthill, H., and George, G., Individualization: Principles and Procedures in Criminalistics, Lightning
Powder, Jacksonville, FL, 2002.

Chapter Questions
1. Describe the differences between class and individual characteristics of evidence.
2. Of the available methods for DNA analysis, which is the best for individualization
in forensic work and why?
3. Describe how tape is used to collect hair and fiber evidence at the crime scene.
4. When evaluating glass fractures for direction of force, which fragments can be
used in the evaluation?
5. How is paint layering used to differentiate two paint samples, such as when com-
paring a paint sample from a hit-and-run to a suspect vehicle?
6. Comparison of soil sample is based on environmental variations from one sample to
the next. What are some of the most significant forms of environmental variation?
7. How would evaluating crime scene evidence involving a pistol differ from that
involving a revolver?
8. Rifling refers to what two manufactured components of a barrel?
9. How are bullets marked for evidence and why?
10. Of the two methods used to collect tool mark evidence (collection of the entire
item or casting of the mark), which is better and why?
11. What is the most significant class characteristic in shoe mark examinations and why?
12. What type of containers are used to collect fire scene evidence in which accelerants
are believed to be present?
13. In terms of a forensic analysis, what is the difference between a forged writing and
a traced writing?
14. What is the most appropriate response by the crime scene technician for collecting
a computer for computer forensic analysis?

Notes
1. May, L.S., Scientific Murder Investigation, Institute of Scientific Criminology, Seattle, WA, 1933,
p. 9.
2. Wiley, B., presentation to the Association of Crime Scene Reconstruction, Denver, CO, October
23, 2003.
3. Tuthill, H., and George, G., Individualization: Principles and Procedures in Criminalistics,
Lightning Powder, Jacksonville, FL, 2002, p. 58.
4. Ibid., p. 59.
5. Ibid., pp. 59–61.
6. James, S.H., and Nordby, J.J., Eds., Forensic Science: An Introduction to Scientific and Investigative
Techniques, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2002.
7. Fisher, B.A.J., Techniques of Crime Scene Investigation, 6th ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2000.
60 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

8. Edmund Locard, http://www.enotes.com/forensic-science/locard-s-exchange-principle,

1 Sept, 2011.
9. Tuthill and George, Individualization, p. 106.
10. Coleman, H., and Swenson, E., DNA in the Courtroom: A Trial Watcher’s Guide, GenLex Press,
Seattle, WA, 1994, p. xi.
11. Wambaugh, J., The Blooding, Bantam Books, New York, 1989.
12. James, S.H., and Nordby, J.J., Eds., Forensic Science: An Introduction to Scientific and Investigative
Techniques, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2002, p. 243.
13. Ibid., p. 272.
14. U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command, Crime Scene Handbook, Dept. of the Army, HQS
USACIDC, Ft. Belvoir, VA, 1999, p. 119.
15. Eltzeroth, R., and Elzerman, T., Eds., The Crime Scene Technician Manual, University of Illinois
and Illinois Dept. of Law Enforcement, Springfield, IL, 1981, p. 302.
16. Microsil and Durcoast are registered trademarks of Kinderprint Industries and Sirchie
Fingerprint Laboratories, respectively.
17. Fire Investigation Unit, Metropolitan Police Forensic Laboratory, The Work of the Fire
Investigation Unit, London, p. 10.
18. DiMaio, V.J.M., and Dana, S.E., Handbook of Forensic Pathology, Landes-BioScience, Austin,
TX, 1998.
19. DiMaio, D.J., and DiMaio, V.J.M., Forensic Pathology, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1993.
20. Spitz, W.U., and Fisher, R.S., Medicolegal Investigation of Death, Charles C. Thomas Publishing,
Springfield, IL, 1980.
21. Interpol DNA Monitoring Expert Group, Interpol Handbook on DNA Data Exchange and
Practice, 2nd ed., OIPC-Interpol, Lyon France, pp. 21–23.
22. Wickenheiser, R.A., Trace DNA: A Review, Discussion of Theory and the Application of the
Transfer of Trace Quantities of DNA through Skin Contact, Journal of Forensic Science, 47(3),
2002, 442–450.
23. Phipps, M., and Petricevic, S., The Tendency of Individuals to Transfer DNA to Handled Items,
Forensic Science International, 168, 2007, 162–168.
23. Barash, M., Reshef, A., and Brauner, P., The Use of Adhesive Tape for Recovery of DNA from
Crime Scene Items, Journal of Forensic Science, 55(4), 2010, 1058–1064.
Actions of the Initial
Responding Officer
3
In order to understand and ultimately achieve a solution to the puzzle that each crime
scene represents, a number of different entities must work together. These entities include
the initial responding officers, the crime scene technicians, the investigators, and the
laboratory scientists. Each one of these groups plays a critical role, and each has specific
responsibilities. How these groups interact in a given situation is organizationally driven;
thus SOP (standard operating procedures) and custom will define specific responsibilities
differently in different organizations. Some of the factors that will affect these differences
include the size of the organization, technical capabilities internal to the organization, and
preferences on the part of the supervisors involved. In whatever fashion an organization
chooses to define responsibility, a failure of the groups to work together or a failure of any
one group to do its individual part will hobble an investigation.
No single group’s responsibility is as clearly defined or as often described in crime
scene references as that of the initial responding officer. The role of the initial responding
officer is critical, and prior authors such as Geberth1 and Griffin and Slack 2 have effec-
tively assisted in defining this role. Initial responding officers do not process scenes; the
crime scene technician or investigator accomplishes processing. Nevertheless, the initial
responding officer sets the stage for a successful processing of the crime scene by bringing
control to what is generally a chaotic situation. Crime scenes are not abnormal circum-
stances for the responding patrol officer. The responding officer’s objectives at the crime
scene are the same as they are in any critical incident: bring the site under control and
coordinate resources.
Site control demands that the officer size up the situation in an attempt to define the
full extent of the problem. The officer then mobilizes whatever available resources he or
she may have in an attempt to achieve control without negatively impacting on any future
operations. Finally, the officer seeks to isolate the area in an effort to prevent further injury
or the escape of individuals. Once this initial site control is achieved and as the inci-
dent matures, the priority changes to establishing control of all of the resources present.
Establishing entrance and exit routes to the incident, creating staging areas for resources,
and creating effective liaison with supervisors who arrive to take control are all part of this
transition of priorities. With these basic thoughts in mind, let us explore the specifics of
how this is accomplished at the crime scene.

Specific Objectives of the Initial Response

These basic goals of incident management that the initial responder is responsible for can
be achieved and expressed in five specific objectives at the crime scene. To safely and effec-
tively gain control of the scene the initial responding officer must:

• Document the provided information

• Not become a casualty

61
62 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

• Provide for emergency care

• Secure and control the scene and all those within it
• Release the scene to the appropriate authorities (the investigating detective or
crime scene technician)

Documenting Initial Information

Documenting the initial information might seem unimportant to the patrol officer
responding to a crime scene, particularly given the presence of computer-aided dis-
patch and the fact that most departments record phone lines and radio transmissions
alike. In actuality, keeping what was said and who said it straight at the onset of any
crime scene investigation can be a critical skill. The responding officer should be clear
about and make written notes regarding what he or she was told about the situation
and specifically identify who told it to him or her. A mass of chaotic facts often pres-
ent themselves as the officer is en route and certainly as the officer arrives on scene.
While the officer is traveling to the scene, there may be confusion on the part of dis-
patch as to the nature of injuries or who is reporting the incident, or even the specifics
of where the scene is. As these “facts” are reported by dispatch, the officer generally
takes them at face value. This can result in false leads and initial confusion in react-
ing to the scene. Incorrect information may be repeated to arriving investigators, who
then incorporate this information into the investigation. Days or weeks later, everyone
involved is still trying to understand why or how that information was introduced into
the investigation.
Upon the officer’s arrival, witnesses or suspects are usually present. In the initial com-
motion and confusion, these individuals will interact with officers, providing additional
information. What they claim to know in the heat of the moment may be at odds with
what they claim to know at a later date. If their knowledge of some fact suggests guilt or
involvement, they may ultimately claim that an officer on scene advised them of this piece
of information. The ability of an initial responding officer to delineate who said what and
at what point they said it can be critical when investigators are evaluating who actually
knew what and when.
The responding officer’s observations upon arrival are important as well. A significant
consideration is for the officer to verify the location of the scene. Once again, this might
seem unnecessary, since as police arrive, they naturally gravitate to or are led to a focal
point. The cluster of EMS (emergency medical services) vehicles, a group standing around
on the street, and any unusual activities will lead the police to the incident in question. To
the initial responder, the address itself rarely serves a significant role in locating the actual
scene once he or she arrives in the immediate area.
Yet a failure to verify the scene can be catastrophic to the investigation. More often
than not, investigators will require a warrant to conduct a search of the crime scene. For
example, imagine officers who are dispatched to a scene in which the caller tells dispatch
the address is 123 Smith Street. The officers arrive and, as expected, gravitate to the loca-
tion of the activity, accepting what they received from dispatch as the address. As the crime
scene technicians arrive, confusion is often still a part of the overall environment. In haste,
the scene investigators accept the address as reported to them by the responding officer,
without verifying it themselves. If the crime scene investigators then seek a search warrant
Actions of the Initial Responding Officer 63

based on 123 Smith Street, when in fact this turns out to be the caller’s home address across
the street, the evidence discovered through the technically incorrect warrant may be in
jeopardy. Simple verification by those responding to the scene, to ensure that the address is
as it was reported, will prevent this type of mistake from occurring.
Observations regarding the specific time of arrival can also play an important role,
narrowing timeframes of events that may have transpired. Just as important, responding
officers should mentally note and later document what they observe as they approach the
scene. Even with quick response times, in the intervening period between the reporting of
the event and the arrival of officers, individuals may be leaving the scene, or for that matter,
others may be arriving who are uninvolved. The ability of the responding officer to comment
on arrivals and departures, to know what various people may or may not have been doing
as the police arrived, or to describe vehicles observed leaving the scene all come into play
as the investigative team develops additional information. Any one of these observations
might prove critical in corroborating or refuting an alibi or claim by some individual.
Responding officers must use all of their senses as they arrive at the scene. Beyond
simply looking with their eyes, they must be alert to sounds or smells, which are fleeting
and transient but which may provide critical information. Odors in particular may come to
the attention of the initial responding officer. Colognes, petroleum products, and burning
tobacco products are all examples of smells that may be present as the first officer enters the
scene. In all of the confusion and chaos, if the officer does not take the time to consciously
attempt to identify such odors, this evidence will be long gone by the time the crime scene
investigators arrive.

Officer Safety

Officer safety is a constant issue, one that plagues police administrators. In their desire to
make a difference, officers (young and old alike) often rush headlong into a fray without
considering potential threats. Officer safety is an issue in both the patrol response of driv-
ing to the scene and the actions of police after they arrive. In terms of driving to the scene,
the only caution that can be offered is to remember that the number of officers killed or
injured each year driving is far greater than those attacked by suspects. If the responding
officer never arrives on scene, he or she cannot help anyone.
The initial responding officer’s consideration for personal safety at the scene must begin
long before he or she arrives. The initial information presented by dispatch or an individual
reporting a crime on the street is usually sketchy and incomplete. Oftentimes it is con-
tradictory as well, leaving the officer wondering exactly what he or she is walking into.
Whatever the case, whatever the information, the officer must consider potential threats
before he or she arrives. Will a suspect be on scene? Will the relatives of a victim turn in
anger on the emergency workers? What kind of hazards can be expected? These and other
questions must be considered and hasty contingencies developed that will allow the officer
to overcome any potential threats that are present. Three specific areas to consider are:

• Is this a crime in progress, and are there suspects on scene?

• Are there natural hazards present that can inhibit or harm first responders?
• Are there man-made hazards present that can endanger first responders?
64 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

It is interesting to contrast the police approach to scenes with the approach taken by
firefighters. Firefighters are far more conscious of hazards as they approach any situation.
To illustrate that difference, an old joke asks the question of police officers, “Are you a fire-
man’s blue canary?” The analogy refers to the early mining days, when miners often car-
ried small songbirds into the mines as a biological early warning system. If the bird keeled
over, this might indicate a hazardous environment for the miner. The canary, although
pretty, was expendable. Thus it is said that as the firefighters pull up to the scene, they look
for three things. Is the engine running on the police car? Everyone knows that in their
haste to arrive, the police jump out, leaving their cars running. If the engine is on, then the
firefighters know there must be enough oxygen in the environment. They then look to see
if the police officers are up and walking about. If so, then they know the environment is
not toxic to humans. And lastly, they look to see if the police are smoking or burning flares
in the scene. If so, then the firefighters know the site is not an explosive hazard. Only then
do the firemen proceed. Perhaps slightly exaggerated in the context of the joke, the truth of
the matter is that police have yet to develop a strong enough sense of personal safety. Police
handle “in progress” calls with due care and caution, but there is a lesson to be learned
from firefighters on risk management in so-called static scenes.
Of particular concern to any responding officer, particularly those who discover scenes
of crime without being dispatched, is the presence of suspects in the scene. The officer can
never presume that a situation is static and that all suspects are gone. As will be discussed
later in this chapter, taking control of the scene in part requires identifying and controlling
all witnesses and other involved parties found there. Once safety and lifesaving activities
are in place, the officer will turn to controlling and limiting the actions of these people.
Suspects, however, represent a higher level of concern and demand a higher priority due
to officer safety issues. Even before lifesaving can take place, the initial responding officer
may have to conduct a protective sweep of a scene to ensure that a suspect is not lurking
about. If officers encounter a likely suspect, for example, a wife who rushes out covered in
blood at a domestic assault, it is only prudent to take control of such an individual until
everything can be sorted out. Granted, the individual may ultimately be identified as a wit-
ness and not a perpetrator, but officer safety can never be taken for granted.

Emergency Care

In crimes involving injury or death, an additional factor is controlling lifesaving activi-

ties and any medical authorities who respond. After ensuring that no immediate threat
exists in the form of suspects and man-made or natural hazards, the responding officer’s
attention is likely to turn to caring for injured parties or those who may be in danger in
the scene. Emergency medical actions, whether carried out by the police or EMS, come at
a high price in terms of evidence preservation. What was once a relatively pristine scene
will be littered with bandages, needles, gauze, and other residues once EMS is through.
The level of disruption is so significant that the aftermath is often referred to as the EMS
bomb (see Figure 3.1). Not disturbing the crime scene unnecessarily is a constant theme
in this book, and evidence preservation is an absolute mandate for every law enforcement
officer working the scene. Nevertheless, the rule regarding emergency care is simple and
inviolable: lifesaving always takes priority over evidence preservation.
Actions of the Initial Responding Officer 65

Figure 3.1  The “EMS bomb” is a reality. Lifesaving always takes priority over scene integrity
and the aftermath can be significant, producing all types of artifacts from debris to bloodstains.
(Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Montgomery County, Texas.)

If they arrive before EMS, the initial responding officers must take steps to aid the
injured and ensure that proper medical care is en route. These actions will usually prevent
them from acting on issues of scene preservation and control, but there simply is no choice.
Even though the officers may not be able to personally act, that does not prevent them
from directing others to act. If presented with a scene where lifesaving is the priority, the
responding officer can direct witnesses or others present to take specific actions that may
assist in protecting the scene. This certainly applies to additional officers as they arrive on
scene. Often, all of the officers present get caught up in the lifesaving activity when, in fact,
they are not all needed for that purpose.

Case Example: Damage Control

Responding to a shots fired call, two investigators and three patrolmen encountered
an apartment where a street-level window was broken and a second-story window was
open. The officers could hear moaning from the second-story window. Forcing entry
and clearing their way to the second floor, they encountered a woman with a perforat-
ing gunshot wound to the abdomen on the floor and a man with a perforating gunshot
wound to the chest on the bed. The woman was conscious; the man was not. A call for
EMS went out as the group of officers began administering first aid to both victims.
Two officers assisted the woman, while a patrolman and one investigator began CPR
on the male. At that moment, the scene was relatively pristine, with numerous items of
evidence lying about the room, including a gun on the bed, various bloodstains, a hol-
ster, and a pair of glasses. Knowing full well that the cavalry would arrive in moments
in the form of advance lifesaving units, the second investigator was charged with mak-
ing note of where these items were. In a matter of minutes, no fewer than eight firemen
and EMS arrived with two backboards to join the five officers already inside this small
12 × 12 ft bedroom. The male subsequently died of his injuries; the woman survived.
66 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

With 13 people providing care to 2 critical victims, the scene was overrun with med-
ical residues. Even after cleaning up the obvious residue items, it was evident that the
condition of the scene had changed dramatically. The evidence was still there, but the
question was: Where was it originally? In the ensuing investigation, a significant issue
revolved around the location of the weapon. Defensive wounds on the man’s hands sug-
gested that the woman had shot the man. An investigative theory developed in which it
was believed that after shooting him, she turned the weapon on herself. Having failed
to kill herself, it was believed that she had placed the gun near him to make it look as if
he had been in control of the weapon all along. To consider and evaluate this theory, it
was necessary to have some confidence about where the weapon was before the scene
was disturbed. It was only as a result of the investigator’s notes that the gun could con-
fidently be placed in the scene at the moment the police arrived.

The officer should make every effort to preserve evidence while tending to or assisting
in lifesaving. Remember always that any effort is better than no effort. The officer does not
simply have to accept the resulting damage to the crime scene. These efforts might include
directing EMS into the scene as they arrive and advising them of areas that may be impor-
tant. Some EMS technicians respond to these requests professionally; some do not. The
officer can either take direct action or ask others to take action to protect, document, or
collect fragile evidence as they await the arrival of EMS. When EMS personnel are work-
ing on a victim, nothing precludes the officer from working in the background to try and
preserve fragile evidence. Many patrol officers are equipped with a patrol camera or use
a personal camera, which can be quite helpful. Upon responding to the scene, the officer
might snap several digital pictures of the scene as he or she found it. Everyone typically
forgets these photos, but they may include important details of the scene prior to any dis-
turbance. Patrol officers should turn these photographs over to the crime scene investiga-
tors. If it is obvious that evidence will be destroyed by EMS efforts, the officer should act to
collect it before the arrival of investigators. This is an acceptable option, although collect-
ing evidence in the crime scene is the exception and not the rule for the responding officer.

Case Example: Initial Photographs Can Be Key

Police and investigators responded to a shooting and bludgeoning scene where a hus-
band reported killing the man who attacked and killed his wife. The first officer on scene
had a Polaroid camera and took several photographs of the scene with the two bodies
lying in situ. He placed these photos in his pocket. This officer was subsequently put back
in service by a patrol supervisor and another officer assigned as primary for the call, all
before crime scene investigators and detectives arrived. The photographs were forgotten.
At the scene, EMS determined the male “killer’s” condition required transporting
and he was removed prior to the arrival of the investigating team. So the investigators
observed the scene after significant alteration. From the husband came a tale of having
found the killer kneeling over his wife striking her with a hammer. The husband claimed
to have shot the killer while he was in this position, which caused him to fall back. He
then shot him a second time when he realized the man wasn’t yet dead. Beyond the fact
that the two blood pools produced as the wife and killer lay in the scene were somewhat
distant to each other, the scene didn’t seem to disprove or preclude the husband’s basic
story. The husband was declared a hero for having killed his wife’s attacker.
Actions of the Initial Responding Officer 67

The case was closed and forgotten for a number of years until a piece of informa-
tion came forward regarding the husband. It seemed the night before the attack, he
called his mistress and asked her, “Will you love me no matter what happens?” Based
on this new information, the case was reopened and reexamined. The new investi-
gative team was aware that someone had taken photographs on scene, but the three
photographs taken by the initial responding officer had gone on a journey in and of
themselves. Nevertheless, they were ultimately found in the files of the department
(see Figure 3.2). The photographs, which depict the bodies in position on the scene,
effectively proved the claim of positioning by the husband was inaccurate. The alleged
killer would have had to levitate and turn in mid-air to come to rest in the scene as he
was found. Although not the only piece of evidence against the husband, he was even-
tually charged and convicted of killing his wife and the man he set up as the killer. The
photographs taken by the initial responding officer completely changed the perspective
of the investigating team.

(example courtesy of Tom Bevel)

Unless given the authority by law, police officers do not establish who is beyond medi-
cal help and who is not. This is clearly a function of the medical professionals. When EMS
personnel arrive on scene and injured or dying parties are present, officers cannot hamper
or prevent access to the scene in the name of evidence preservation. Officers must allow

Figure 3.2  This Polaroid photograph was taken by a first responding officer. The surviving
spouse claimed the man in the foreground was the “killer.” The photograph shows how he was
positioned before transport, a position the original investigators were not aware of. The photo-
graph proved the alleged killer’s position was not consistent with the claims of the husband.
(Courtesy of Tom Bevel, Bevel, Gardner and Associates, Norman, Oklahoma.)
68 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

EMS personnel to assess whether medical intervention is appropriate and, if not, allow
them to establish death.

Case Example: Death Isn’t Always a Sure Thing

One spring in Alaska, two brothers decided to hike up a mountain in the Chugach
Range, just outside of Anchorage. Both were tourists and had no understanding of
the Alaskan backcountry or of the weather issues. They were not outfitted or dressed
appropriately, and they presumed that they would achieve their goal quickly and return
that afternoon. Although they began early, they found themselves deep in the woods as
late afternoon approached. They turned back and began the difficult task of negotiating
the woods as dusk set in. As the temperature dropped, both began exhibiting the effects
of hypothermia. Well past sunset, one brother became unresponsive and was unable
to continue. The second brother could hear cars on the nearby highway, so he left his
brother and set out in hopes of finding assistance. The second brother made it to the
highway, but all efforts to locate his brother throughout the evening failed. The follow-
ing morning, after sunrise, an officer involved in the search located the first brother. An
experienced officer, he checked the man and, based on all evidence, determined him to
be dead. A subsequent autopsy verified that the man died of exposure and hypother-
mia. This was a sad and unfortunate story, but one that was not quite finished.
Within days of the event, a medically trained individual claimed in the local paper
that the officer had caused the man’s death. He based this claim on the fact that the offi-
cer sent the body directly to the morgue and not to the hospital. The individual claimed
that the hypothermia the victim suffered would have created conditions similar to the
mammalian diving reflex seen in cold water drowning. Therefore, he claimed that, in
the hands of proper medical authorities, the deceased brother could have been revived.
As a result of this claim, the press clamored for more information, and the alleged mis-
take was front-page news for several days. In the end analysis, if the officer made any
mistake at all, it was a procedural one in which he made the call of death rather than
allowing a medical authority to do so.

In most jurisdictions, state law will define exactly who can pronounce death. Officers
should know and comply with any such requirements to prevent placing themselves in a
similar predicament.
Without disparaging our comrades in the fire and EMS services, officers should also
recognize that, at times, the enthusiasm of EMS can get the better of them. There are logi-
cal exceptions when it is appropriate to slow or prevent EMS from entering a scene, but the
officer must use common sense in attempting to slow such individuals down. The officer
also must ensure that such actions are not in contravention to local laws. Obvious instances
where EMS can be slowed include scenes where there is putrefaction of the victim or where
the head is in one corner and the body is in another. In these clear-cut death circumstances,
the officer should stop the EMS or medical authority at the perimeter, explain the situation,
and then lead one of the EMS crew into the scene to check the body personally. This allows
EMS to accomplish its task without having to take the officer’s word as to the condition of
the victim. At the same time, it prevents unnecessary damage to the scene, since the EMS
technician is led to the body in a controlled and deliberate manner.
Actions of the Initial Responding Officer 69

Case Example: Curbing EMS Enthusiasm

On an army installation, soldiers gather every day for morning formation. This often
occurs at or near dawn. One morning just before dawn in Washington state, a unit
gathered for its morning formation as usual. As they were formed, the soldiers were
facing a three-story utility building across the road. The first sergeant verified atten-
dance and went about advising the soldiers of the various work details for that day’s
activities. As this occurred, the sun was rising. It soon became evident to the leader-
ship that something had the soldiers’ attention across the street. As dawn broke fully,
this something was revealed to be a young man hanging by the neck from a fire escape
ladder. The police were called and, in an abnormal circumstance, investigators arrived
prior to EMS. The investigators climbed the building to check the victim. It was appar-
ent he was dead and had been so for some time. By the time they completed this check,
the body had been hanging from a choke chain for no less than 20 min since discovery.
As investigators climbed back down, a siren was heard approaching in the background.
Two ambulance attendants arrived a few moments later and immediately sprang from
their vehicle. There was evident haste in their step, so the investigators explained the
circumstance and the time lapse since discovery. Despite this information, the EMS
rushed to climb the stairs and crawl out onto the fire escape ladder in the chance that
CPR was in order. As there was little they could actually disturb in the scene, they were
allowed to proceed.
The victim was hanging from the ladder just below the top floor, and the only way to
attach heart leads was by reaching down from above. Of course, the only way to the top
of the building was over the victim. One EMS clambered up the ladder with the heart
monitor—a large, heavy, plastic orange box—slung over his shoulder. When the EMS
swung his body out to negotiate his way over the victim, everyone watched as the heart
monitor swung out wildly and slammed back into the victim’s face. Sheepishly, the
EMS continued his climb, attached the heart monitor, and then enlightened everyone
with the information that the patient was, in fact, dead. Needless to say, at autopsy the
victim demonstrated postmortem injuries to the head.

The desire to make a difference affects everyone, and there may be times when the
officer will not be able to talk sense to EMS. Whatever the circumstances, the respond-
ing officer’s responsibility is always to present a professional demeanor and work within
the guidelines of EMS as much as possible, recognizing that they too have a job to do. An
attitude of teamwork and cool-headed effort will usually eliminate any issues or problems
that arise.
When EMS arrive prior to the initial responding officer, it is imperative that the EMS
personnel be questioned as soon as practical as to what they observed upon arrival, par-
ticularly the position of the victim and the condition of clothing on the victim. All of these
scene aspects are likely to be changed by lifesaving activities. Questions should be asked
about any actions taken by EMS to move or change the condition of the scene, as well as
ensuring the full identification of all EMS who responded to the scene. Supporting EMS
or firefighters are often the best source for this information, since they are not as focused
on the immediacy of the victim and have occasion to observe the overall situation. The
primary EMS personnel are generally a poor source for the responding officer; besides
being focused on the victim’s care, they are usually quite busy and unable to break from
70 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

their duties for even a few moments. Once identified, the primary EMS can always be
interviewed in depth at a later time.
If the victim is alive in the crime scene and transportation to a medical facility is
planned, whenever practical an officer should be assigned to ride along with the ambulance.
This officer’s responsibility is to document any dying declarations or utterances made by
the victim and to collect any evidence removed from the victim in the course of lifesaving
activities. The nature of such evidence may include personal effects, bullets and casings,
trace evidence, or other items recovered during the initial examination, and this certainly
includes the victim’s clothing as it is removed en route or at the hospital. These items will
be of considerable interest to crime scene investigators and may be critical evidence.

Secure and Control the Crime Scene

Once the scene is safe and lifesaving activities are underway or completed, the initial
responding officer must seek to secure and control both the scene itself and anyone found
there. The number of individuals present often determines the level of chaos encountered
at the scene. These additional parties may or may not have information relevant to the
investigation. Many will be nothing more than “looky-lous” who happened upon the event
and, having heard the commotion and choosing to investigate, inserted themselves in the
midst of the mess. It is often difficult, if not impossible, at this initial stage to distinguish
those who are relevant to the case from those who are not.
Rather than attempt to make this distinction arbitrarily, the initial responding officer
should simply bring this group under control and isolate them. This action prevents additional
onlookers from being mixed in with this group. That alone will make it easier to deal with this
group once resources become available. The first responding officer directs this group from the
primary crime scene, isolates them from the onlookers if possible, and seeks their cooperation.
By explaining the need to identify and interview each of them, they are more likely to comply
with requests to remain in the area. The individuals should be instructed not to discuss with
each other what they did or did not observe. In instances where there are significant witnesses
or additional victims known to the officer, those individuals should be isolated immediately.
Because controlling and ensuring continued control of this group will be difficult, it is
imperative that at the very least everyone in this group be identified upon arrival. Failing
to do so, some may simply vanish into the crowd never to be heard from again. A critical
mistake the first officer can make when dealing with this group is to make a knee-jerk deci-
sion as to who is and who is not relevant to the investigation. Many a significant witness
has been chased away from the crime scene by the good intentions of officers who were
trying to prevent a crowd from gathering. Be cautious in dealing with the crowd. The vast
majority of citizens tugging on the officers’ coat tails as they arrive have little if anything
to offer the investigation. Yet among this mass of humanity there may be a critical wit-
ness who can point out the perpetrator, identify additional leads or evidence, and provide
immediate assistance to the investigation.
As additional officers arrive on scene, dealing with this group should be a priority.
The group should be fully identified. Those who are totally unrelated to the investigation
should be released and returned to the area outside of whatever crowd control barriers are
in place. Those who are determined to be witnesses or additional victims should be briefly
interviewed for critical details and then funneled to the investigative team. If additional
Actions of the Initial Responding Officer 71

suspects are located among this group, they too must be dealt with effectively, controlled,
and brought to the attention of the investigative team. As it may be some time before any
of these individuals can be fully interviewed, the officer must take steps to prevent cross-
contamination of their individual stories. Whenever possible, conduct initial interviews
outside of the hearing of the other witnesses, and afterwards, isolate each individual and
give him or her a clear warning on the importance of not discussing his or her observa-
tions with others. Although most people will readily agree to this request, be cautious
as the scene matures. Human nature and natural inquisitiveness will quickly take over.
Fifteen minutes later, the officer will return to find the group discussing the event in detail.
An important aspect of taking control of this group, as well as controlling the scene, is to
remove these individuals from the primary crime scene. One thing that is certain is that
the officer cannot allow them to take up residence within the crime scene itself.
What defines the primary scene? What area should the officer bring under immediate
control? There are no easy answers. Every crime scene is different, and the initial respond-
ing officer must be observant. In deciding where to establish an initial perimeter, the officer
should consider:

• Primary focal points

• Natural entry and exit points
• Secondary scenes

Primary focal points are easy. As the officer arrives, he or she will naturally gravitate to
or be led to such points—a body lying in the middle of the room, the ransacked bedroom
in a burglary, shell casings scattered across the floor of a convenience store after a robbery.
Primary focal points always stand out to the responding officer. It is not difficult to figure
out that these areas hold important evidence and should be included in the controlled area.
But primary focal points are only part of the picture. The body lying in the living room
may only represent its final position. The actual assault may have occurred on the front
porch, with the body having been dragged back into the house later on. If the responding
officer realizes this after sequestering the witnesses on the front porch, it may be too late to
prevent damaging or destroying evidence.
Natural entry and exit points are of particular interest as well. Perpetrators cannot
appear and vanish from a crime scene. Just like the responding officer, they have to enter
and exit in some fashion. The officer should look for natural entry and exit points and
include them in the controlled area. By linking the focal points with natural entry and exit
points, the officer will identify and include areas in the primary scene most likely to hold
physical evidence.
A significant problem for responding officers is overlooking secondary scenes. Drawn
to the focal point, officers do not always give enough consideration to areas on the periph-
ery of the scene or along natural avenues of approach or departure. Such secondary scenes
may include staging areas used by the criminals, locations where they loaded up goods
subsequent to the crime, or areas where items were deposited as they fled. These areas are
identified by the responding officer through critical observation and by considering the
natural actions necessary to accomplish the crime. If the police do not look for secondary
scenes on the periphery of the primary scene until after completing the crime scene exami-
nation, it is likely that these secondary scenes will no longer exist. Secondary scenes must
be considered in the officer’s initial scene assessment.
72 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Once the primary focal points, their natural entry and exit points, and any nearby sec-
ondary crime scenes are identified, the responding officer will have a relatively defined area
to secure. This initial scene assessment does not take long. It can be accomplished in a mat-
ter of minutes. In making this initial assessment, remember that it is always better to extend
the perimeter well out from these areas of interest. It is much easier to decrease the secured
area than it is to expand it. As the crowd grows, as the press congregates, and as additional
police and fire resources arrive, all of them will encroach on the outer perimeter of the
crime scene. If it becomes necessary to increase the secured area, it will be a logistical night-
mare to move this mass of people and equipment out and away from the initial perimeter.
A significant caution is in order when defining this initial scene. The officer cannot
allow artificial or even natural boundaries in the scene to unduly define the initial perim-
eter. This is particularly true in outdoor crime scenes. As officers arrive in any scene, there
are natural and artificial boundaries present. An example of a natural boundary might
include a hedgerow of thick thorn bushes on one side of the crime scene. Lacking any
opening, the condition of the bushes and their mere presence may make it improbable
that anyone moved through them. In that instance, the hedgerow might serve to func-
tionally define that section of the scene perimeter. On the other hand, consider another
natural boundary such as a stream that meanders through a field. The officer may arrive
and visualize the water’s edge as a boundary, simply because he or she has no intention of
walking through it. But the depth of the stream itself may not have prevented a perpetrator
or victim from having crossed it multiple times in the course of an event. In that case, it
may be unwise and unwarranted to allow the stream’s edge alone to define some part of the
perimeter. Man-made boundaries are perhaps more common as distracters when defin-
ing the initial perimeter. Invariably, crime scene tape is strung up along the boundary of
a property, along the street at the edge of a property, or along some other artificial line. In
most cases, it is not that the officer arrived and assessed the scene based on the focal points
and natural entry and exits, but rather that he or she arrived and, in a simplistic assess-
ment, decided the scene was defined by the technical boundaries of the street, property,
or whatever. If these initial boundaries are far enough back from the true scene, then all is
well. But if this simplistic assessment is used in an extended crime scene, physical evidence
is likely to be lost or destroyed.
Once the arriving officers have some idea of what area they wish to secure as the ini-
tial perimeter, the problem becomes one of actually creating a means of barring onlook-
ers, witnesses, victims, and newly arriving officers from entering this area. The officer’s
presence and voice commands are the first tools used, but as the scene matures, these
will quickly become ineffective. A physical barrier of some nature is usually necessary. In
an interior scene, the physical barrier is often the confines of the room itself. The door-
way to the primary focal point (e.g., a bedroom in which the murder victim is located) is
manned to prevent others from entering. The door to the building can be used to secure
the scene. Thus the entire building is defined as the initial perimeter. Securing an interior
scene through this process is all well and good, but the officer must return to the three
considerations described earlier, which include primary focal points, natural entry and
exit points, and secondary scenes. Unless an officer arrived on scene and arrested a suspect
inside the scene, the perpetrator will had to have entered and exited the building or room
in some manner. Entry and exits to these areas are of interest and should be secured and
subsequently searched for physical evidence.
Actions of the Initial Responding Officer 73

The use of barrier tape, set up in an extended perimeter around the actual building, is
a far more appropriate response. Even if it is later determined to be unnecessary, extending
the physical barrier out away from the building will prove quite functional as the scene
matures. This action will allow the unencumbered flow of necessary emergency services
personnel in and out of the building, as well as eliminating a crowd of onlookers, press, or
relatives from congregating at the door. Rolls of barrier tape should be carried by all patrol
officers or, at the very least, by patrol supervisors. Barrier tape is relatively inexpensive and
is the most effective way to quickly establish a visual perimeter on scene.
When the barrier tape is in place, the officer must establish a single entry/exit point
and ensure that this location is manned. The individual manning this control point will
be responsible for documenting who enters and exits the scene and for what reason.
Ultimately, a crime scene control log will be established and maintained at this location as
well. Additional officers may be needed to roam the outer perimeter and verify compliance
with the police line established. The mere fact that the barrier tape says to stay out will have
little impact on many in the crowd. Hardheaded onlookers, concerned relatives arriving
on scene, and certainly members of the press will ignore the barrier’s presence and pass
through, around, and under it if given the opportunity. These individuals must be con-
trolled to ensure scene integrity.
In considering overall scene integrity, the responding officer must protect the scene
from more than just the EMS and other non-law enforcement parties present on scene. A
significant group of individuals must be controlled and guarded against: the police them-
selves. Police officers, from patrolmen to chief, represent a major threat to scene integrity.
As any officer knows, police tend to swarm at significant scenes and calls. It is not uncom-
mon to find officers from adjoining jurisdictions present on scene, ready to lend aid if
needed. The mere fact that an individual is a police officer is not sufficient reason to allow
carte blanche entry to the crime scene. Once some level of control is in place, with onlook-
ers and witnesses removed, first aid in progress, and the scene generally safe and free of
suspects, the tempo of police operations should slow down. Scene integrity becomes the
priority. Only officers with specific purpose and missions should be allowed back into the
scene. Officers on scene who are not directly involved in these initial concerns should be
placed into service assisting in crowd control, initiating neighborhood canvases, maintain-
ing perimeter control, or organizing and directing arriving resources.
Of course, tact and respect should be used when asking these officers to leave the primary
scene. In the minutes before the crime scene tape went up, everyone, including his or her
mother’s uncle, was probably inside the primary scene. Suddenly, in a matter of moments,
everything had changed. In the chaos, these remaining officers may not realize that this
transition had occurred. Many an officer or assisting citizen’s feelings have been wounded
needlessly by tactless remarks as they were herded unceremoniously from the scene.

Case Example: Transition to a Secured Scene

Just before lunch, a man walked into a municipal police department asking to see an
officer. The senior detective of the department happened to be present and began talk-
ing to the man. The man presented a video camera and proceeded to show the detective
what appeared to be a decomposed corpse floating in a pond. He informed the detec-
tive he had just come from a neighborhood park where he had observed the body.
74 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

The detective and officers from his jurisdiction proceeded to the park. Sure enough,
there in the water was a corpse. As it happened, however, the body was floating approx-
imately 50 yards past the municipality’s border, clearly in the next city’s jurisdiction.
The corpse was in an area frequented by school children and others during lunch. The
second jurisdiction was immediately notified and their detectives advised of the situa-
tion. As the first officers awaited the arrival of the second city’s detectives, they set up
an initial scene perimeter to prevent the lunch crowd from happening upon the scene.
The senior detective, as his training dictated, proceeded to take pictures of the scene.
He was still actively accomplishing this task when his peer from the second jurisdiction
arrived and was briefed. Without so much as a thank you, the newly arrived detective,
whose crime scene it now was, walked up to the first detective and loudly asked, “Are
you done? This is our crime scene and you need to leave.” Of course, this was done in
front of all of the officers present.
Was the second detective correct in asking the first detective to leave the scene? Of
course he was. Taking control of the scene and turning over responsibility to the proper
jurisdiction was necessary. But the first detective had secured the scene, and his efforts
up to that moment were appropriate as well. The lack of respect shown to the first detec-
tive when asking him to leave left him fuming over an act that was not soon forgotten.
A simple, tactful comment between the two and a “thanks” would have easily accom-
plished the transition more effectively without creating any animosity.

In the example, the two officers involved were senior detectives, but very often it is the
patrol officers who become the target of such comments. The use of tact during the transition
of the scene from the initial responding officers to the crime scene team is also necessary.
It is not just officers who are working secondary missions in the investigation that
represent a threat. It is important to protect the scene from those officers directly involved
in the primary crime scene activities as well. The primary scene is not a command post,
and the responding officer should not take up residence inside the primary scene. Nothing
will perturb the crime scene technicians more than arriving to find the responding offi-
cer seated at the kitchen table 5 ft from the victim’s body, filling out an incident report.
Encountered just as often are officers who, inside the primary scene, use the facilities or
phones because they are handy, or are found eating, smoking, or drinking inside the inner
perimeter. Protecting the crime scene from our own actions is an important and critical
aspect of maintaining crime scene integrity.
Once the scene perimeter is established, the tempo of operations will slow significantly.
In this lull, a number of considerations need to be revisited by the initial responding offi-
cer or any supervisor who may have taken responsibility for the scene. First and foremost,
consideration should be given to enhancing the security of the scene. Are more officers
necessary? Have sufficient resources been requested? Is more barrier tape needed? Officers
should coordinate for additional manpower and equipment as required and not wait for the
investigative team to make that decision. Another consideration is the presence of fragile
evidence. Officers should reexamine the scene to ensure that there are no items of evidence
in immediate danger due to current or impending operations. If fragile evidence is present,
the officer should take action to protect or collect the evidence to prevent its destruction.
The last consideration is to ensure that the scene is contained. An officer should be assigned
to reexamine the perimeter and ensure that all obvious secondary scenes or avenues of
approach and departure are secure.
Actions of the Initial Responding Officer 75

If a crime scene entry log is not yet in place, this is the time to initiate one. The pur-
pose of the crime scene entry log is to document who entered the crime scene and why.
Although the patrol officers may not have a specific form available to them, a simple sheet
of paper that identifies the name, agency, reason for being at the scene, and time in and
out will be more than adequate. More often than not, upon arrival, detectives will task a
patrol officer with this responsibility. There is no reason to wait for their arrival to initiate
this action.

Release the Scene to Appropriate Authorities

Eventually a crime scene technician or detective will arrive to take responsibility for the
scene. Whether this is a few minutes or a few hours depends on the operations tempo of
the organization. Needless to say, there is usually a period of downtime as the patrol officer
waits. This period is an excellent time for the officer to begin making notes. He can capture
details regarding initial observations, his actions upon arrival, and details regarding any
statements offered by individuals present on scene. It is also a good time for conducting
further interviews of the firefighters and EMS personnel who may have arrived prior to the
police.
Once the detective is on scene, passing of responsibility to the investigative team is
not simply a function of two ships passing in the night. As the detectives arrive, the offi-
cers do not jump in their cars to rush off and answer the five calls that have been holding
for an hour. The officer responsible for the scene, and certainly the initial responding
officer, must brief the investigative team on all aspects of what he or she knows, what he
or she found, and what he or she did upon arrival. It is best that this responsibility not
pass from supervisor to supervisor as additional patrol resources arrive. This often hap-
pens, and the initial responding officer is returned to service. The chain of command can
certainly function on scene, but it should do so in support of the initial responding officer.
It is imperative that the investigating team debriefs the initial responding officer on all of
these issues.
When involved in this debriefing, the officer should assume nothing. All pertinent
details and actions should be discussed. Do not assume that a witness will tell the crime
scene team the same information or that the investigators will “figure it out on their own.”
If fragile evidence was recovered or responding officers took photographs, ensure that the
investigating team is made aware of this as well. Do not be surprised by a certain level of
indifference on the part of some investigators or crime scene technicians. It is not uncom-
mon for this group to look at the time spent talking with the patrol officer as wasted. That
judgment is a critical error on their part, but in no way eliminates the responsibility of the
initial responding officer.
The current status of the crime scene perimeter should be discussed as well, with par-
ticular attention paid to concerns or issues that might affect scene integrity. Oftentimes,
patrol resources will be tasked with continuing the crime scene security or enhancing it
as the investigative team performs its mission. Responsible supervisors should ensure that
no one leaves the security post unless a proper authority has given authorization and a
relief is in place. The time assigned to these security duties is perfect for the officer to use
to catch up on notes of observations, actions, or other information developed as a result of
the officer’s investigation.
76 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Once all of these actions are complete, the responsibility for the scene transitions from
the initial responding officer to the crime scene team and detectives. From that point for-
ward, the initial responding officers take on a support role, and the actual processing of
the scene begins.

Summary

The initial responding officer is not directly responsible for the processing of the crime
scene. The officer’s actions, however, will set the stage for success by the crime scene team.
The two basic goals of the responding officer are (1) to gain control of the site and (2)
to manage the available resources effectively. At the crime scene, this translates into five
distinct objectives, which include documenting all of the information that comes to the
officer, not becoming a casualty, providing or coordinating emergency care, securing and
controlling the physical scene and the individuals found there, and subsequently releas-
ing the scene to the investigative team. Although processing and collecting evidence is
not a specific responsibility of the initial responding officer, when presented with obvious
threats to evidence integrity (e.g., fragile evidence), the initial responding officer must act
to protect the evidence or to document and collect it before it is destroyed.

Suggested Reading
DiMaio, V.J.M., and Dana, S.E., Handbook of Forensic Pathology, Landes-BioScience, Austin, TX,
1998.
DiMaio, D.J., and DiMaio, V.J.M., Forensic Pathology, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1993.
Fisher, B.A.J., Techniques of Crime Scene Investigation, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2000.
James, S., and Nordby, J.J., Eds., Forensic Science: an Introduction to Scientific and Investigative
Techniques, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2002.
Ramirez, C., Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, Fl, 2011.
Spitz, W.U., and Fisher, R.S., Medicolegal Investigation of Death, Charles C. Thomas Publishing,
Springfield, IL, 1980.
Tuthill, H., and George, G., Individualization: Principles and Procedures in Criminalistics, Lightning
Powder, Jacksonville, FL, 2002.

Chapter Questions
1. What are the two primary goals of the initial responding officer when reacting to
any critical incident?
2. There are five basic objectives the officer uses to achieve these goals. Identify and
briefly discuss each one.
3. How might a failure to verify the address of a crime scene negatively impact
the investigation?
4. With regard to evidence preservation and emergency care, what is the overriding
rule for the responding officer?
5. When is it appropriate to slow or stop EMS from entering a crime scene?
6. If tasked to accompany a victim to the hospital, what is the officer concerned with?
Actions of the Initial Responding Officer 77

7. When confronted with numerous individuals at a crime scene who do not appear
to be directly involved, what should the officer consider before chasing them off?
8. The area contained within the initial responding officer’s crime scene barrier
should include three things. Identify and briefly describe each.
9. How might a natural or man-made barrier (e.g,. a row of trees or a roadway) in the
crime scene negatively affect what an officer includes in his or her initial crime scene
boundary?
10. What is the purpose of a crime scene entry log, and when is it put in place?
11. During the on-scene debriefing between the initial responding officer and the
crime scene team, what information should be provided to the team?

Notes
1. Geberth, V.J., Practical Homicide Investigation; Tactics, Procedures and Forensic Techniques, 3rd
ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1996, pp. 39–68.
2. Griffin, T.J., and Slack, G.E., Crime Scene Investigation, AIMS Basic Peace Officer Academy,
Greely, CO, 1999.
Processing Methodology
4
With the arrival of the crime scene technicians, responsibility for the scene transitions
from the first responders, who attempted to control and protect the scene, to the investiga-
tors, who have responsibility for processing the scene. Process is a very simple word that
means “to submit something to a treatment or preparation.” But what is this treatment and
how is it accomplished?1 The fact is that there is no one right way to process a crime scene.
The methods and the order in which those methods are employed is a product of the situ-
ation and the resources available to the technician. Nevertheless, there is an underlying
rhyme and reason to scene processing; there are certain sequences of procedures that must
be employed throughout the overall process. Although it may appear to be a haphazard
affair, there is a clear method to the madness in scene processing. To recognize both the
necessity and practical application of this sequential order, we must revisit the basic goal
of crime scene processing.
The purpose of processing the crime scene is to collect as much information and evi-
dence as possible, in as pristine a condition as possible. This evidence will serve to develop
conclusions regarding how the crime transpired, who was involved, and perhaps the “why”
of the crime. But this collection of evidence is more than simply the physical collection of
things from the scene. Crime scene technicians are not mere garbage collectors picking up
whatever residue they encounter. Cataloging the interrelationships of where items are in
the scene, noting the physical layout of the scene, and documenting observation of things
that cannot be physically collected are all integral parts of collecting evidence. Content and
context of the scene are both important aspects that are easily disturbed.
Why is the order or sequence of the scene processing so important? Simply put, scene
processing is a one-shot operation. You only get one chance to do it right. Once altered or
damaged, you cannot put the scene back in place and try again. There are opportunities
to reenter a scene after the fact, perhaps in search of some overlooked item, but even these
instances are few. As the crime scene technician walks out the door and turns off the light,
the scene is irreparably changed, its content and context forever altered by the efforts of the
police. At this point the technicians either have what they need or they do not. There are
few second chances; there is no way to answer the question, “Oops, I forgot to take a picture
of the chair before we moved it; was it facing east or was it facing west?” Any and all ques-
tions that might ultimately arise about the scene must be answered from the product of the
crime scene examination. If a question cannot be answered from that product, then it is
unlikely it will ever be answered. But what will the issues be? No one really knows. In the
initial stages of an investigation, police rarely have any way to know what will be in conten-
tion at some future trial. There is no way to know what alibis or alternative theories may be
forthcoming. The technician must be prepared to answer any and all questions. Any failure
in scene processing, any failure to document the condition and context of the scene can
have a devastating effect on the ability to solve a crime or provide an answer to the judge
or jury at some future hearing. As the scene processing model is introduced, many profes-
sionals may argue, “I don’t do that. I don’t need to! That is overkill.” Overkill is a truism of
scene processing. There is significant overkill in any valid scene processing model. Given

79
80 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

only one chance to do something, it is always better to overkill the process than underkill
it. The methods employed by the crime scene technician must be methodical, systematic,
and complete in order to be effective. You will only get one chance!
Crime scene technicians are not exempt from Locard’s principle of exchange: every
action the technician takes in the scene has an impact. Some actions are less intrusive;
others are significantly intrusive, damaging the original content and context of the scene.
Technicians, by their mere presence and certainly by their action in the scene, will create
post-incident artifacts and may damage the condition of evidence already there. There is
no way to prevent adding, moving, or damaging evidence in the scene as it is processed; all
the technician can do is limit the nature of this alteration. This is accomplished by begin-
ning with the least intrusive methods of processing, leaving the most intrusive methods to
the latter stages.

Basic Activities of Scene Processing

At any crime scene, the technician will apply the following actions to any evidence
found there:

• Assessing
• Observing
• Documenting
• Searching
• Collecting
• Processing/analyzing

Assessing
Before any action can be taken at the scene, the crime scene technician must assess the
circumstances in order to decide on a proper course of action. How complex is the scene?
How extensive? What resources are required, and how will those resources be employed?
Are there risks inherent to the scene? If so, how can the risks be mitigated? Assessment
begins the processing task and defines what procedures will be employed. Assessment is
an ongoing process as well. The technician continuously assesses the situation and adjusts
the processing plan when necessary. Remaining flexible is a critical aspect of responding
to and dealing with the crime scene.

Observing
The most basic aspect of crime scene processing is observation—looking and mentally
registering the condition of the scene and artifacts found in the scene. On its face, obser-
vation might appear as nonintrusive, and in most instances it is not intrusive. But quite
often, observation is conducted in conjunction with specific search efforts. To observe, the
technician must move about the scene, which in and of itself presents opportunities of add-
ing, moving, or damaging evidence. As the technician observes the scene, items of interest
often present themselves. More often than not, this leads the technician to move other
items to better observe some facet of an item of interest. So observation in and of itself can
Processing Methodology 81

be an intrusive act. There are specific points at which the technician must consciously act
to observe and purposely limit moving into the scene or moving objects in an attempt to
observe an item better. Later in the processing model, after documenting the overall condi-
tion of the scene, the technician can take more intrusive actions (e.g., exploratory search)
to better observe specific aspects of items of evidence.

Documenting
Documentation entails a variety of efforts, which include written documentation of the
technician’s observations, photographing and videotaping of the scene, and the creation of
sketches. As with observation, documentation can be a relatively nonintrusive act, such as
carefully walking through the scene to photograph the scene condition as found. Just the
same, documentation can be exceptionally intrusive, such as when documenting blood-
stain patterns using techniques like the road mapping method (see Chapter 6). In the same
fashion, the creation of a rough sketch has little impact on the scene itself, but the ability
to provide factual dimensions and measurements (e.g., fixing of evidence) requires sig-
nificantly intrusive action on the part of the technician. To fix evidence, the technician
must enter and make precise measurements in and around objects and evidence. Every
measurement presents an opportunity to change or damage the condition of the scene.
So even the actions taken to document the scene demand an order or sequence based on
their intrusiveness. These actions are not one and the same, and they are not accomplished
simultaneously. Documentation of observations always precedes detailed photography;
photography always precedes sketching and measuring; close-up photography and spe-
cial techniques such as road mapping are always the last actions taken. Documentation is
the critical component. It is through documentation that the technician backs up claims
regarding the original condition and context of the scene. Documentation must capture
the content and context of the scene in situ before any significant scene alteration.

Searching
The nature of any search and associated activity is always intrusive. During a proper
search, items have to be moved so that their surfaces can be examined, and there is no way
to do this without changing the scene. But the search of the scene is not accomplished in
one single effort. Multiple searches occur throughout any processing effort. Initial searches
tend to be more visual than physical, while later searches require significant movement,
including dismantling and even removal of items from the scene. The overall method of
processing the scene must incorporate and introduce these search methods, starting with
the least intrusive activities and saving the more intrusive activities for the latter stages of
processing. Because of its intrusive nature, any physical search of the scene always follows
initial documentation efforts.

Collecting
Physical collection of items in the scene is always an intrusive process. Once the techni-
cian removes an item from the scene, the context of the scene is changed forever. Some
mechanisms of collection are far more intrusive than others. For instance, simply picking
up a revolver from the scene has little impact on the rest of the scene. On the other hand,
82 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

recovering a bullet from a wall or door creates significant disruption of the remaining
scene. Unless dealing with fragile evidence, the technician always collects evidence after
the observation and documentation phases. Once collected, an item cannot be placed back
into the scene to create scene documentation. If an item is moved prior to documentation,
then the technician must live with the decision and simply provide whatever written docu-
mentation is possible regarding its original location or condition.

Case Example: Once Moved You Can’t Replace

On New Year’s Eve of the millennium five Puerto Rican tactical officers engaged two
armed men at an apartment complex. The two men had weapons and according to the
officers were firing them in a celebratory fashion. As the officers approached, the offi-
cers claimed the weapons were leveled against them and shots fired in their direction.
The officers broke into two groups and pursued the two men into a stairwell. There, due
to a crossfire situation, an exchange of shots occurred in which each group of officers
fired on a young man in the stairwell who was alleged to be holding an AK style rifle.
He in fact never fired a shot. He was, however, struck multiple times and died on scene.
As it was New Year’s Eve, a significant number of revelers were present on the oppo-
site side of the apartment complex, many of whom were also armed. When the revelers
became aware of the shooting, a large angry crowd surrounded the area and the officers
found it difficult to keep them out of the stairwell or secure the scene. When the first
police supervisor arrived on scene, he saw the rifle lying in the stairwell, assessed the
angry sentiment of the crowd, and based on the lack of security, ordered the rifle col-
lected and placed in a police vehicle for safekeeping.
As more units arrived, the scene was eventually secured and the crowd moved back,
but the area and body remained under the full view of the crowd. When the crime
scene investigators arrived, they inquired as to the whereabouts of the weapon. When
told the weapon was in a police car, a crime scene investigator directed one of the
involved officers to get it and place it back in the scene as they had found it. In full view
of the crowd, the officer brought the weapon from the police car, reached through the
railings, and placed the rifle by the deceased man (see Figure 4.1).
Needless to say, from the majority of the crowd’s perspective, they were eyewitnesses
to the police planting a weapon in the scene after shooting an innocent young man.
Given the totality of facts, the most significant being the rifle was never fired in the stair-
well and the numerous witnesses who claimed the police staged the scene, the Ministry
of Justice (MOJ) considered pursuing murder charges on all of the officers involved.
Only after an exhaustive crime scene analysis was sufficient information developed
to explain what appeared to be unexplainable contradictions by the officers involved.
The MOJ did not file charges against the officers, but the perception of the witnesses
would never be altered. In their minds they saw the police plant a rifle.

Evidence items are moved before documentation for various reasons. The rationale
in the case example may not have been the best, but regardless, it was a decision that was
made and acted on. Once that decision is acted on, there is no way to undo it. Never replace
an item of evidence that has been moved and represent it as the in situ scene.
Processing Methodology 83

Figure 4.1  The scene documentation in an officer-involved shooting included this photograph
of the weapon by the dead suspect. Unfortunately, this photograph depicts the scene after an
officer placed the weapon back in the scene at the bequest of the crime scene investigator. The
weapon had previously been removed for safety reasons. The crime scene investigator’s per-
spective was to show the scene complete, but this action was taken in full view of hundreds of
witnesses, whose perception was one of the police planting evidence. Once removed, items are
never put back in a scene for photographic purposes. (Courtesy of Landron and Vera, LLP, San
Juan, Puerto Rico.)

Processing/Analyzing
The actual processing of items of evidence in the scene is a significantly intrusive action.
Powder deposits, superglue fuming, or other chemical enhancement techniques for latent
prints clearly change an item’s original condition while also altering the scene. Luminol,
fluorescein, or leuco-crystal violet enhancements of bloody prints and pattern transfers
can alter the scene as well. Oftentimes, this alteration does not change the outward appear-
ance of an item; rather, it introduces chemicals that can damage or alter the original con-
dition of other evidence (e.g., DNA). Whatever the mechanism, processing will alter the
evidence being processed and more than likely alter the scene. Processing techniques for
various items of evidence are almost always the last actions taken by the technician in the
overall scene processing methodology. Ultimately, items of evidence from the scene must
be analyzed at the lab to establish what each one defines in and of itself and what the vari-
ous interrelated pieces may define about events that occurred during the crime. Scientific
analysis is always an intrusive act.
The crime scene technician constantly considers every method and process employed at
the scene in an effort to determine where in the overall sequence it belongs. Only by conscious
effort and careful consideration can the technician hope to prevent unnecessarily altering or
damaging the scene, its contents, and the associated context before it is fully documented.
Obviously, there are instances in which the rules are ignored. Consideration of fragile evidence,
initial searches of the scene for a suspect, and lifesaving efforts all require immediate empha-
sis. But beyond these exigent situations, scene processing falls into an orderly and relatively
simple sequence of events. In this simplest form, the order is to observe, document, search,
collect, and process, all the while assessing the situation and remaining flexible. Interestingly
84 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

enough, technology advances have not changed this order. Adherence to this basic order pro-
vides the greatest probability of achieving the underlying purpose of crime scene processing.

A Processing Model

There is no single, foolproof sequence or methodology the author can offer to ensure suc-
cess. There are, however, a number of established and validated methodologies. The fol-
lowing is based on one such validated and functional sequence. The U.S. Army Criminal
Investigation Command (USACIDC) developed it, and it has been the basis of its crime
scene training for over 30 years. As with most scene processing models, it is presented in
the context of a homicide, but it is easily adopted to less serious crimes by simply eliminat-
ing the unnecessary steps. The USACIDC model is presented here in an abbreviated form,
adjusted to account for organizational differences between various agencies. Although dis-
tributed in a variety of formats over the years, the full model was published in 1999 in CID
Pamphlet 195-10, Crime Scene Handbook.2
The model incorporates the six basic crime scene actions: assessing, observing, docu-
menting, searching, collecting, and processing. As the sequence develops, it will be obvi-
ous that there are various levels of these actions (e.g., multiple searches during a single
crime scene processing). As discussed, the less intrusive forms will precede the more
intrusive forms in the entire process. Here, the model is presented in a synopsized format
primarily for consideration of the overall order of sequence. The specific activities and
techniques involved in assessing, documenting, and processing crime scenes are described
in detail in later chapters. The USACIDC model is not presented as the model, but rather
a time-proven process. By understanding and incorporating the general order of activi-
ties presented in the various steps, the crime scene investigator’s actions become far more
methodical and all-encompassing. This model can easily be adjusted and incorporated into
any organization.
Whatever model of processing the crime scene investigator utilizes, when apply-
ing that model to any scene the investigator must understand the necessity of what the
author refers to as the concept of “going back.” At any stage of the scene processing
the crime scene investigator must be prepared to go back to a prior step. This becomes
necessary when the technician discovers previously unobserved evidence. For instance,
imagine a situation in which the processing has proceeded to the collection stage and
nothing new has been located. Every known item of evidence has been observed, doc-
umented (photographed and sketched), and examined (searched) to ensure that no
other trace evidence is associated with it. As the technician collects a large item and
physically moves it, the technician may suddenly discover a bloody fingerprint or some
other item of interest beneath it. The newly discovered bloody fingerprint now requires
the same effort as all other previously discovered evidence. Thus the technician must
stop the current step of collection and return to the initial steps (observe, photograph,
sketch, and search), acting on each step for this newly discovered item. In effect, this
will bring the bloody fingerprint up to speed with the level of effort directed at the rest
of the scene.
This going-back process is an integral part of scene processing. It happens all the time
and at nearly every step of the processing methodology. The further one goes into the scene
processing procedure, the more intrusive the search, collection, and processing actions,
Processing Methodology 85

and thus the more likely it is that the technician will encounter items that were not previ-
ously observed. As a result, technicians are routinely discovering new evidence. A failure
to make this effort results in incomplete documentation. As in the example of the bloody
fingerprint, if the technician fails to go back in the steps, then no evidence-establishing
photograph will exist, the location of the bloody fingerprint won’t appear on the sketch,
and at trial it may be difficult if not impossible to effectively demonstrate where it was in
the scene. Throughout the overall scene processing procedure, the technician must expect
to stop the current step and return to the earlier steps of the sequence in order to deal with
newly discovered evidence.

The Adapted USACIDC Processing Model

Step 1: Initial Notification

In the same fashion that the initial responding officer must carefully note what he or she
is told, on scene the call-out to the investigative team requires the same consideration. As
Bruce Wiley, formerly of the San Jose PD Homicide Unit; says, “The call you got isn’t the
call you get!”3 A dispatcher reports a shooting involving one victim, and the technician
arrives to find a stabbing involving two victims. Rarely is what you find at the scene similar
to what you think you will find. The investigator must make note of who called, what they
reported, and how that individual became aware of the information. Any contradictions
may be significant at a later date, and the investigator must be able to identify the source of
any misinformation. Whether talking directly to someone on scene or through a dispatch
office, the investigator should ask what crime scene security measures are in place and then
provide basic guidance. The more information provided in this initial call-out, the more
adequately the investigator can coordinate a response.

Step 2: Coordination, Assessment, and Team Call-Out

A first consideration for the investigator is a legal one of jurisdiction. Verify that the scene
is part of the local jurisdiction and, if necessary, make appropriate notification if there are
multiagency issues. More often than not, the initial investigator will perform an on-scene
assessment before initiating a call-out for a crime scene team. Once again, the issue is
simply that what the technician thinks he or she has—based on the initial information—
is often nothing like what is found on scene. Sometimes the scene is significantly more
complex than anticipated, but just as often the scene entails far less than what was initially
believed. Requiring on-call resources to respond to a scene before it has been assessed can
lead to a waste of time and effort. Just as the initial responding officer did, the first inves-
tigator on scene should make note of environmental conditions, verify the scene location,
and seek out the initial responding officer.

Step 3: Conduct Initial Observations

Once on the scene, the investigator conducts an initial scan, looking specifically for vic-
tims, central theme items, and fragile evidence. If lifesaving is necessary, then that takes
priority over all other actions. If lifesaving is not an issue, the investigator looks for central
86 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

theme items, which might include a body or living victims, weapons, points of entry or
exit, or perhaps a room in disarray. Central theme items assist the investigator in trying
to develop some understanding of what may have happened. Remember always that these
initial impressions are just that, impressions based on incomplete information. Thus the
investigator must be prepared to constantly reevaluate his or her beliefs as additional infor-
mation becomes available. Too often, investigators suffer from tunnel vision and allow
these initial impressions to become fixed despite the discovery of additional information or
evidence. This refusal to consider other viable hypotheses of what happened can hamstring
the investigation and hinder the administration of justice.
This initial scan will assist the investigator in making a thorough assessment of the
scene. Once the initial scan is complete—and given that there is no requirement to provide
first aid—the investigator must complete the assessment described in Chapter 5, acting on
the scope and integrity of the scene (including additional security), defining team compo-
sition and resources, developing a viable search plan, and assessing what risks exist and
how those risks can be mitigated. The technician must deal appropriately with any fragile
evidence discovered during this step, to include photographing, documenting, and collect-
ing it in order to prevent its loss. Although an initial responding officer may choose not to
act on a fragile evidence issue, the investigator has an absolute duty to act. Ambivalence
or laziness is not an acceptable reason for losing fragile evidence once it has come to the
investigative team’s attention. This does not mean that the investigator will be able to pre-
vent the loss of all fragile evidence, but the investigator cannot simply ignore it.

Step 4: Deal with the Deceased

The investigator should recheck any apparent deceased victims for vital signs and identify
who, if anyone, has already made a pronouncement of death. Many jurisdictions will have
ME (medical examiner) investigators who have authority and responsibility for examin-
ing the body at the scene. This examination may include adjustment of position, clothing,
and even the insertion of temperature probes. It is imperative to determine what actions
were taken during lifesaving or during any ME examination. Fully identify these medical
authorities and ensure that you understand all of the actions they may have taken. Seek the
opinion of EMS, ME investigators, or doctors as to the nature of obvious injuries or reasons
for death, but treat these opinions with a healthy dose of skepticism. The investigative team
should then coordinate for release of the body and, if possible, coordinate the time and
location of the autopsy.

Case Example: Be Wary of EMS Interpretations of Wounds

Investigators responded to an injured party call and found a taxicab driver significantly
injured, bloody, and unresponsive outside of his cab. EMS personnel were already on
scene and attending to lifesaving. Based on the scene context, it appeared that a rob-
bery was the motive behind the attack. The victim was transported from the scene and
died en route to the hospital. Before EMS left the scene, investigators were informed
that the victim had suffered multiple gunshot wounds to the chest. Given these data,
the scene was contained and processing began. No gun or other weapon was located in
or around the taxicab and no casings or bullet defects were found in the cab. Lacking a
weapon, searches beyond the primary scene were immediately conducted in the hopes
Processing Methodology 87

of locating the gun or other evidence. Throughout the evening as processing contin-
ued, the investigative team was under the impression that they were investigating a
shooting. Later in the evening, the investigators dispatched to the hospital ultimately
learned from the attending doctor that the victim had been stabbed 23 times. No gun
was involved.
Initial impressions developed from EMS personnel can cloud the investigative team’s
beliefs and actions. The investigators should seek out EMS knowledge and observa-
tions; however, like anyone else they can be in error. Never allow such observations to
define and direct the investigation until they are verified.

Step 5: Photograph the Scene

At this point in the processing model, all actions necessary to ensure the well-being of
possible victims have been taken. The scene is stable, and now there is no further reason
to violate the scene for lifesaving purposes or to protect fragile evidence. The investiga-
tive team should now photograph the scene, using both still cameras and available video
equipment. Initial photographs must include overall photos. These photographs will define
the condition of the scene as the formal processing begins. Chapter 6 provides a detailed
review of the photographic documentation necessary.

Step 6: Document Overall Observations

Unlike the initial observation and scan of the scene, overall observations by the investiga-
tor require significant effort. The best method is to use an eight-step descriptive set. The
investigator describes the following aspects of the item:

• Quantity
• Item
• Color
• Type of construction
• Approximate size
• Identifying features
• Condition
• Location4

Using this descriptive set, the investigator creates an in-depth narrative of the scene.
This descriptive process, although detailed, is accomplished in a nonintrusive fashion. The
investigator makes the majority of these observations from a point outside the primary
scene, moving into the scene carefully only when necessary. As the scene has not been
sketched and items of evidence have yet to be fixed, items are not moved during the overall
observation step. The investigator makes the most detailed observation of the items as pos-
sible given their position, realizing that additional notes and observations will be necessary
once evidence is collected and items are moved. This step is important, as it memorializes
the condition of the scene in words, which will support the initial photographs.
This narrative description should include the building, room, furniture, fixtures, and
items present within. Although this step will ultimately be synopsized in the crime scene
88 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

report to a page or two, the actual notes of initial observations should deal with every
aspect of the scene.
The phrase “in words” is an important distinction when conducting overall observa-
tions. Many investigators employ a recording device in this stage. Although practical, this
also presents an opportunity for failure. Recording devices can fail and digital audio files
can be lost or corrupted. Overall observations are best documented via handwritten notes.
If you choose to use a recording device, back it up with some level of note taking.

Step 7: Sketch the Scene

Creating a rough sketch, which includes details on the room and furniture dimensions as
well as evidence-fixing measurements, is the next step of the processing model. The prior
observations and efforts to photograph the scene did not require any movement of articles
in the scene; thus everything should be in the same position as when found, with the obvi-
ous exception of items moved during lifesaving or fragile evidence collection. The inves-
tigator now creates a rough sketch of the scene depicting the orientation and relationships
of the various articles in the scene. This document will support the notes and photographs.
Chapter 7 describes in detail the various methods used to create the sketch, and as the
reader will discover, sketching requires movement of items in the scene, since the investi-
gator cannot measure accurately without occasionally moving items. For this reason, mea-
suring and fixing of evidence is always conducted after completing initial photography and
recording overall observations.

Step 8: Conduct a First Recheck

To this point in the processing model, all search efforts have been visual, with the investi-
gator looking for any items he or she feels are important. Each item discovered, as well as
the general scene, has been photographed, described in notes, and sketched. During this
recheck, the search continues in a visual mode in which the investigator rechecks for any
items or critical observations that may have been overlooked. Anything found during the
recheck will require the investigator to return to the earlier steps in order to complete the
photos, the overall observations, and the sketching steps.

Step 9: Release the Body

Unless undue exposure of the body in the scene is a problem (e.g., a body lying in the
middle of a busy highway), there is no investigative reason to rush the body from the scene.
Therefore, the body should remain in place throughout the photography, overall observa-
tional, and sketching processes. Once these actions are complete, the body is released from
the scene to the appropriate authorities. Before moving the body, preserve fragile evidence
on hands or feet by bagging them with paper bags. Physical examination of the body is a
must, including examination with an alternate light source (ALS). If items are observed
(e.g., fibers, abnormal blood drops, or broken fingernails) at any point during the exami-
nation, they should be documented and collected immediately. An investigator who fails
to collect items immediately will find that they have a habit of disappearing. Make sure
that the clothing and body condition are adequately documented in situ before placing
the body into a body bag. This should include photographing both the front and back of
Processing Methodology 89

Figure 4.2  Clothing items of victims must be documented before placing them into a body
bag or otherwise repositioning them. Here the victim is seen in situ, face down, and as yet
unmoved. The insert photo shows the position he was moved to on scene before being placed
into a body bag. (Courtesy of Josh Moore, Atlanta, Georgia.)

the victim. As a result of movement and passive blood flow from wounds, once the body is
inside the bag, blood will tend to saturate or smear unstained areas. This action can oblit-
erate gunshot residue or bloodstain patterns of interest (see Figures 4.2–4.4). Whenever
possible an investigator should remain with the body until it is signed into the morgue in
order to maintain a physical chain of custody. One additional concern is to fully search

On-scene Condition

Figure 4.3  The condition of the victim’s shirt and pants as found. Both items have bloodstain
patterns that may be of interest. (Courtesy of Josh Moore, Atlanta, Georgia.)
90 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Condition after
Transport

Figure 4.4  The condition of the clothing items when examined at the laboratory. Note the
heavy saturation across the entire back of the shirt and the large saturations stains on the hips
of the pants. If the on-scene condition is not documented, it is likely that saturation stains will
mar other evidence of interest. (Courtesy of Josh Moore, Atlanta, Georgia.)

and document the area beneath the body as soon as it is removed, ensuring no additional
evidence is present.

Step 10: Collect Items of Evidence

At this point in the scene processing model, the condition and location of all items that
were evident in the scene have been documented. It is now permissible to begin moving
items that the investigator intends to collect as evidence. Each item is examined for fur-
ther trace evidence, and the areas beneath the item are examined for additional evidence
that was not evident before removal. Controlled close-up photographs of the evidence,
often referred to as forensic quality photographs, are taken in addition to any photographs
taken as the item lay in the scene. Each item is documented on an appropriate evidence
custody voucher and the item marked for identification. If the item requires fingerprinting
on scene, this should be accomplished before it is placed into an evidence container. Keep
in mind that if the item is collectable, a more appropriate fingerprint response is to return
the item for superglue fuming in a controlled environment (e.g., a fuming tank). In this
case, the investigator need only secure the item in a manner that will preclude smudging
or smearing any latent prints during transportation to the office or laboratory. A rule of
thumb in collecting items of evidence is to always take the container to the evidence, not
the evidence to the container.

Step 11: Conduct a Second Recheck of the Scene

The second recheck is a far more intrusive act than any prior checks or searches. At this
point, all known evidence has been collected and is safely containerized or removed from
the scene. Now is a good time to utilize an ALS (alternative light source) in an effort to
locate body fluids or trace fibers and evidence not apparent in white light. Once that search
is complete, efforts to obtain fingerprints from scene surfaces (e.g., walls and furniture)
Processing Methodology 91

can begin without inadvertently contaminating other evidence. Fingerprint searches at

the scene are not arbitrary. The investigator must consider how the perpetrator interacted
with the scene and then pursue fingerprinting in these areas. The investigator will also
begin exploratory searches of the scene during this step. Items are moved, removed, or dis-
mantled in the scene in an effort to determine if there is additional evidence on, inside of,
or beneath them. As these additional actions are taken, new evidence is likely to be located.
With each new discovery, the investigator must stop and return to the earlier stages of the
processing model in order to completely document the newly found evidence.

Step 12: Conduct a Third Recheck of the Scene

During the third scene recheck, the investigator ensures that all exploratory searches were
sufficient and that no areas have been overlooked. In terms of rechecking the scene, the
investigator continues to recheck the scene until the recheck is negative. This is also an
excellent time to review investigative checklists, ensuring that all necessary steps have been
completed and the investigator is not forgetting some specific aspect of the scene. Once this
action is complete, advanced techniques such as chemical enhancements (e.g., luminol or
amido-black enhancement) or external ballistic examinations can be undertaken without
fear of damaging other evidence.

Step 13: Check beyond the Scene

Although checked during the initial assessment, the scene perimeter and outlying areas
should be thoroughly checked again by the investigative team to ensure that no evidence
has been overlooked. Blood trails leading from the scene may suggest areas where a lumi-
nol search is necessary, which in turn could lead to secondary scenes at some distance
from the original scene. This is a good time to photograph the exterior of the scene and
approaches to the scene. In investigations of serial homicides, these photographs are often
of importance to a criminal profiler.

Step 14: Conduct an On-Scene Debriefing of the Investigative Team

Before releasing or relinquishing the scene, the investigative team should spend a few
moments reviewing their efforts. Investigative checklists can be checked, and crime scene
products (e.g., narrative notes, sketches, and photos) can be checked against one another
to ensure that all information is documented and that information has not been skewed.
This is a time to question what the team did and what was not done. If something was not
done, then ask, “Why not?”

Step 15: Release or Secure the Scene

Once a scene has been released, the technician cannot return to the scene without a war-
rant. Therefore, it is imperative to be confident that all appropriate effort has been com-
pleted. Keeping a scene only requires manpower. Particularly when dealing with scenes
early in the morning, it is often a good idea to hold the scene until someone with a clear
head can review the scene documentation. When releasing a scene, whenever possible,
release it to an appropriate individual (e.g., resident, manager, or employee). Be sure
92 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

he or she understands that the police are done and that responsibility for security of the
scene now lies with the individual.

Step 16: Process and Package Evidence

On scene, the investigator cannot always package evidence for the long term. Items blood-
ied and still wet must be dried and packaged at a later date. The investigator may not
have the best container on scene and might choose instead to use an adequate interim
container. Once the investigator returns to the office, he or she can take steps to locate the
best packaging and then repackage the evidence. Evidence vouchers should be checked
against scene documentation to ensure that everything is annotated properly (e.g., room
and directions). As the investigator works these issues, he or she can begin formalizing any
analysis plans. What items need to go forward to the lab for what purpose? What latent
print methods are appropriate given the items that need processing? These are all questions
that must be considered and answered.

Step 17: Conduct a Formal Debriefing

A formal debriefing is usually conducted within 24 h of the completion of scene process-
ing. All of the available primary parties sit down and revisit the investigative effort. This
debriefing often serves as an outlet for considering and validating possible hypotheses and
for ensuring that all aspects of the scene processing are understood and shared with the
investigative team. If possible, individuals such as the ME investigator or initial respond-
ing officer should be invited to attend this meeting as well.
This model is applicable to all crime scenes, from the simplest to the most complex.
In simpler scenes and less severe crimes, the steps associated with bodies obviously are
excluded. But the overall sequence as described is appropriate to all crime scenes, whether
they be misdemeanors or felonies. The model sets the stage for the technician to leave with
as much evidence as possible. The issue will never be whether these methods should be
applied to all crimes scenes. If we could, we would, because it would help solve crimes.
The problem is one of resources; simply put, this model cannot be applied in its entirety at
every scene.

Summary

This book cannot set a minimum standard of methodology for every police agency. There
are simply far too many variations in manpower and equipment resources. Each organi-
zation and each technician must understand the basic methodology and apply it as con-
scientiously as possible given their particular circumstance. Whatever means they use at
the scene, it must include in some fashion the six basic processes: assessing, observing,
documenting, searching, collecting, and processing/analyzing. If the scene context is to
be captured in as pristine a condition as possible, then the sequence of the method must
follow the prescribed order as well. Haphazard behavior in the scene, or wandering about
throwing a little dust here and there, is a charade. The technician might as well not be
there. Without order and process, evidence will be lost unnecessarily. So if a technician
Processing Methodology 93

chooses to be present at a crime scene and take responsibility for processing a scene, then
that individual should choose, as well, to bring some method to the madness.

Suggested Reading
Crime Scene Handbook, CID pamphlet 195-10, HQS USACIDC, Ft. Belvoir, VA, 1999.
Ramirez, C., and Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL, 2011.

Chapter Questions
1. Why is sequence of order so important in crime scene processing?
2. What are the six basic processes accomplished during crime scene processing?
3. In terms of intrusiveness and alteration to the scene, how might the step of docu-
mentation alter a crime scene?
4. Explain why it is necessary for the crime scene technician to be prepared to return
to an earlier stage of the processing model?
5. Pick any object in your immediate vicinity and, using the eight-step descriptive set
(step 6), describe the item as completely as possible.
6. During the first recheck of the scene, are the methods used for the recheck visual
or physical?
7. Prior to placing a corpse in a body bag, what are some of the documentation efforts
the technician must take?
8. Rechecks of the scene are continued until when?
9. There are three debriefings that occur during a crime scene processing: the initial
debriefing by the first responding officer to the crime scene team, and two that
occur after all of the primary documentation and collection activities are com-
plete. When, where, and with whom are these debriefings conducted?
10. In terms of the crime scene processing goal, why is the phrase “in as pristine a
condition as possible” an important distinction for the crime scene technician?

Notes
1. New Webster’s Dictionary, Lexicon Publication, New York, 1990, p. 321.
2. U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command, Crime Scene Handbook, CID Pamphlet 195-10,
HQS USACIDC, Ft. Belvoir, VA, June 1999, pp. 14–36.
3. Wiley, B., case presentation to the Association of Crime Scene Reconstruction, Denver, CO,
October 2002.
4. Ibid., pp. 21–22.
Assessing the Scene
5
Once the investigative team takes control of the scene, the true task of assessment begins.
This assessment considers a number of logistical and technical aspects of scene processing.
These considerations will ultimately define the actions of the crime scene team as well as
identify additional resources that may be necessary. The team must complete this assess-
ment before initiating any direct scene processing and after receiving a debriefing by the
initial responding officer. If the investigative team fails to address these issues or fails to
seek out the initial responding officer and simply starts processing, in all likelihood evi-
dence and information will be lost, and personnel may be exposed to undue hazards.
The purpose of the debriefing and assessment by the investigative team is to consider
the following issues:

• Scope of the scene

• Scene integrity and contamination control
• Team approach and composition
• Search methods to be used
• Personal protective measures

Additional considerations of the team may include dealing with mass scene and mass
casualty situations as well as interacting with media representatives.

Debriefing the Responding Officers

Upon arrival at the scene, the crime scene team must seek out the initial responding officer.
Once found, this individual should be interviewed to determine:

• Scene scope and nature: The initial officers should clearly define the scope of the
scene, identifying specific boundaries and reasons why areas were included or
excluded in the initial perimeter. The general impressions of the officer regarding
the nature of the crime and specific observations that led to those impressions
should be sought and considered by the investigative team. If the officer discov-
ered specific items of evidence, these should be pointed out to the investigator.
Information regarding how the crime came to the attention of the officer (e.g.,
dispatched or flagged down) and the specifics of what that information entailed
should be sought.
• Changes to the scene: The initial officer should quickly highlight significant changes
to the scene by the police, fire, or EMS (emergency medical service) personnel.
If items were moved, lights turned on, doors opened, or bodies were moved, the
investigator must know that these actions occurred. The specific methods of entry
by the police into the scene and any items that were inadvertently touched by the
police or observed being touched by others should be identified.

95
96 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

• Status of involved parties: The status of victims, significant witnesses, and any sus-
pects should be made known to the investigator. Live or near-death victims may
have been transported, suspects may have been detained, or individuals claim-
ing to be witnesses may be present. As a result, the investigators or crime scene
team may have to act immediately to evaluate if there is physical evidence (e.g.,
bloodstained clothing, gunshot residue, and trace evidence) present on these indi-
viduals. Particularly when dealing with bloody scenes, the crime scene technicians
should examine all witnesses claiming to have discovered a body in an effort to
determine if there are inappropriate bloodstains present on their clothing. Any
statements to officers made by the involved parties should be shared as well. This
will ensure that the crime scene team is able to recognize disparities, if they exist,
as they process the scene.
• Scene security: The initial responding officer should describe the steps taken to
secure the scene, including those efforts the officer feels are necessary to enhance
security. The initial responding officer may be aware of an area on a perimeter
that is open or weakly secured. Any crime scene entry logs created by the initial
responders should be identified, collected, and attached to the crime scene team’s
entry/exit log. If a specific scene integrity threat (someone who has already dem-
onstrated an attempt to violate the perimeter) exists in the nature of a relative or
media representative, the initial responding officer should ensure that the investi-
gative team is aware of this threat.

The crime scene technician should listen carefully to all of the information provided
and seek clarification of any issues that are not clear. While the technician must resist
being misguided by seemingly wild theories, he or she must cautiously consider all of the
information presented.

Case Example: Things Are Not Always as They Initially Appear

Responding to a report of a body dumped in the woods, the Maine State Police encoun-
tered what appeared to be a woman’s body wrapped in a blanket and tied with ropes
(Figure 5.1). The only portion of the victim exposed at the scene was a leg clad in fishnet
stockings. From all apparent evidence, the Maine State Police felt that they were deal-
ing with the dump site of a sexual homicide.
When checked by the initial responding officers, the exposed leg of the victim cer-
tainly appeared human, and when touched it felt much as a corpse should feel. Since it
was clearly evident the body was dead, the scene was not disturbed, and a careful scene
examination began. But as the investigators examined the scene and the “body,” it also
became evident that all was not what it appeared to be.
The “victim,” it turned out, was a doll anatomically correct in every facet (Figure 5.2).
She showed obvious wear and tear, including evidence of previous attempts at restora-
tion (e.g., reattachment of a breast). Investigators subsequently determined that this
lifelike, human-feeling doll was available from a company in the West and sold as a
sex toy for a price tag of several thousand dollars. The police ultimately concluded her
predicament in the scene was either a dress rehearsal for future scenes or an artifact of
a demand by a wife to dump the offending “friend.” Interestingly enough, her head was
not found, perhaps retained as a fond reminder of better times.
Assessing the Scene 97

Figure 5.1  A scene that was originally believed to be a body dump site by the initial respond-
ing officers. Directly in front of the barrel is what appeared to be a body wrapped in a blanket,
which was then tied by rope. Extending out of the blanket and evident in the photograph was
a leg clad in fishnet stockings. (Courtesy of Deputy Chief Michael Ferenc and Detective Herb
Leighton of the Maine State Police. With permission.)

Investigators are not often presented with as convincing a false scene as the Maine
State Police were, but the truth is that when investigators arrive at a scene, they are often
provided with inaccurate information. The crime scene team cannot presume anything
while being debriefed; at the same time, they must evaluate everything they are told in
light of what they can see.

Figure 5.2  The “victim” from the scene in Figure 5.1. This doll was anatomically correct in
every aspect and had a fleshlike look and feel. Although this is an extreme case, it illustrates
that the initial impressions of those on scene are often incorrect. The crime scene team must
evaluate all information independently. (Courtesy of Sergeant Steven Drake and Detective
Herb Leighton of the Maine State Police. With permission.)
98 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Once the debriefing is completed, the initial responding officer can be released to carry
on other duties or assist in security of the scene. If the officer is released for other duties, he
or she should be reminded of the importance of documenting his or her findings, actions,
and observations in the incident report. The crime scene team should also coordinate to
receive copies of these reports as soon as they are available.

Scene Scope and Boundary Assessment

The crime scene investigators must reassess the boundary of the crime scene perimeter to
ensure that all areas of concern are secured. The crime scene team uses the same criteria
as the initial responding officers when considering where to place the boundary in the
scene. These criteria include primary focal points, avenues of entry and exit, and second-
ary scenes. Although they use the same criteria, it is not uncommon for the boundar-
ies to change once reassessed by the investigators. This occurs for a number of reasons.
First and foremost, the crime scene team applies the criteria with a far more critical and
experienced eye. They will often recognize a minor nuance in the scene that suggests
expanding the perimeter or see evidence that was not immediately evident to the patrol-
men. Another factor that affects reassessment is the general conditions at the scene. By
the time the crime scene team makes its assessment, the scene is far more stable. The
chaos encountered upon the arrival of the initial officers is no longer a major factor, since
the individuals encountered on scene are now under control, and any associated fire or
EMS activity has diminished. Often, additional lighting systems are in place as well,
increasing everyone’s ability to view the scene. All of these factors allow the crime scene
investigators to evaluate the entire circumstance more effectively, particularly the issue
of secondary scenes on the perimeter. Just as important, all of the fragmented informa-
tion provided by various participants has now funneled to the investigative team, allow-
ing them to better understand and evaluate what areas are or are not involved based on
testimonial claims.
If the scene boundary requires expansion, the crime scene investigator should act on
this requirement immediately. As this occurs, the initial responding officer may still be
present. The crime scene investigators should not admonish or criticize the decisions of
these officers, realizing that various factors may have prevented them from recognizing the
true scope of the scene. They should, however, offer comment on why the expansion was
necessary and mentor the officer as a mechanism of developing that officer’s knowledge
and experience base.

Scene Integrity and Contamination Control

Remember always that the basic goal of scene processing is to collect as much evidence as
possible in as pristine a condition as possible. Therefore the crime scene team must care-
fully consider how its impending actions will affect scene integrity. As processing begins,
a number of individuals will actively move in and around the scene, resources and equip-
ment will be needed inside the scene, and evidence will ultimately have to be removed from
the scene. With these actions in mind, the investigator must consider establishing access
routes to be used by the crime scene team, determine how the team will manage access to
Assessing the Scene 99

Initial Scene Perimeter

Area entailing the actual crime scene.

Area outside controlled perimeter where

on-lookers and media may gather.

Figure 5.3  The use of a single scene perimeter is typical of the initial responding officer’s
effort. Although functional in the early stages, a single perimeter leaves onlookers and media
in too close a proximity to the scene. A single perimeter provides for no buffer between these
people and the actual scene and evidence.

the scene, and establish how they will ensure scene isolation to prevent unnecessary con-
tamination or destruction.
As the team arrives on scene, the initial perimeter is likely to consist of a single barrier
put in place by the responding officer (see Figure 5.3). Although adequate for its initial pur-
pose, a single barrier is not sufficient for long-term scene integrity. A single barrier allows no
buffer distance between what may be evidence and the crowd of onlookers (see Figure 5.4).

Figure 5.4  A single perimeter between the scene and the crowd that may gather will not
isolate the scene. The barrier is visual only, and only those willing to recognize it will respect
it. Here onlookers who knew the victim rush past a single-perimeter barrier into the primary
scene. A second-level perimeter will allow some buffer between onlookers and the actual scene.
100 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Outer Scene Perimeter

Inner Scene Perimeter

Area entailing the actual crime scene.

Working area, evidence holding area and staging point for equipment,
it also provides a physical buffer between the actual scene and
unauthorized individuals.

Area outside the controlled perimeters where on-lookers and media may gather.

Figure 5.5  Multilevel containment of the scene is accomplished by using a minimum of two
perimeters. The inner perimeter encompasses the actual scene. A second perimeter (the outer
scene perimeter) in effect creates a buffer zone and work area for the crime scene team. It moves
the crowd and media back from any evidence or areas of interest and is an effective staging area
for equipment and personnel.

In considering scene isolation, the crime scene team should employ multilevel isolation
and containment. Two perimeters should be established, which in effect will create three
areas of access (Figure 5.5). The inner perimeter boundary extends around the area consid-
ered to be the actual scene, as previously described. Access into this inner area is limited
to those who are conducting the scene processing. A second perimeter, placed beyond the
inner boundary, will create a working area surrounding the actual crime scene.
This working area serves multiple functions, and entry to it is controlled as well. Only
law enforcement officials or others who are on scene in an official capacity should be pres-
ent inside of this boundary. This boundary creates a buffer that removes the onlookers
from the immediate area of the crime scene. The area will serve as an excellent staging
point for equipment. Items such as camera cases, bulky equipment, or investigative kits
that are required in the scene but are not currently in use can be placed here. The working
area also serves as a trash collection point for debris, in particular the gloves, Tyvek suits,
and booties used for personal protection of the crime scene processors. Last but not least,
the working area also provides a secure area for evidence collection. As items are brought
from the scene, they are often collected at a single point before being placed in a vehicle for
transportation to the evidence room. By establishing a specific evidence collection point
in this area, away from the outer perimeter but within the secured area, evidence integrity
is not violated.
Whether the second perimeter is placed inside or outside of the initial perimeter cre-
ated by the initial responding officer is scene and situation dependent. If the initial perim-
eter is far enough out from the primary scene, there may be more than adequate room
Assessing the Scene 101

to insert an additional perimeter inside of this first barrier. If the initial perimeter barely
contains the primary scene, as seen in Figure  5.4, the additional perimeter will have to
be placed outside of it, demanding that onlookers and vehicles be moved further back.
Everything outside of the outer perimeter is unsecured and uncontrolled. Here relatives,
onlookers, and press are likely to gather. This outer boundary will always require the great-
est level of effort and manpower on the part of the officers securing the scene.
If necessary, additional perimeters can be established to create even more defined
access control. As an example, the addition of a third perimeter creates a second working
area. Access to the innermost working perimeter might be limited to scene processors and
used for evidence collection and equipment staging. Supervisors requiring briefings and
other authorized officials or investigators not directly involved in the scene processing
could then be limited to the second working perimeter. This increases the isolation of the
scene, providing greater security at the evidence collection point, and prevents inadvertent
entry to the scene by those supervisors who have no true business inside. There are limita-
tions for establishing these additional levels of containment. The first limitation is ensuring
that everyone understands who should be where in the scene, and the second limitation is
in actually manning and controlling the various perimeters.
The use of multilevel isolation can be effective as the size and scope of the scene increases.
In major crimes or situations involving mass casualties, multiple perimeters established at
varying distances from the scene might be necessary to control and ensure scene integrity.
The actual distance between each perimeter in any crime scene is dependent on the needs
of the investigation. The best advice in terms of defining the distance between perimeters
is to know why the perimeter is in place. If it is designed to keep the media from having a
direct line of sight into the scene, then that demands a far greater distance than a perimeter
simply designed to keep the media at a safe distance.
When using multilevel containment, never create more perimeters than are function-
ally necessary, and certainly no more than can be manned effectively. It is far better to have
one perimeter that no one can violate than to have three perimeters manned by weak secu-
rity that anyone can violate. Keep in mind that the innermost perimeter may require only
limited security (e.g., one officer maintaining the entry log). If the organization is properly
trained in advance and applies that training at each scene, the inner perimeter will likely
be self-regulated.
No matter how many perimeters are created, once the purpose of the perimeter is
defined, it is imperative that all parties be held accountable for respecting its purpose. This
includes other police officers. It is often amazing to see the number of people present inside
the barrier tape at a crime scene. Few, if any, will have purpose, and more than likely they
will be standing around with their hands in their pockets (Figure 5.6). Status as a police
officer, rank, or political position should play no part in defining who may pass a perim-
eter. The uniform division commander cannot enter a perimeter designed to keep every-
one out except for the actual crime scene processors simply because he or she outranks the
detectives. Similarly, the deputy chief does not need to walk through the crime scene just
because he or she has to brief the chief in the morning. Perimeters have purpose, and that
purpose will effectively guide the crime scene team in deciding who should or should not
pass beyond the perimeter.
There are supervisory and political realities for those engaged in crime scene process-
ing. Not all supervisors understand or, for that matter, care about crime scene integrity.
They often believe their need to know overrides evidentiary issues. In trying to ensure
102 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 5.6  Once a perimeter is established, everyone is responsible for respecting its purpose,
including emergency service workers and police. Far too often, everyone in uniform assumes
they have purpose inside the perimeter. As in the case of this bombing scene, despite the pres-
ence of a perimeter, the inner perimeter is often filled by people without a specific purpose.

scene integrity, the crime scene team may find itself involved in politically incorrect
actions. Balancing the competing interests and duties of everyone at the scene and apply-
ing a true team effort is necessary. Simply put, keeping a supervisor in the know does
not always demand giving that person access to the scene. Explaining that to the deputy
chief at 3 a.m. in a chaotic scene can be a task. Nevertheless, criminal investigations are
fluid events, so it is imperative that supervisors and those with political responsibilities
are kept informed. They need factual information and often need to understand scene
nuances. Without this information, it will be difficult to deal with the press or ensure that
senior officials are informed. The most effective approach is for the senior leaders in an
organization to sit down and establish these access policies before an event. In the heat of
the moment, interdepartmental confrontations can get out of control without established
policies. Coordination, a standard approach to scene containment, and department-wide
training before the incident will usually prevent “turf” issues from developing.
Three techniques for handling supervisors or politicians are (1) to enforce the use of
standard personal protective measures, (2) to enforce the use of scene entry logs, and (3) to
consider creating walking routes or observation points for authorized visitors. If everyone
in the scene is required to use proper protective clothing (e.g., Tyvek, booties, and masks)
without exception, this alone will remind those who are nothing more than “inquiring
minds” that the scene is not particularly safe. If this hint is insufficient, then the require-
ment and inconvenience of putting on all of this protective clothing may be enough to
make these individuals reconsider their need to be inside the scene. Requiring these indi-
viduals to log in on the scene entry log is often effective as well. If your name appears on the
entry log, the probability of being called as a witness in future hearings and trials increases
dramatically. Supervisors tend to want to arrive and leave anonymously; they generally do
not like their names to be included in reports. Finally, the creation of established walking
routes is an effective way to allow supervisory and political entities limited access to the
scene. Such walking routes are generally created after completing the initial documenta-
tion. The route must be cleared of any items of evidentiary value and should be clearly
Assessing the Scene 103

marked. A member of the crime scene team should accompany anyone given access to the
scene via a walk route.

Managing Access

Once the perimeters are in place, the next concern is to identify access points in the perim-
eters (where team members may move in and out of the scene) and to decide what scene
entry logs are necessary. Defining the access routes into the scene is not as simple as it might
appear. Just because the front door is right there does not mean that it is the best choice for
access to the scene. Entry and exit points for the crime scene team are not defined solely
on ease of access. Other considerations are in play as well. The primary considerations are:

• What avenue of approach or departure did the perpetrator utilize?

• Will the access point expose operations to unnecessary media scrutiny?
• What access points are available?

Each of these considerations is important, and each must be evaluated in its own right.
You will recall that access routes used by perpetrators are important areas. They are typically
rich in physical evidence and therefore are areas in which scene integrity must be main-
tained. These areas are likely to hold footwear marks (both patent and latent), fingerprint
evidence, and a variety of post-incident bloodstain patterns. Tromping the primary scene
processors through this area can result in the degradation of any number of items of physical
evidence. In this instance, an alternative entry point for the processing team is warranted,
at least until the entry/exit can be properly processed and any evidence present collected.
The second concern in defining the entry point is media scrutiny. Once containment is
in place and a routine established, the team’s entry point may receive a significant amount
of media interest. It offers a good backdrop for video clips, as it is a point of police activity.
Items are moved out of the scene through this location, and often supervisors and proces-
sors will interact here. At any significant scene, expect the media to direct standoff audio
and imaging devices at this location. The more exposed the entry point is to the media, the
more difficult it may be to prevent unintentional information leaks. The only functional
way to prevent this kind of media interest in an exterior scene is the use of sheer distance
between the media and the access point. If the media are equipped with specialized equip-
ment, even that effort may fail. When operating in buildings, there are other options for
preventing undue exposure. For instance, if the team uses a side or back door, one physi-
cally isolated from the main street and onlookers, it is less likely that media representatives
will be able to observe or film the removal of bodies or evidence. If this is not possible, the
use of crime scene screens (Figure 5.7) or the simple act of closing a door may limit this
kind of invasiveness.

Case Example: With Standoff Technology, You Are

Never Out in the Middle of Nowhere
In 2002 the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) encountered a mass scene involv-
ing a crematory in which the operator—rather than cremating remains—was simply
discarding the bodies throughout his multiacre facility. Ultimately, more than 300
104 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 5.7  Crime scene screens are an effective way to limit the invasiveness of the media’s
cameras and to provide a victim with some level of final dignity. These screens can be self-
constructed for under several hundred dollars.

bodies were found scattered across the property. The community’s outrage and the
sheer magnitude of the situation created significant national and international media
attention. In developing a scene response, a significant area surrounding the property
was placed off-limits. This effectively prevented the media from directly photograph-
ing on-scene operations.
At one point during the scene processing, it was necessary to retrieve several remains
from a ditch in a wooded section of the property. For all intents and purposes, the
investigators working this detail were out in the middle of nowhere. Despite the isola-
tion of this scene, photographs of a corpse being hoisted from this ditch were soon
circulating on the Internet. A subsequent investigation identified the photographer,
and it was determined that the photographer had shot the photos without violating
the scene. The photographer simply walked onto an adjoining property and, from a
significant distance, employed a standoff still-camera lens. Thankfully, good sense and
ethics prevented the photos from being published in any newspaper or magazine, but
the incident illustrates that the scene processor is never really alone.1

The crime scene team is often presented with a situation in which there is only one
entry point into the scene. This is common in apartment buildings, hotel or motel rooms,
and other small buildings. It is also possible that additional entry points to the scene are
unreasonable or unsafe for some reason. In such situations, the crime scene team will have
to utilize the main access. If this is the case, it will demand that the team process this area
appropriately before allowing it to be used as an access to the primary scene. A point-to-
point search method (as described in the “Search Patterns” section below) can be quite
functional, allowing a work path to the primary scene to be cleared in advance.
After defining the points of access on the perimeter, the crime scene team must decide
how they will document access control using the crime scene entry control log. The entry
control log is a simple document (Figure 5.8) that identifies who entered the scene, when
they entered, what their purpose was, and when they departed.
At a minimum, the perimeter that defines the true scene should have a crime scene
entry control log. This is the area of greatest interest, and defense counsel is apt to ques-
tion who had physical access to the actual scene, and therefore access to evidence. Issues of
who may have been in an outer staging area are far less likely to be of significant interest
Assessing the Scene 105

Crime Scene Entry Log

Time In Name/Unit Reason at Scene Time Out
1750 S.A. Brown—Homicide Scene processing
1759 Smith/ME investigator Scene exam 1823
1800 H. Jones—CS unit Scene processing
1800 L. Marshall—CS unit Scene processing
1817 Chief Kyle Scene visit 1833
1817 Maj. Darren—PIO Update by homicide 1833

Figure 5.8  The crime scene entry control log is intended as a means of providing a running
record of everyone who entered the scene, when they entered, why they entered, and what time
they left. This allows the crime scene team to more effectively answer questions regarding
crime scene integrity at judicial proceedings.

to anyone. Depending upon need and circumstances, crime scene entry logs can be used
at additional perimeters (e.g., outer perimeters). A caution is in order when considering
the use of entry logs at the additional perimeters. Be careful not to create an unnecessary
gauntlet of bureaucracy that scene processors must survive while trying to do their job.
If team members have to sign in and out every 15 ft, this will lead to disgruntled officers
and tempt individuals to try and bypass such security. Controlling access to any given
perimeter does not necessarily require the use of a written entry control log. The primary
purpose of the entry control log is to keep track of who was inside the actual “crime scene.”
Establish scene entry logs at those areas necessary to document that information and then
enforce their use.
If the initial responding officers created an entry control log, it should be attached to
the formal crime scene entry control log and kept as a complete record of access to the
event. Some authors have suggested adding names and times from the initial responding
officer’s entry log to the crime scene team’s formal entry log. The entry log should stand
on its own, a contemporaneous written record of what happened. It is unnecessary to go
back and recreate entries on the team’s formal log or to try and recreate a log that was never
established in the first place. The court may view adding entries to “complete the record”
as inappropriate. Simply ensure that the responding officer or someone in the investigative
team documents in their supplemental report any information regarding who may have
been inside the scene in these early stages and retain any written logs provided.

Defining Team Composition

The composition of the crime scene team is first defined by whether the team’s approach is
one of area or function. In the area approach, a single team handles all activities associated
with processing. In a functional approach, the team leader designates different teams to do
different activities. Which method is chosen is based primarily on the nature and scope
of the scene. A simple burglary involving a single room requires far less effort and logisti-
cal support than a multiple murder scene, where bloodstain patterns or bullet trajectories
throughout multiple rooms may be in question.
Using the area approach, a single group of scene investigators is responsible for all pro-
cessing for a given area in the scene. The area in question may be the entire crime scene or
106 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

a small section (a zone) of a larger, more complex crime scene. The group will document its
area of the scene through photography, measure and sketch the scene, search for and col-
lect latent prints and other physical evidence, and conduct any other associated activities
involving that area. The area approach is very typical in small police departments, where
specialization is not an option and manpower resources are limited.
In a functional approach, crime scene teams are developed to handle specific functions
within the entire scene. Examples could include a documentation team, responsible for
photographing, sketching, and measuring the crime scene; or a fingerprint team, respon-
sible for processing all appropriate scene surfaces for latent prints. When using the func-
tional approach, it is not as important how one breaks down the different activities (e.g.,
how many different teams you create to do different jobs), but it is important in what order
the teams are staged through the scene. The basic order of procedures that were discussed
in Chapter 4 must be adhered to. The supervisor cannot decide to send the latent team in
prior to the arrival of a photography team; as such, an action would violate the basic rules
of documentation and scene integrity.
Some of the other factors to consider before making a determination of area vs. func-
tion include:

• Single or multiple scenes

• Order of activity involving specialty examination needs
• Available resources (equipment or personnel)
• Physical size of the scene

Not every crime is confined to a single scene. In a murder, there may be an assault
scene and then a dump site for the body. In the burglary, you may find multiple homes
or businesses burglarized on a block during a single event. Whatever the case, the more
scenes you must deal with simultaneously, the more difficult it is to direct resources to
them. The sheer logistics of moving teams or providing equipment at each scene may deter
smooth operations. In a multiple-scene situation where equipment resources are not at
issue, an area approach may be the more advantageous method. The area approach reduces
the issue of transporting multiple functional teams to each scene.
The more complex the crime scene is, the more likely it is that specialty examinations
may be necessary. Classic examples of specialty examinations include analysts conduct-
ing bloodstain pattern evaluations, reconstruction teams attempting to define external
ballistic issues, or perhaps a unique latent print issue that requires an on-scene chemi-
cal enhancement by a crime lab team. Additional examples might include the need for
on-scene computer forensics, or addressing the safety issues involved in dealing with a
methamphetamine lab. Specialty examinations must be considered in terms of the overall
order of processing as well as whether the primary team has the skills necessary to conduct
the activity. If no one on the team is specifically trained in a specialty skill, then that will
demand locating appropriately skilled analysts. Bringing those individuals into the situa-
tion will then force the team into a functional team approach.
The physical size of a scene may force the issue of an area vs. functional approach. If
the scene is too large, size alone may prevent effective movement of the functional teams
through it in a timely fashion. In that instance, zones may have to be assigned to different
teams and an area approach applied. This is particularly true in mass crime scenes or mass
casualty situations.
Assessing the Scene 107

Resource availability is also a significant factor in considering which method to use.

Manpower usually underlies any standard operating procedure for an organization’s
response to the typical crime scene. When faced with a significant scene, consideration
must be given not only to the availability of people but also equipment. Are sufficiently
trained individuals present to create separate area teams? If there are enough people, is
there enough equipment to properly outfit each team? If equipment resources are at a pre-
mium and there is not enough to go around, a functional approach may be the answer.
There simply is no single right answer to apply. The team must assess the situation, consid-
ering the scene as well as the availability of resources. Use of a standard approach estab-
lished by standard operational procedure (SOP) or organizational custom (whether based
on area or function) may be more than adequate in a simple scene. As the complexity of
the scene increases, any number of these considerations may force the crime scene team
into a different approach.
No matter what method is ultimately chosen, the respective team members will engage
in certain basic activities at every crime scene. These include photography, sketching and
measuring, searching, and the collection of evidence. Each of these activities will be dis-
cussed in detail in later chapters, but a general understanding of how many people it takes
to conduct these activities is necessary in order to properly plan and staff the teams in the
first place.
Photography teams require a minimum of two people. An attempt by a single indi-
vidual to take the photographs and maintain the photo log is likely to result in error. With
two team members, one operates the camera, while the second is responsible for creating
and ensuring the accuracy of the photo log. The second team member (or a third member if
available) also assists by setting up scales and photo placards in the scene as the photogra-
pher creates the various photos necessary (e.g., with and without scale photos or evidence
close-ups). A sketch and measurement team generally requires three people. Two members
are needed to effectively operate the measuring device, while a third creates the rough
sketch. If a fourth member is available, this person can act as a scribe and document each
measurement on paper. If only two members are present, it is certainly possible to measure
and create a sketch, but the flow of the process is not as effective and the accuracy of the
sketch may suffer. Evidence collection teams require a minimum of two team members.
The primary member is responsible for collecting the evidence, physically bagging and
tagging it. The second member is responsible for creating the evidence log, documenting
what was taken, when it was taken, and where it was found. If necessary, a single team
member can accomplish both aspects, but once again, the process is not as effective as
when accomplished by two people, and the accuracy of the evidence log may suffer. It is
not uncommon to find crime scene technicians who create their evidence log after the
fact. In other words, they collect multiple items, then return to the office and create the
evidence log. Although functional, this process often leads to mistakes. This is particularly
true when dealing with multiple items that are similar (e.g., shell casings), but which were
not fully marked on scene. This approach is discouraged. It is far better to create a written
evidence log on scene, to prevent misidentifying or in some fashion misrepresenting where
an item was located.
Defining the proper number of search team members is more difficult. As the next section
on search methods will explain, what the police are searching for and in what environment
they are searching for it will force a number of issues with regard to the number of searchers
involved. In the typical crime scene search, a minimum of two search team members should be
108 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

involved. A single searcher, no matter how methodical that person may be, is always capable of
overlooking something. Because we tend to see and perceive things differently, two sets of eyes
operating over the same territory will usually prevent inadvertently missing items of evidence.

Crime Scene Search Considerations

Eventually a search of the scene will be required to locate any evidence that is present. The
specific method the crime scene team chooses to conduct the search is really unimportant
so long as the method employed is methodical and systematic.
The word methodical is defined as “marked by ordered and systematic habits or behav-
ior.”2 Methodical then, at least in the author’s consideration, is the application of estab-
lished procedures and practices. The word systematic is defined as being “purposefully
regular.”3 Thus the approach used to conduct the search must be based on established
practice and routinely conducted in a purposefully regular fashion. From the application
of a methodical and systematic approach, the end result will be an all-encompassing and
detailed search in which little if anything will be overlooked. What the crime scene team
cannot do is meander about in the scene, moving from one point to the next, wherever
fancy and mindless focus lead them.
Whatever search method is used, there are a number of factors to consider regarding
the area or search swath that a single searcher is responsible for at any moment. This width,
i.e., the size of the strip or swath the searcher is viewing at any given moment, is affected
by the:

• Nature of the ground being searched

• Lighting conditions
• On-scene environmental conditions
• Size of the item being searched for

The nature of the area being searched will have a significant impact on the swath a single
searcher can evaluate. For example, a cluttered room with items strewn about on the floor is
far more difficult to examine thoroughly than a clean, well-swept industrial floor. Similarly,
searching an asphalt parking lot is far easier than searching through a field of knee-high
grass (Figure 5.9). Since the crime scene team does not get to choose the site of the crime, all
they can do is adjust the size of their search swath to the terrain they encounter.
The time of day and ambient lighting conditions can severely hamper the ability of even
the best searcher. It is not uncommon to walk into a crime scene and find a single 40-watt
bulb burning in a corner with no other lighting available, natural or otherwise. Crime scene
technicians often carry 100-watt bulbs in their crime scene kits and use these to replace the
existing bulbs in the scene. Although this practice will enhance the lighting conditions, it
will not resolve all issues. The poorer the lighting conditions in the scene, the smaller the
width of area the searcher can effectively monitor. On the other hand, if lighting conditions
are favorable or if additional lights are brought in, the searcher can widen this swath, allow-
ing the coverage of more ground in a shorter period (see Figures 5.10 and 5.11).
Above and beyond the ability to put sufficient light onto the area to be searched, the
kind of light available is a factor as well. The most important tool of the crime scene searcher
is clean white light. Fluorescent lights, standard house bulbs, and flashlights are all helpful.
Assessing the Scene 109

Search Search
Width 1 Width 2

Area to be Searched

Terrain at Width 1 Terrain at Width 2

Figure 5.9  The area or swath that a single searcher can evaluate at any given moment is a
function of many things. As in this case, when the search involves terrain such as high grass,
the swath of area being searched must be reduced. On the other hand, when searching an area
such as asphalt, the searcher can increase the swath size.

Figure 5.10  Ambient light and available light will affect the area that can be searched by a
single searcher. In this instance, a flashlight provides effective lighting, but the beam obviously
limits the area under observation.
110 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 5.11  With the use of a portable alternative light source (ALS) system, the same area
as in Figure 5.9 is illuminated with far better results. The beam of light produced by the ALS
allows the searcher to check a broader area effectively in a single glance.

They will certainly increase the illumination in the scene, but they do not always allow the
searcher to see the scene cleanly. Natural white light produced by the sun, and mimicked
by a variety of unfiltered alternative light source (ALS) systems, allows the crime scene
technician to see and perceive the scene much more accurately. For example, in Figure 5.10,
note the presence of a yellow tint in the light produced by the flashlight. That yellow tint
affects the reflection of color for every item in the scene. The ALS used in Figure 5.11, how-
ever, produces a far more natural light that reflects the colors more accurately.
Lacking an ALS, work lights and spotlights are one optional way to increase ambient
light in both interior and exterior scenes. These systems may include halogen work lights,
industrial lighting systems with generators, or spotlights mounted on vehicles (Figure 5.12).
Halogen work lights are the most common approach for the crime scene technician. They
can be purchased at any hardware store for a minimal cost, but they do come at a price in

Figure 5.12  Additional lighting systems are available to increase lighting in dark interior
scenes and to help illuminate low-light exterior scenes. These may include halogen work lights
(foreground) or vehicle-mounted spotlights. Often the crime scene team can also procure large
industrial lighting systems from the fire department as well.
Assessing the Scene 111

terms of application in the scene. First and foremost, they usually increase the ambient
temperature in the scene, particularly in enclosed rooms. As a result, it becomes difficult
to work in close quarters with one of these lighting systems while wearing protective gar-
ments. Second, the work lights often produce a glare that may actually reduce the ability of
the searcher in some areas. Nevertheless, lacking the availability of any other lighting sys-
tem, these work lights set up easily and provide significant additional lighting. By install-
ing a power converter in the investigator’s vehicle, one designed to convert the car’s 12 V
dc system to 110 V ac, halogen light systems become mobile as well.
When considering exterior scenes, particularly large-scale exterior scenes, the investi-
gative team may find that there is no other option than to wait for daylight before conducting
the search. In many instances, work lights and industrial lighting will simply not fulfill the
lighting requirement, at least not in sufficient fashion to ensure a good-quality search.

Case Example: Waiting for Dawn

Just after midnight in 1981, a Washington State fire crew responded to a brush fire
in a recreational area. As the fire crew worked the field fire, they repeatedly found
themselves tripping over items beneath their feet. In the dark, they had no clue of
what the items actually were. Once the fire was under control, they took a moment to
investigate and, to their surprise, determined that they had been fighting the fire on
top of what appeared to be a body. The investigators called to the scene discovered a
severely decomposed body, essentially consisting of skeletal remains. As the scene was
examined with flashlights and additional lighting, bones were found scattered across
an area of no less than ¼ acre.
The scene was in a field, ½ mile from the nearest street, with no ambient light what-
soever. Even with the additional lighting present on the fire truck, most of this area was
pitch black. Although no one really wanted to spend the rest of the morning waiting
for dawn, the senior investigator realized that there was no other course of action. The
crime scene team went into hold and waited for sunrise. When dawn arrived, a reas-
sessment of the scene quickly expanded the area involved from the ¼ acre evident the
night before to an area that easily encompassed a full acre. Small bones and artifacts
were scattered from one end of this field to the other. Interestingly enough, even in the
light of day, the head of the body was never discovered.
The team could easily have begun processing the scene the night before. Indeed,
there was significant discussion and peer pressure suggesting this course of action. This
“get on with it and get home” attitude often appears on scene. But the senior investiga-
tor, a wise and experienced crime scene investigator, realized that the effectiveness of
a nighttime search would have been severely limited. Using the lighting available that
night, he knew it was impossible to be confident of the actual scene limits or the quality
of the search. Waiting for dawn and natural light was the only valid option available.

On-scene environmental conditions will certainly affect the ability of the searcher.
In interior scenes, temperature extremes, odors, and other environmental factors can
interfere with the ability of the searcher. In exterior scenes, rain, snow, or other inclement
weather may limit the ability of the searcher. Clothing and equipment intended to limit the
impact of such conditions will also affect the visual ability and stamina of the searcher. The
concentration and focus of any searcher is always negatively affected as the environmental
112 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

conditions worsen. The most appropriate way to respond to such conditions is to decrease
the width of the swath being searched.
Occasionally, the crime scene team may have to search an area for a specific item,
rather than conducting a generalized search for any and all evidence. In this instance, the
size of the item being searched for will clearly impact on the width of area a single searcher
can evaluate. Looking for a shell casing in a manicured lawn is a far different activity than
looking for a .40-caliber pistol in the same lawn, as illustrated in Figures 5.13 and 5.14.
As conditions and the situation change in the scene, the searcher must adjust the size
of the search swath accordingly. Particularly when conducting an initial search, when the
searcher has no idea of what he or she may or may not find. The smaller the width of the
search swath, the better the search.

Figure 5.13  Oftentimes a search is directed at a specific object. The nature of the object will
force issues as to how wide of a search path a single searcher can evaluate. In this instance, a
single .40-caliber shell casing in a manicured lawn is difficult to see, even close up.

Figure 5.14  If the object of the search is a weapon in the same manicured lawn, the situation
is radically different. Searchers must modify their approach to the search to meet the condi-
tions and situation.
Assessing the Scene 113

Search Patterns

There are five basic patterns for conducting a detailed crime scene search:

• Circle or spiral search

• Strip and line search
• Grid search
• Zone search
• Point-to-point search

One significant point is worth emphasizing when utilizing any of these search pat-
terns. As they have developed over time, these techniques are generally described in any
number of books on crime scene methods. But as defined, the descriptions suggest a two-
dimensional process. The crime scene search is a three-dimensional process. As simple as
this may seem, it is a point that must be made. Whether using a strip, circle, or zone, all of
the surfaces that come into the swath of the searcher (e.g., undersides of cabinets, ceilings,
table legs, trees, and shrubs) have to be examined.

Circle or Spiral Search

The circle or spiral search is an effective method that is widely employed in interior scenes.
The searcher begins on the outside of the area or room and then, moving in a slow circle,
searches in a spiral pattern inward, as seen in Figure 5.15. As was previously discussed, the
width of the swath or area being evaluated with each spiral is scene dependent. The circle
search is also employed in reverse, by moving outward from a primary focal point or the
center of a room. The only critical consideration in the circle search is managing the pace
of the search. As the circle closes, the searcher often begins moving along the path of the
spiral at a faster pace. The searcher has to consciously slow his or her speed as the area
remaining to be examined narrows. Whether moving inward or outward, the searcher
must maintain a pace that allows a full evaluation of the area in question.

Circle Search

End Start

Start End

Narrowing Widening

Figure 5.15  The spiral or circle search. A searcher moves through the scene using a spiraling
pattern.
114 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Strip and Line Search

The strip search is also a very effective technique. It is most often used in exterior scenes
when a large area is being evaluated. Classic scene examples include yards or parking lots.
The crime scene team designates a strip or swath size based on an area that can be func-
tionally evaluated by a single searcher given the scene conditions. The area is then subdi-
vided into similar strips. In extremely large areas, the team can physically designate the
strips by marking them with engineer tape or string. This action prevents searchers from
fading from a given lane. In most circumstances, searchers are simply held responsible for
visually maintaining their bearings. The searcher begins on an outer strip and moves down
that strip. Upon arriving at the end of the area in question, the searcher reverses direction
and evaluates the next adjacent strip. This process is repeated until the entire area has been
evaluated, as seen in Figure 5.16.
A line search is a variation on the strip search. The primary distinction between the two
methods is in the number of searchers. In the strip search, one or two searchers may start
on the outside lanes and move back and forth until all ground has been covered. In the line
search, a large group of searchers line up on the lanes and move down the strips together
in a single direction, each evaluating their particular lane, as seen in Figure 5.17. The num-
ber of searchers necessary is, of course, scene dependent. This method is particularly useful
in dealing with exterior scenes over uneven terrain. The most critical consideration for the
search team is to move the group together as a single entity. Searchers should remain on line,
moving at the pace set by the slowest searcher. One method that allows the search to pro-
ceed in a timely fashion is to flag items of evidence as they are found. Once flagged, the line
of searchers continues on, and a crime scene team comes in behind the line to process the
item. Whether in a shoulder-to-shoulder formation or at arm’s length from each other, any
staggering of the individuals in the line is likely to result in an area being overlooked or in
one end of the line pivoting the entire line. Such a motion will drag the entire formation off
Strip Search

Start End

Figure 5.16  In the strip search, a searcher divides the area in question into functional strips
or lanes. The searcher starts at one end of the scene and begins searching each strip, reversing
direction at the end of a lane and searching the next adjacent strip until all areas have been
evaluated.
Assessing the Scene 115

Line Search
End Line

Start Line

Figure 5.17  The line search is a variation on the strip search. It is effective when dealing with
uneven terrain. A group of searchers is lined up along the lanes and moves in a single direction
from a start line to an end line. Each searcher is responsible for evaluating a single lane. To keep
the line moving, as items are encountered, the evidence is flagged and a team comes in behind
the searchers to process the evidence.

course from the intended area. To prevent this, the line search usually requires one or more
supervisors to monitor and direct the pace of various parties in the line. On even terrain or in
urban environments, the line search is easy to control. The more uneven the terrain, the more
difficult it will become to control. Unfortunately, as the terrain gets rougher, the line search
may be the only effective way to confidently search such an area.

Grid Search

The grid search is another variation on the strip search. Rather than limit the search area
to strips oriented in a single direction, the area is divided into two sets of strips or lanes
that run at 90° angles to each other. Once subdivided in this fashion, the searcher treats
each set of lanes in the same fashion as in a normal strip search. Starting on an outer lane,
the searcher moves up and down the lanes until he or she reaches the far side of the area
being evaluated. At that point, the searcher begins a second search using the second set of
lanes, which lie at right angles to the first (Figure 5.18). What the grid method creates is a
second look by a single searcher over all of the ground being evaluated. Simply changing
the direction of the search, in and of itself, often changes the searcher’s perception of the
area, ensuring a more effective search.

Zone Search

The zone search is used in two variations. The first variation of the zone search is particu-
larly effective when dealing with small confined spaces, areas that are not easily searched
by a patterned movement (e.g., a spiral movement). The classic example of a zone search is
the vehicle search. The areas in question in the vehicle are broken down into zones, and the
searchers deal with each one individually. For example, in Figure 5.19 the inner compart-
ment of a car can be broken down into four areas or zones (zones A to D). The crime scene
technician checks each area thoroughly and independently of the other sections before
moving on. This process will generally result in sufficient overlap to prevent items from
116 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Grid Search

End

Start

Figure 5.18  The grid search is also a variation on the strip search. Instead of a single group of
lanes, two groups are established at 90° angles to each other. Starting at one end, the searcher
moves along the first group in the same fashion as a normal strip search. When the searcher
reaches the end, he or she begins the second look over the same terrain, following the second set
of lanes. This results in one searcher checking the area twice from two different perspectives.

Zone Search
Zone G

Zone B Zone C

Zone J Zone F Zone E Zone H

Zone A Zone D

Zone I

Figure 5.19  One variation of the zone search is to break down an area that is not easily
checked with another patterned search into small, defined areas. The searcher checks each sec-
tion independently before moving on to the next.

being missed that may lie in between or under the seats near an adjoining zone. The hood
and trunk are each considered an independent zone (zones E and F) and are dealt with
accordingly. If the exterior of the car is under scrutiny for fingerprints, paint chips, blood-
stains, or some other type of evidence, each side of the vehicle becomes a zone (zones G
to J). The utility of the zone search is that it prevents the searcher from indiscriminately
Assessing the Scene 117

Zone Search

Zone 6 Zone 5 Zone 4

Zone 7 Zone 9 Zone 3

Zone 8 Zone 1 Zone 2

Figure 5.20  Another variation of the zone search is to break a large area up into smaller areas
to be searched independently by different teams. Once the area has been broken down and
assigned, the team uses another search pattern (e.g., strip or grid) to check these smaller zones.

moving from one point of interest to another. It forces the searcher to consider each area
independently and reduces the probability that an area will be overlooked.
The second variation of the zone search is to subdivide a larger scene into manage-
able pieces of ground that the searcher can then check with some other search method
(e.g., strip or spiral). As depicted in Figure  5.20, these zones are often defined by the
geography of the scene. In the figure, the yard is broken down into eight zones (zones 1
to 8). Each zone is assigned to a team to be checked independently using a strip, circle,
or grid search. If directly involved, the house is defined as zone 9, which another team
will evaluate.
A more formal approach to subdividing an area is to physically grid off the zones.
Although this can be done with engineer tape or crime scene barrier tape, it is often more
effective to simply stake the grid intersections. The grid intersections created are then
assigned a letter and number system. Each individual zone can be identified by the associ-
ated intersections that define its perimeter, as seen in Figure 5.21. This method is particu-
larly effective in dealing with large exterior crime scenes involving significant amounts of
evidence, situations involving scattered remains, or even aircraft crashes. The zones and
associated grid allow the area to be effectively subdivided, which allows for more effective
command and control by a supervisor when assigning and verifying that areas have been
searched. It also provides for a more thorough search and easier identification of where in
the scene the various items of evidence are found. Using the measurement techniques to
be described in Chapter 7, the evidence is fixed using the intersections of the smaller zone
as a reference. This significantly reduces the span of measurements necessary for fixing
evidence in these large, expansive scenes.
118 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

C2
C1
Zones used as a method of
subdividing large areas.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
F F

E E

D D B2
B1
C C

B B

A A
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Figure 5.21  In extremely large scenes, zones can be formally assigned and a grid established
using stakes or barrier tape. The use of barrier tape is not as functional, as searchers must
move around the tape. The use of stakes is effective and has been employed by the Federal
Transportation Safety Board (FTSB) at aircraft crashes. The teams use each intersection as a
reference point for evidence-fixing measurements.

Point-to-Point Search

Point-to-point search methods are rarely practiced in the United States, at least in any
effective manner. The point-to-point method is taught in the Scenes of Crime Officer’s
Course at the Metropolitan Police Academy in Hendon, England. In the point-to-point
search, the crime scene investigator determines in what order he or she wishes to deal
with primary focal points and evidence. Following that priority, a path is cleared to the
first focal point (e.g., the body in a homicide) and an area cleared around this point. That
particular focal point is dealt with accordingly, and when it is completed, the team clears
a path to the next focal point. This process is repeated until all areas have been dealt with
and processed. The application of proper point-to-point search methods is a far cry from
entering the scene and allowing the team to move randomly through the scene. The pri-
mary distinction is that walk and work paths are cleared from and to each point of interest,
and the team does not stray from these cleared areas. Throughout the author’s career, he
can recall no instance in which he observed a point-to-point search conducted as defined
above. Lacking practice in this method, the point-to-point search routinely breaks down
into a haphazard affair.

Personal Protective Measures and Hazard Identification

Once a search method and approach are defined, the crime scene team must consider safety
issues. A significant level of effort has been directed at informing crime scene investigators
on the issues of biohazards. Biohazards are clearly important, but the nature of hazards at
the crime scene is not limited to biohazards. The full scope of hazards includes:
Assessing the Scene 119

• Biohazards from blood and other body fluids

• Structural hazards found in fire and explosion scenes
• Chemical and inhalation hazards found in fire scenes
• Inhalation, chemical, and fire hazards from on-scene processing methods
• Inhalation, chemical, or explosive hazards associated with drug labs
• Biochemical hazards associated with terrorism

Any one of these hazards can present significant health and safety issues. Each must
be considered in its own right, and personal protective measures should be employed to
prevent exposing crime scene investigators to potential hazards. In most instances, it is
impossible to prevent exposure, so the technician must apply risk management techniques
and at least mitigate the risk of exposure before directing team members into the scene.
(See Appendix B for a discussion of risk management.)

Biohazard Risks

Biohazards are the most common concern of crime scene investigators, particularly when deal-
ing with violent crime or death scenes where the technician is likely to encounter blood, urine,
fecal matter, sputum, or vomit. The primary biohazards associated with such situations are HIV
and hepatitis. HIV, or the human immunodeficiency virus, is responsible for AIDS (acquired
immune deficiency syndrome). The HIV virus attacks white blood cells known as CD4 T-cells
in the host, reducing the ability of the host to fight off other infections. Following infection by
HIV, if the CD4 cell count falls below a certain level, the individual is considered to have AIDS.
In the past, any HIV infection would almost certainly lead to AIDS. Although there is still no
cure for HIV exposure, currently there are a number of treatments that help keep the infection
from progressing to AIDS. HIV is transmitted primarily through contact with blood, semen,
and vaginal secretions. Avenues of infection in the crime scene run the gamut from needle-stick
injuries to direct exposure of open wounds and mucous membrane contact (e.g., eyes, nose, and
mouth). A critical concern regarding HIV is its survivability in a dried form. The only literature
available suggests that the virus can remain active for up to 3 to 5 days in a dried form, and when
wet, the virus can survive for even longer periods.4 The HIV transmission risk appears relatively
low for most crime scene exposure, with studies suggesting an infection rate of less than 1% in
cases involving blood contact with an open wound. Studies of mucous membrane exposure sug-
gest an even lower infection rate of less than 0.1%. However, these same studies suggest that the
risk increases as the volume of infected blood involved in the exposure increases.5
Hepatitis A (HAV), hepatitis B (HBV), and hepatitis C (HCV) are additional threats
present in biological fluids. HAV and HBV are less severe than HCV. HAV is transmit-
ted primarily through oral or fecal routes, while HBV is transmitted through direct and
indirect contact with infected blood or body fluids. This includes needle-stick injuries or
other minor injuries caused by infected articles in the crime scene. In terms of efficiency
of infection by HBV, contact with infected blood is more likely to result in infection than
with other body fluids.6 Of particular concern is the fact that HBV can survive in dried
blood at room temperature for periods up to 1 week.7 Both hepatitis A and B result in a
variety of symptoms that affect the individual, including fever, malaise, nausea, jaundice,
and abdominal discomfort. Untreated, either form of the disease can lead to more signifi-
cant complications and even death.8 Both forms of the disease are on the rise in the U.S.
120 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

population. There are preventive treatments for both hepatitis A and B, in the form of
inoculations. In the United States, OSHA regulations (OSHA 1910.1030) direct employers
of at-risk employees to pay for such inoculations when requested by the employee.
Hepatitis C is the more severe form of the three viruses. HCV attacks the liver and
leads to serious liver problems or death. There are no preventive treatments for hepatitis
C. Exposure routes for the disease are similar to those for HBV, with direct or indi-
rect contact with infected blood the primary exposure risk at the crime scene. Studies
show a less than 2% incidence rate of infection following exposure of open wounds to
HCV-infected blood and an even lower incidence rate for mucous membrane exposures.
There have been no reported cases of infection from exposure of intact skin with HCV-
infected fluids.9
Any of these biohazard exposures can occur while assisting in first aid, handling the
injured or dead, or through a variety of mechanisms involved in processing the scene. The
crime scene technician can reduce this threat in a number of ways. If at all possible, indi-
viduals with preexisting open sores, cuts, or abrasions should not work a scene where a bio-
logical hazard is present. If this is not possible, such injuries must be thoroughly protected
and isolated above and beyond the normal use of protective equipment. When involved in
searching or engaged in activities involving tools, the crime scene technician should use
extreme care, as needle-stick injuries and evidence collection accidents represent a signifi-
cant exposure avenue. During the collection of biological samples, only those individuals
necessary for the operation should be present. These individuals should wear an appropri-
ate particulate mask with safety goggles to eliminate exposure of mucous membrane tissue
from airborne particles. Activities such as eating, drinking, smoking, or the application of
makeup are also discouraged in any biohazard scene.
Another concern for the technician is postprocessing exposure through contamina-
tion of crime scene equipment and clothing. The use of personal protective equipment
(PPE) in the biohazard scene, to include shoe booties, is critical. This prevents the techni-
cian from carrying to his or her home, office, or car any contaminants on his or her foot-
wear. Favorite pens or notebooks should not be utilized inside the crime scene either. It
is better to use disposable pens and paper pads. Once processing is complete, these items
are disposed of to eliminate any possible cross-contamination issue. Any durable items or
equipment exposed to biohazards in the scene must be decontaminated. Durable equip-
ment can be washed with a 1:10 dilution of bleach and water. Items such as plastic photo
tents or scales can be cleaned with less caustic commercial alcohol solutions.
Technicians should establish a biohazard collection point at the working perimeter.
This should be a location convenient to the access point of the primary scene. The collec-
tion point should have large plastic trash bags (taped open) to help eliminate excessive han-
dling of contaminated items by crime scene technicians. Fresh PPE (e.g., Tyvek, booties,
and gloves) should be present here as well, making it easy for technicians to change gloves
and booties when exiting and reentering the primary scene.
Crime scene supervisors should make exposure prevention their primary strategy for
protecting their workers. The next step of prevention is vaccination from HBV for any
technician who routinely processes biohazard scenes. Finally, if prevention fails and an
accidental exposure occurs, the individual should seek medical assistance in order to
obtain the most appropriate treatment. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) indicates
that timely reporting of possible exposure is very important for effective treatment. The
individual should seek treatment in hours, not days.10
Assessing the Scene 121

Current guidelines suggest the following as on-scene first aid procedures after a sus-
pected exposure. In situations involving mere contact, wash the area involved with soap
and water or an antimicrobial wash. Exposed mucus membrane tissues should be flushed
with water. Although prior guidelines suggest allowing needle-stick injuries or other
wounds to bleed freely for a moment, there is no evidence to suggest that this action will
reduce the probability of infection.11 If possible, wash and rinse the wound with soap and
water or an antimicrobial solution. The injured party should then seek medical assistance
and report the incident to supervisors.

Structural Hazards in Fire and Explosion Scenes

Structures damaged as a result of fire, bombs, or explosions represent a significant threat

to the crime scene processor. What may appear as structurally sound can actually be a
severely weakened building. Additional weight or pressure on a wall or floor can lead to
collapse or cave-in. The expertise of the firefighters on scene will serve as a primary line
of defense for the crime scene technician. Prior to initiating interior operations in such a
building, the crime scene supervisor should verify the safety of the building with the fire
marshal. In severe situations, the crime scene technicians may have to call on the expertise
of a structural engineer to determine if the scene is safe, and if it is not, determine how to
make it safe (see Figure 5.22).

Figure 5.22  Fire scenes always represent a significant scene hazard. The fire burned beneath
this floor, resulting in several weakened areas. These weak spots are not always readily evident.
If the crime scene team fails to ask the fire marshal to examine the scene before processing,
they may find themselves breaking through floors or having ceilings fall onto them.
122 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Chemical and Inhalation Hazards in Fire and Explosion Scenes

One of the primary health concerns in the fire scene is the inhalation of dusts and gases.
Scene processing, in particular the process of removing debris, will expose the technicians
to significant levels of charcoal dust and other debris. Beyond the sheer amount of dust
the technician may breathe in, contaminants present in the dust can increase the health
risks. In older buildings, it is not uncommon to find asbestos material, and some scenes
may contain burned wood treated by arsenic or other chemicals. Once burned, these con-
taminants become an integral part of the dust circulating in and around the scene. The
primary control measure to prevent exposure to dust is for the technician to wear a proper
particulate mask.

Case Example: Inhalation Hazards Are Real

The terrorist events of September 11, 2001, are ingrained in contemporary American
history, but those events taught emergency service organizations a hard-learned lesson
in mass scene response. Significant health issues developed in both the on-scene rescu-
ers and the workers who assisted at Ground Zero after the attack. The majority of these
health risks are now attributed to exposure to the dust cloud created when the World
Trade Center towers collapsed and to subsequent exposure during rescue and recovery
operations. This cloud and its residue contained toxic fumes, cement and drywall dust,
burned polyvinyl chlorides (PVCs), asbestos, mercury from fluorescent lighting, pul-
verized glass, and a host of other toxic materials. It was, to say the least, a lethal brew.
In medical studies of the firefighters, the proportion of firefighters experiencing below
normal lung function climbed from 3% before 911 to over 18% after the attacks. Of the
estimated 30,000 to 50,000 workers assisting in the recovery efforts, more than 80%
reported some pulmonary symptoms in the year after the attack, and many continue to
experience significant medical issues.27 The use of inadequate particulate masks caused
these many health issues. As a result of the numerous studies completed and still ongo-
ing, guidelines for workers in such an environment were amended. Currently, rubber
masks with screw-in P-100 or R-100 HEPA filters are considered proper for individuals
working in an environment with a wide variety of airborne hazards.

Inhalation, Chemical, or Fire Hazards from

Scene Processing Techniques

Many of the techniques the crime scene technician may use on scene also represent poten-
tial hazards. The first and foremost advice for the technician is to ensure that he or she
understands all associated safety concerns of any collection techniques employed in the
crime scene. A number of chemical enhancement techniques can expose the technician
to chemicals for which the full health implications are not yet known. An example of this
problem was the old presumptive test for blood using benzidine. These tests were routinely
used at the crime scene for a number of years until benzidine was determined to be carci-
nogenic. A variety of new tests have since replaced the benzidine derivatives, including leu-
comalachite green and phenolphthalein. Although these replacements are not considered
Assessing the Scene 123

carcinogenic, they are still active chemicals, and the technician should guard against direct
skin exposure or inhalation of vapors.
A number of current fingerprint techniques also pose a scene hazard. The use of ethyl
cyanoacrylate (superglue vapors) or iodine fuming—both of which are common and func-
tional crime scene techniques—can expose the technician to inhalation irritants when
used in unventilated areas. Inhaled iodine fumes are not only an irritant, but are also toxic.
Solvent-based fingerprinting methods such as ninhydrin and amido-black represent a pos-
sible fire hazard. In the instance of amido-black, the best precaution is to use only water-
based procedures at the crime scene.12 The use of solvent-based techniques can lead to
oxygen depletion in the working area, resulting in an asphyxiation hazard.13 Standard pow-
der-and-brush applications represent a minor inhalation hazard from airborne particles,
leading to respiratory irritation. Specialty powders such as aluminum powder present a
greater risk due to the finely milled size of the aluminum particles. Wearing a particulate
mask will reduce this type of hazard. When using aluminum powder in confined spaces,
a breathing apparatus may be necessary to provide adequate protection to the crime scene
technician.14 Simply put, the list of hazards from scene processing is anything but lim-
ited. New techniques and procedures are discovered and tested routinely, and crime scene
technicians should ensure that they understand any possible health risk before attempting
these techniques in the field.
The primary exposure control for the technician consists of knowing how to use these
techniques properly, wearing gloves and PPE to prevent direct exposure of exposed skin
and eyes to chemicals, and wearing masks or breathing apparatus when employing these
techniques. The suggested guidelines for using any on-scene solvent technique include
having a second team member observe the procedure from a well-ventilated area. This
person is responsible for monitoring and aiding the scene processor should something go
awry.15 First aid for exposure to spills or splashes of chemicals applied in a scene consists
of washing the affected area in cold running water. If any level of irritation, soreness, or
complication persists, or if the identity of the chemical is unknown, the technician should
immediately seek medical assistance.

Chemical and Bioterror Hazards

Drug labs represent a significant hazard to law enforcement. For example, the chemicals
and solvents utilized in methamphetamine labs can be toxic to humans from both con-
tact and inhalation. At varying stages of production, these labs are literally bombs waiting
to go off. In any situation involving a suspected drug lab, the initial responding officers
and crime scene team should egress from the area immediately and await assistance from
a team properly trained and equipped to enter and make the scene safe. Under no cir-
cumstances should the team attempt to handle the scene independently, unless previously
trained and equipped to do so.
Finally, with the realities of terrorism, crime scene investigators must consider and
approach the mass casualty scene and suspected anthrax scenes carefully. By definition,
crime scene technicians who become casualties have failed in their mission. Procedures
and SOPs should be established for dealing with anthrax scares, and those responsible
should practice these techniques so they are comfortable recovering evidence while oper-
ating under these conditions.
124 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

1
2

1. Goggles/eye protection - splash and

mucous membrane tissue protection.
3
2. Face/particle mask - inhalation
protection.
3. Tyvek suit - impervious to liquid
contaminants. 4

4. Rubber gloves - impervious to liquid

contaminants.
5. Booties - splash and contact protection
for footwear.
5

Figure 5.23  Standard personal protective equipment (PPE) may consist of goggles or eye pro-
tection, particle masks for the face or mouth, a Tyvek suit, rubber gloves, and booties. Each
has a purpose, and each serves to protect the crime scene processor from a variety of on-scene
hazards.

Personal protective equipment (PPE), illustrated in Figure 5.23, is the primary safe-

guard for many of these crime scene hazards. Goggles or safety glasses help prevent
contact from splashes of chemicals or blood. Goggles will usually provide some level
of protection of mucous membrane tissues from airborne particles as well. Face masks
and particle masks prevent inhalation of dust and other nontoxic irritants such as latent
print powders. A Tyvek suit creates a liquid impervious barrier that will help protect
the technician’s clothes from chemical and biohazard contact. Rubber gloves provide
the same protection for the technician’s hands, guarding against contact with chemicals
or biohazards. Booties provide some level of splash and contact protection for the tech-
nician’s shoes and boots, eliminating cross-transfer issues when they leave the scene.
Depending upon the hazards present, any or all of these PPE items may be necessary.
Remember that the crime scene technician’s strategy is one of prevention. Prevention is
always preferred over treatment!

Considerations for Mass Crime Scene and Mass Casualty Situations

A mass crime scene in many respects is no different than any other crime scene, at least
in terms of the basic actions necessary to document and process them. Size and complex-
ity, however, will force a number of issues and may stretch the capability of any single
organization to handle the scene independently. A mass crime scene will often demand
a multijurisdiction response. The major concerns of the mass crime scene lie in the fact
that (1) personnel from these multiple jurisdictions must somehow operate as a cohesive
team and (2) the available resources will quickly be depleted. Scenes such as the Murrah
Building bombing in Oklahoma City or the Columbine High School shooting in Littleton,
Assessing the Scene 125

Colorado are an unfortunate reality. This reality demands a level of proactive effort on the
part of police and investigative leadership before an incident happens.
The following discussion is based primarily on the efforts and lessons learned in the
Columbine High School shooting. Tom Griffin and Chris Andrist coauthored the pub-
lication Mass Crime Scene Handbook, which is based on their experiences as well as the
experiences of many others who worked the Columbine scene.16 Griffin and Andrist offer
a variety of key considerations on preparing for and handling these types of scenes. Not
unlike the typical crime scene, the mass crime scene first and foremost requires a level of
prior coordination, but this coordination extends beyond the limits of a single organiza-
tion. Processing the mass crime scene will demand capabilities and personnel from any
number of the local or state agencies. Without some level of pre-event coordination, these
agencies will be left to learn how to work together on the fly.
Prior coordination begins at the executive level and involves the primary organiza-
tions responsible for dealing with a mass scene or mass casualty situation. These parties
may include, but are not limited to:

• ME or coroner’s office
• Chiefs of police for local agencies
• Sheriff
• District attorney
• State police and investigative agencies
• Local FBI
• Hazmat officials
• Explosive ordinance disposal (EOD)
• Fire and rescue services17
• Local emergency management officials

These and any other relevant entities should meet and seek to develop a standard imple-
mentation of the incident command system (ICS). They should consider possible scenar-
ios, discuss risk management for critical targets, and decide who the primary responders
should be and what each organization should handle. These efforts are generally exec-
utive-level discussions defining organizational responsibilities, establishing mutual aid
agreements, and dealing with similar issues, but they can be expanded to include tabletop
exercises (e.g., Abbottville Training Simulation18). Whenever possible, police executives
should include senior investigators and crime scene technicians in these training opportu-
nities. Although tabletop exercises do not allow for scene-specific training, they do allow
the senior leaders of investigative and crime scene teams to better understand their role in
the ICS.

Pre-Event Considerations of Crime Scene Supervisors

Once the basic issues are resolved at the senior level, the subordinate leaders who are most
likely to lead and direct actual operations in a mass scene must work out additional issues.
Their considerations may include:
126 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

• Identification of specific technical skills in local agencies: This requires a skill assess-
ment of the various personnel assigned to the organizations involved. Who is
trained in what areas? What specific skills are available if required?
• Identification of resources available in the local area: What investigative equipment
can the local agencies muster if needed? What is the typical day-to-day stock level
of investigative supplies? Is an equipment reserve necessary for a mass scene (e.g.,
personal protective equipment, barrier tape)? If needed, who will create and main-
tain this reserve? If required, where in the local area can heavy equipment, addi-
tional lighting, and other atypical equipment be located?
• Identification of likely staging areas: Where would resources be sent in the instance
of a mass scene? It is better to consider and identify in advance possible staging
areas, rather than wait for the situation to arise.
• Consideration of a scene access identification system: Access control is much more
critical at the mass crime scene. Who will control access to the scene and how will
they control it? This issue is complex in a scene where multiple jurisdictions are
operating and not everyone may know each other. Identification systems can be
devised in advance, and with the availability of computer and lamination systems,
these control methods can be taken to and managed at the scene. In a typical
scene, inner perimeters tend to self-regulate themselves, but scene members also
know to challenge anyone they do not recognize. At the mass scene, not only do
you have a large number of people present who may not know each other, but you
also have significant media interest. Without a functional badge system in place,
unauthorized individuals can violate perimeters without being recognized. In the
recent past, there have been more than a few incidents involving media represen-
tatives who apparently left their ethics at the door and actively sought to infiltrate
scene security. Developing a plan without considering some kind of ID or pass
system at the mass scene is an invitation for failure.

The scope and nature of any scene will dictate the crime scene team’s response, and
this is certainly true for the mass crime scene. It would be nice to believe that prior to any
mass scene or mass casualty event, coordination could be accomplished that would elimi-
nate all issues, but it is unlikely that such coordination could consider and deal with every
possible scenario. Much of the coordination necessary to actually deal with a scene will
have to wait until after callout and the initial scene assessment. The two primary concerns
will be team formation and standardization of techniques.
Team formation deals with all of the issues discussed earlier in the chapter. For
instance, will the team approach be one of area or function? What equipment do the
teams require, and is that equipment available? If an “available personnel roster” is not
already in place, one will be necessary to identify who is actually available from the
various agencies to assist. How will the teams collect and store the evidence? Is each
jurisdiction responsible for evidence, or will the primary jurisdiction ultimately take all
evidence? Whatever decision is made, it will impact on the forms used and coordination
required. Team leaders and team members will have to be assigned, and each team must
have a team designation (e.g., a letter or number). That team identification should be
something that can easily be annotated to photo placards, evidence vouchers, sketches,
and other associated team products.19
Assessing the Scene 127

Standardization of techniques across the various teams is a critical aspect for creat-
ing seamless teams and producing a consolidated scene documentation package. What
conventions will be used on sketches, on photo logs, and for marking evidence? If team
A, operating in zone 1, uses evidence items 1 to 45 for their sketch and team B uses the
same numbers for the adjoining zone 2, there is a likelihood of confusion. Andrist and
Griffin offer that an effective method is to liberally overestimate the number of evidence
numbers and assign them to each team.20 This approach will eliminate any possibil-
ity of duplication. A standard annotation of film rolls is necessary as well, with teams
using a similar initial photo placard that clearly identifies the subject of the photographs.
Consideration of both a team and zone number may be necessary, since teams may pro-
cess more than one area within the overall scene. The methods of taking crime scene
measurements and the general terminology used to describe the scene must be standard-
ized. Is everyone clear on the difference between a bullet, a casing, and a cartridge? If one
team operates on a baseline method while another operates on triangulation, then that
may lead to confusion. Are measurements for three-dimensional reconstruction neces-
sary? If so, are teams applying the same measurement process? If they do not, the indi-
vidual trying to put the different teams’ effort into one product will end up pulling his
or her hair out.
Standardization at the working team level will present the greatest challenge and
require the highest level of effort from those attempting to coordinate the situation. If this
effort is well thought out and managed properly, the end result will be good scene docu-
mentation, where the efforts of one team will seamlessly fit with the efforts of another.

Practical On-Scene Considerations for the Mass Scene

There is no foolproof way to prepare anyone for the demands of the mass crime scene. But
experience has shown that there are practical techniques that may make the job easier.
Andrist and Griffin offer a variety of additional suggestions that will assist in controlling
and dealing with the mass scene:

• Dropping body placards at the time of the initial scene assessment. This will assist
in tracking bodies throughout the scene processing and prevent confusion once
the teams actually enter and begin processing.21
• Sending in a video and photo crew before introducing any of the teams into the
scene. This is an effective method of documenting the scene before significant dis-
turbance and provides a valuable briefing tool for supervisors.22
• As furniture is encountered, marking and labeling legs and chairs, then marking
their position on the floor. This will allow the scene to be reassembled quickly after
scene processing.23 Such reconstruction may be necessary for analysis and theory
testing.
• Having on-scene or near-scene counseling available for team members.24
• Establishing an effective chain of command that allows issues to be addressed in
both directions.25
• Planning and conducting briefings and updates for team members, both in the
course of the event and as a matter of double-checking documentation after the
event.26
128 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Managing the Media

Although managing the media is not a true logistical or technical consideration, it is a

critical crime scene skill. The scene investigator must work to manage the media from the
initial moments after arriving and throughout the scene investigation. How well the inves-
tigator actually manages media issues is very much a function of the quality of the media–
law enforcement relationship that exists in the jurisdiction. Unfortunately the relationship
between the media and law enforcement can often be characterized as tenuous at best. Law
enforcement often doubts the media’s sincerity in providing a true public service, and the
media tend to view our behavior as repressive and unnecessary. In the candid words of one
media editor, too often they encounter an officer at the scene whom they view as having
the “Barney Fife” syndrome. So there always seems to be a certain level of distrust, which
is bridged only by the efforts of professionals on both sides of the relationship.
In order to deal effectively with the media and prevent inappropriate release of informa-
tion, it is imperative to understand something about how the media operate and the nature
of the ethical guidelines they work under. The typical news crew consists of a reporter
and video journalist operating from a news truck as an autonomous team. Technology in
the form of satellite and microwave communications allows the team to shoot, edit, and
direct-feed completed stories from the field. The reporter usually acts as the crew chief and
producer for this team, but is backed up by a managing editor or executive producer at the
station. Unless dealing with a live feed, producers and editors have the final editorial deci-
sion on what is or is not broadcast. In sensitive cases, the executive producer or editor may
even seek legal advice before deciding what is airable and what is not. Editorial guidelines
usually prevent the airing of video feed involving bodies, body parts, or large blood pools.
With that said, news editors quickly acknowledge that they expect their video journalists
to be aggressive in getting complete video coverage of the scene and activities around it.
Just because it is not typically shown on air does not mean the video journalist is not going
to shoot such scenes. If the editor feels that graphic video serves a function in telling a
story, then he or she reserves the right to show any video that was shot in a public setting.
As for their technology capability, any news crew outfitted with a mast on their vehicle
may also have access to a remote camera mounted on the mast. Once raised, this camera
allows the team to shoot video feed around obstacles (e.g., fences, bushes, or even crime
scene screens). Of course, the ever-present news helicopter is outfitted with standoff video
capability as well, which allows the camera to peer right down on top of the scene.
Ethically, news crews are instructed and expected to comply with all lawful requests
and directives by law enforcement officials, in particular respecting crime scene barriers.
If issues arise as to the legality of some request by the police, managing editors prefer that
the issue be raised at a higher level than the on-scene authorities. In this fashion, the news
media avoid creating a specific problem by arguing with the police on scene.
With this information in mind, the crime scene supervisor should approach the news
crew with a cautious attitude. Expect them to respect crime scene boundaries and comply
with lawful requests. If they fail to do so, the problem is likely to be with the individual
and not the station. If a specific problem arises where an individual from the media vio-
lates the crime scene boundaries, the crime scene supervisor can begin by taking the issue
to the reporter. If that fails to resolve the situation, a call to the station may be all that is
necessary. If there are critical considerations in the scene that should not be released, such
as holdback details, the supervisor can approach the news crew as well. The news reporter
Assessing the Scene 129

will act as a go-between for such requests, but the editors and producers back at the station
have the final say in deciding whether they will agree to such requests. “Deals” worked out
between the crime scene supervisor and reporter may or may not be recognized when the
final cut is made back at the station.
The news media prefer when a department has an assigned public information officer
(PIO), simply because the probability of developing a good working relationship increases
when you have fewer individuals interacting in the relationship. Obviously, what the media
want from the PIO is as much information as possible. They prefer that the information
be confirmed and not be pure speculation, but oddly enough, they acknowledge that they
will often ask for speculation on the part of the individual serving as the PIO. The media
routinely call the PIO the gatekeeper in this relationship, meaning that if we, as the police,
are willing to say it, then they, as the media, are willing to print or broadcast it. Thus the
role of the PIO is critical. This is not a job to be relegated to a rookie or to an inarticulate
member of the force. The PIO must use caution when releasing information, ensuring that
what is released is appropriate from an investigative standpoint as well as being accurate.
Coordination of effort on the part of investigators, senior supervisors, and the crime scene
supervisor is necessary to ensure that only essential information is released. The manner or
words a PIO uses when relating this information must be carefully chosen to prevent inap-
propriate perceptions from viewers or the reporter. When practical, these releases should
be written and handed out at the time of the interview. This helps prevent the PIO from
going off on a tangent and ensures that a historical record exists of exactly what was said.
A standard operating procedure defining the PIO’s duties should be in effect long before
the PIO says a word. This should include clear guidelines on how the jurisdiction intends
to deal with new releases.
What the media desires from the police in this relationship is even-handed and equi-
table treatment as professionals, accompanied by an understanding that they too have a job
to do. Another critical aspect from the media’s perspective is that law enforcement should
not carry grudges. The media often encounter stories involving alleged and even verified
malfeasance by police or public officials. They have a responsibility to ask hard questions
and show both sides of a story, even if it does not serve the best interests of the police
department. What they report is that entire departments or an individual officer will often
remember such stories and act vindictively at some later date.
A police department must seek a professional and mutually supportive relationship
with the media. Operating as antagonists is not the answer since the police may need the
assistance of the media at some point in the future. Nevertheless, it can be difficult to work
with the media, simply because they expect so much and are willing to give back so little.
Ultimately, the individuals who work together on the street will define how good or bad
the relationship is between these two entities. Caution is always in order when dealing with
the media, but professionalism is a must, which includes recognizing the media’s public
service role. The technician may not always agree with this point of view, but it is a reality
and a necessity.

Summary

Once the investigative team arrives, myriad assessment actions are necessary before ini-
tiating scene processing. These actions will define how the crime scene team will operate,
130 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

help identify the level and nature of the resources necessary to do the job, and help prevent
unnecessary exposure of the crime scene team to the variety of hazards that may exist.
First and foremost, a debriefing of the initial responding officer is necessary. This
debriefing will allow the crime scene team to understand the extent of the scene itself and
any alterations that were made to the scene by responding officers, EMS, and others. The
debriefing should identify the status of individuals who were on scene, which in and of
itself may require further action on the part of the crime scene team.
After conducting the debriefing, the crime scene team must reassess the scope of the
scene and adjust the crime scene barriers if necessary. Often, the initial responding officer
will not recognize subtle nuances that suggest expanding a scene, or faced with chaotic
conditions or the lack of light in the scene, the officer may not realize the full scope of the
scene boundary. The crime scene team is responsible to ensure that the full scope of the
scene is recognized and protected.
Once the full scope of the scene is evident, the crime scene team must ensure that
scene integrity is maintained. The initial responding officer will usually establish a single
crime scene barrier, but a single barrier only provides minimal protection. The use of a
second barrier by the crime scene team will create multilevel isolation that will ensure
that the onlookers and other nonpolice personnel are sufficiently isolated from the actual
crime scene. Protection of the scene integrity from onlookers and the media is only half of
the picture. The creation of these barriers is also intended to limit the number of police or
investigative personnel who may enter the scene, including supervisors. The purpose of a
barrier must be respected by everyone once it is established and in place. As a general rule,
only those individuals who are actually processing a scene are allowed inside the interior
barrier of the crime scene.
Barriers are intended to keep unauthorized individuals from the actual scene and evi-
dence. The crime scene team should expect, however, that counsel will raise the question as
to who in law enforcement was allowed access to these areas. The use of a crime scene entry
log provides a written record of each individual who entered the primary crime scene. It
defines who entered, when they entered, when they left, and what their purpose in the scene
was. In multilevel containment, where there are multiple barriers, a crime scene entry log
is not necessary for each and every barrier. Only the barrier that defines the actual scene,
and perhaps the evidence-holding area, must have an entry control log. The crime scene
team must ensure that an entry log is established and maintained for this area.
Before initiating any processing of the scene, the team leader must decide if they will
deploy their resources in an area or functional approach. In the area approach, a single team
handles all activities associated with the processing of the scene. In a functional approach,
the team leader designates different teams to do different activities (e.g., documentation
team, latent print team, or evidence recovery team) and, using an ordered approach, stages
each team through the scene. A variety of factors can affect the team leader’s decision,
including organizational custom and SOP, size and complexity of the crime scene, and the
availability of equipment and manpower resources.
Once a team search approach is defined, the team must then decide on a search
method. This decision is based on a variety of factors as well, including but not limited to
the nature of the ground being searched, the lighting conditions at the scene, and on-scene
environmental conditions. The more disorderly a scene is, the more difficult it may be to
search effectively. Similarly, the surface area of a scene may create a significant hindrance
to effective searching (e.g., knee-high grass compared with asphalt). The crime scene team
Assessing the Scene 131

has no control over what area they must search; therefore, in response to these factors, the
team will have to adjust the size of the area that a single searcher is responsible for at any
given time. Narrowing the search swath that a single searcher is responsible for is the only
way to increase the effectiveness of a given search.
The methods most often employed in a crime scene search include the spiral or circle
search, the strip or line search, the grid search, the zone search, and finally the point-to-
point search. Each method has its unique pros and cons, and no single method must be
employed in any given circumstance. Spiral and circle searches are very effective in an
indoor or small exterior crime scene. Strip, grid, or line searches are often employed in
large exterior scenes. All of them are effective mechanisms, but the line search is the best
choice for a situation involving large areas over uneven terrain. The zone search is the most
common search used when dealing with small confined spaces that are not easily searched
using a patterned search method (e.g., spiral or strip). The zone search is particularly use-
ful when searching a car. Zone searches are also used effectively to subdivide a large crime
scene into smaller, more manageable portions, which are then searched using a standard
technique such as a strip or grid. The point-to-point method, although an effective pro-
cess, often breaks down into a haphazard affair. Properly done, the searcher creates cleared
paths to and around the areas being searched. Whatever method the crime scene leader
designates to use for the search, it must be methodical and systematic. This will ensure an
all-encompassing search where little, if anything, is missed.
The crime scene team may face a variety of hazards in a scene. Biohazard scenes rep-
resent a significant risk. The crime scene team may be exposed to blood or body fluids
that represent exposure risk for HIV, HBV, and HCV. Any one of these viruses represents
a significant risk to the health of the crime scene team. There are also inhalation risks
when employing chemicals, dusting for latent prints, and when evaluating arson or bomb
scenes. Structural hazards exist in arson, bombed, or collapsed building scenes, all of these
situations demanding that someone clear the area before initiating operations. Fire and
explosive hazards from the use of solvent-based forensic techniques are a concern. Fire and
explosive hazards are also problematic if the scene involves a drug lab. Crime scene teams
must assess the level of risk and, using good risk management techniques, establish meth-
ods to reduce or eliminate these risks before entering a scene.
Any and all of these issues affect how the team will process the scene. Each area
must be considered and acted on before initiating on-scene processing. Often, a standard
approach defined by organizational custom is more than adequate for the crime scene
team to employ, but as the complexity and severity of a given scene increase, SOP and cus-
tom may not be enough. The crime scene team must be prepared to consider and employ a
variety of different techniques and methods in order to accomplish their mission.
Two additional concerns that can affect the crime scene team are dealing with mass
crime scenes and the media. The mass scene or mass casualty situation is a problem that
requires “before the event” planning, in which the organizations most likely to work
together must plan and organize for the probability of such an event. Once the event does
occur, the most critical aspect will be in coordinating the organizations and individuals
involved into cohesive crime scene teams whose work product can be integrated into a
coherent whole. This will require significant on-scene effort and planning by the crime
scene team leaders.
To deal effectively with the media, the crime scene team must understand how the
media operate. A professional approach, recognizing that the media have a true public
132 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

service function, combined with a cautious attitude will help ensure that both investigative
needs and media requests are considered and met whenever possible.

Suggested Reading
Andrist, C., and Griffin, T., Mass Crime Scene Handbook, self-published, Denver, CO, 2000.
Police Scientific Development Branch, Fingerprint Development Handbook, Home Office Policing
and Crime Reduction Group, Heanor Gate Printing Ltd., Derbyshire, UK, 2000.
Ramirez, C., and Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL, 2011.

Chapter Questions
1. What is the primary concern of scene assessment by the crime scene technician?
2. Why is the use of a single crime scene barrier ineffective?
3. How can enforcing use of personal protective equipment (PPE) help control scene
integrity with regard to any police supervisors on scene?
4. When setting up crime scene teams, what are the two basic approaches to team
composition and how do they differ?
5. Identify and describe three of the four factors that affect decisions about team
composition.
6. Identify and describe the five basic patterns used to search a crime scene.
7. What are the variations of the zone search and when are they used?
8. Why is postprocessing exposure to biohazards a problem and how might it occur?
9. When presented with a possible drug lab, how does the crime scene technician
respond?
10. Why is it important to establish standard team processing techniques at a mass
crime scene?

Notes
1. Bankhead, J., presentation to the Georgia Association of Chiefs of Police (GACP), Savannah,
GA, August 2002.
2. American Heritage College Dictionary, 3rd ed., Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1993, p. 858.
3. Ibid., p. 1379.
4. Bigbee, D., The Law Enforcement Officer and AIDS, 2nd ed., U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC, 1988, p. 10.
5. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, Updated U.S. Public Health Service
Guidelines for the Management of Occupational Exposures to HBV, HCV and HIV and
Recommendations for Postexposure Prophylaxis, Morbidity Mortality Weekly Report, 50, June
29, 2001, pp. 7–8.
6. Ibid., p. 4.
7. Ibid., p. 3.
8. GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Twinrix Hepatitis A and B Twin Threats Twin Defense, Rizensart,
Belgium, 2002.
9. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, Updated U.S. Public Health Service
Guidelines, p. 6.
10. Ibid., p. 16.
Assessing the Scene 133

11. Ibid., p. 17.

12. Home Office Policing and Crime Reduction Group, Police Scientific Development Branch,
Fingerprint Development Handbook, Heanor Gate Printing Ltd., Derbyshire, UK, n.d., p. 51.
13. Ibid., p. 10.
14. Ibid., p. 76.
15. Ibid., p. 9.
16. Andrist, C.G., and Griffin, T.J., Mass Crime Scene Handbook, self-published, Denver, CO, 2000.
17. Ibid., p. 2.
18. Abbottville Training Simulation is a trademark name of Command School, Inc.
19. Andrist and Griffin, Mass Crime Scene Handbook, p. 4.
20. Ibid., p. 6.
21. Ibid., p. 5.
22. Ibid., p. 5.
23. Ibid., p. 9.
24. Ibid., p. 8.
25. Ibid., p. 6.
26. Ibid., pp. 7–11.
27. Armour, Stephanie, Health Problems Continue to Plague Ground Zero Workers, USA Today
Online, http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2003-03-02-wtc-workers_x.htm.
Crime Scene Photography
6
Documentation of the crime scene is truly the most critical element of scene processing.
Without good documentation, it is often difficult to explain or make understandable to a
jury any observation made by the technician. Without good documentation, it can be dif-
ficult if not impossible to weather a well-thought-out cross-examination. If there is no sup-
porting documentation that clearly and concisely demonstrates the points the crime scene
technician is trying to make, counsel will effectively argue that the technician was mis-
taken. Documenting the condition of the scene is a core element of proving what did or did
not happen at the scene. Without proper documentation, it may be impossible for even the
investigators to arrive at a conclusion regarding what did or did not occur. Unfortunately,
documentation of the scene is one of the least understood processes of crime scene exami-
nation, which routinely results in an incredibly poor documentation product.
What does crime scene documentation entail? Documentation has four key elements:

• Notes
• Photographs/video
• Sketches
• Reports

Each element plays an important role; each serves to memorialize what the scene con-
dition was, what the investigator observed, and what the investigator did. No single ele-
ment stands alone; no single element can replace another element in and of itself, but often
one element will serve to answer a question that another element is unable to. Together,
these four key elements support one another and provide everyone with a clearer picture
of the exact nature of the scene. This chapter and the next two provide an in-depth treat-
ment of each area of documentation, illustrating what must be done to document a scene
properly and how best to do it. We’ll begin with crime scene photography.
To say that a picture is worth a thousand words is absolutely true in terms of under-
standing crime scenes. Put a crime scene technician on the stand and ask him or her to
describe some aspect of the scene. There is no doubt that a competent technician can give
an effective description. But in order to describe that small part of the scene, it might take
5 or 10 min of direct testimony, and even after the testimony, it is doubtful that the jury
would equally and fully comprehend everything the technician was describing. Give that
same jury a single photograph, one that is clear and in focus, and instantly every juror view-
ing the photo would comprehend the nature of that portion of the scene. Graphic infor-
mation is far easier to comprehend and integrate than testimonial information. Our eyes
serve as our window to our comprehension of the world and our surroundings. Without
even thinking about it, we see and incorporate interrelationships between objects, spatial
relationships, and literally in the blink of an eye take in details of color, texture, and any
number of other characteristics. Pictures tell the story of the crime scene far better than
any other form of evidence.

135
136 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.1  An overall photograph shows an area of the scene. It captures the basic aspects of
the scene and general relationships. This figure shows an overall photograph after placards are
in place. The crime scene photos will lead us from this overall view to the details of the scene.

Crime scene photography, then, is the bread and butter of the crime scene documenta-
tion. Crime scene photographs are intended to lead the viewer of the photographs through
the scene, from an overall perspective right up to the details of specific items of evidence
(see Figures  6.1 to 6.3). Such photographs serve to highlight and make understandable
the crime scene report. Even without the report, someone viewing the crime scene photo-
graphs should comprehend significant details and aspects of the scene.
As important as they are to comprehending the scene, the technician can never take
too many photographs. This is particularly true in a significant scene (e.g., a homicide).
City managers and police chiefs are often quick to complain about the costs of processing
or printing all of the photographs taken of the scene, but remember that the technician has
only one chance to process the scene. There are no second chances, no opportunities to
return and shoot a picture that was forgotten. By cutting a corner over a few cents worth of
printing or film cost, the technician will pay for that shortcut three times over in aggrava-
tion or in an inability to answer some important question arising from the scene. Digital
media is the cheapest thing at a crime scene!

What Makes Good Photographs

Good quality photographs for any pursuit, including crime scene work, require:
Crime Scene Photography 137

Figure 6.2  An evidence-establishing photograph of the evidence at placard 2 depicted in

Figure 6.1. The viewer now recognizes that the item of interest at placard 2 extends across
the top of the doorway. This photo establishes where the individual stains of interest are (the
smaller sublabels 2C and 2D).

Figure 6.3  A close-up photograph of the details at sublabel 2C allows the viewer to see details
of the bloodstains. Combining Figures 6.1 to 6.3 allows the viewer to know what he or she is
looking at and where it is in the scene. These three basic photographs lead the viewer from a
general viewpoint to the evidence of interest.

• Physical control of the camera

• Proper use of the cameras controls such as aperture, shutter speed, and lens
• Proper composition

A single chapter cannot teach in-depth camera control or effective use of variations
of aperture, shutter speed, and lenses; this chapter will only touch on some general and
very practical aspects of these issues. Several excellent crime scene photography books are
listed at the end of the chapter, which the reader may refer to for a more detailed discus-
sion. Composition of the crime scene photographs is, however, of significant importance
and is the primary focus of this chapter. Without proper composition (an understanding of
what must be captured and how best to capture it), no matter how skilled the crime scene
138 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

technician is with the camera, the end result will likely fail the expectations of good crime
scene documentation.
Photographic composition is accomplished by organization of the space and items
depicted in the photo so that the various visual elements relate to one another properly.
Composition involves controlling contrast (e.g., lighting a subject against the background),
properly framing the subject, maintaining simplicity in the photograph (e.g., having a
single primary subject), altering the viewpoint (e.g., working with vanishing points), and
applying the rule of thirds. The rule of thirds relates to subject placement, where the subject
is always framed slightly off center in the photograph.
In an artistic effort, all of these composition elements are used together to create aes-
thetically pleasing photographs. Crime scene photography is not the same as artistic pho-
tography; the purpose of a crime scene photograph is to accurately depict the scene without
introducing distortion or visual bias. Crime scene photography amounts to creating a pho-
tograph that depicts what the viewer would have seen had he or she been present standing
in the scene and looking at the same area. Thus in crime scene photography, simplicity,
framing, and contrast are all applicable elements that must be controlled, but the alteration
of viewpoint and the off-center framing of a subject are generally not used. At the scene,
proper contrast is achieved through effective lighting of the subject using fill flash, ring
lights, off-camera flash, and bounce flash. Simplicity is achieved by knowing the purpose
of every photograph taken. The analyst asks: “Why am I taking this photo and what is it I
want to show?” In crime scene photography the most critical element of composition is in
understanding the three basic types of crime scene photographs. Before we can talk about
general composition concerns, the technician must also recognize how his or her actions
can create problems in the photographs.

Recurring Problems in Crime Scene Photography

The fact that crime scene photographs are important is hardly a revelation. It has been true
throughout the history of modern criminal investigations. Despite the recognized impor-
tance of crime scene photographs, it is an area of documentation that is routinely lacking
in content. From homicide scenes in which the total crime scene photographs (including
the autopsy) equal a single roll of 36 exposures, to photographs so woefully out of focus
that they are of little value, the same mistakes appear over and over again in investigative
documentation. Improper photography can be blamed on two areas. The first is a lack of
understanding or practice with the camera equipment. Whether using digital cameras,
large-format cameras, or 35 mm film cameras, the technician must feel confident in the use
of the available equipment. A lack of confidence generally manifests itself in terms of poor
focus, bleached-out colors, or insufficient lighting. The photographer either fails to physi-
cally control the camera or is unskilled in using light and lens. This chapter addresses some
basic issues related to lighting and focus that are applicable across the entire spectrum of
photography equipment. Beyond understanding these basics, the technician must be prac-
ticed with the equipment he or she is using. A homicide scene is not the time or place to
read the owner’s manual for the first time.
The second area of concern is that of composition, a failure to understand and capture
what the crime scene photographs are intended to depict. In nearly any crime scene refer-
ence, terms such as overall, mid-range, and close range, or overall, evidence establishing,
Crime Scene Photography 139

evidence close-up, and forensic quality are utilized to describe crime scene photographs.
Unfortunately, few references explain the purpose of each type of photograph and how the
technician can best go about creating them. As a result, the technician ultimately takes a
number of photographs at the scene that create significant comprehension problems for the
viewer, including:

• Identification problems
• Orientation problems
• Confusion problems
• Incomplete documentation

Identification Problems

Crime scene photographs are often created in which the viewer has absolutely no idea
of what the item is or why the photograph was taken. In viewing the photograph, some
object may be apparent, but there are no supporting photographs to help the viewer see
the evidence better. Looking at such photographs, the viewer asks questions like “What is
it?” The photographer eliminates these problems by creating evidence-establishing shots
as well as proper evidence close-up shots that clearly and fully depict all objects in ques-
tion (see Figure 6.4). The primary figure clearly shows something on the rug at J, but what
is it? Without the evidence close-up photograph (the inset in Figure 6.4) the viewer is left
wondering as to the specific nature of J.

Figure 6.4  Photographs are often created by crime scene investigators that depict something,
but the photograph leaves the viewer guessing. Is item J on the rug a bullet or something else?
Without the true close-up photograph the issue is unresolved.
140 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

What is the orientation?

Which way is up?
What surface is this?

Figure 6.5  A photograph producing an orientation problem. Looking at the photograph, the
viewer asks, “Where is the surface this bloodstain is on?” and “What direction is up or down?”
Direction and orientation in the scene can be of great significance, so the photographs must
provide the viewer with enough information to clearly orient the object in question.

Orientation Problems

Photographs are often created in which there is no way to distinguish left from right or up
from down. Or the photograph fails to show an effective landmark and the viewer is left to
ponder and guess where the object actually is in the scene. One of the greatest failures of
crime scene photography is the absence of good evidence-establishing shots. These photos
serve to orient the viewer as to where the item of evidence is in the scene by including some
visible landmark. With appropriate landmarks in the evidence-establishing shot, orienta-
tion is easily understood. Orientation issues are often significant at trial, because orien-
tation in the scene can change the conclusions drawn from the evidence. Figure 6.5 is a
classic example of an orientation problem.

Confusion Problems

Photographs are routinely created showing the scene in altered states or conditions. The
obvious question becomes: Which photograph depicts the scene best, and who altered the
scene in the first place? In Figure 6.6, is the coffee cup part of the scene, or is it a post-
incident artifact left by the chief of detectives? The use of a photo log helps eliminate many
of these problems and prevents wild and unsupported claims by counsel at trial. Confusion
also arises from shooting poorly referenced photographs of a number of similar items (e.g.,
shell casings, bloodstains, or fingerprints). If shooting photographs of two shell casings
(items A and B), the photographer must be able to discern which photograph is item A as
opposed to item B. Photo logs combined with numbered or lettered photo placards help
eliminate this type of confusion (see Figure 6.7).
Crime Scene Photography 141

Which photo came first?

Figure 6.6  Multiple photographs of the same area showing the scene in altered conditions can
create confusion or become a distracter at trial. Is the coffee cup part of the original scene, or is
it a post-incident artifact? Photo logs help clear up issues of this nature.

Figure 6.7  Confusion in photographs arises when photographs are produced of similar items
on similar backgrounds with no way to distinguish between them. The photographs on the left
produce this effect, while the introduction of photo placards as seen on the right eliminates
this confusion.
142 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Incomplete Documentation

Problems also arise from incomplete documentation. Ultimately, all critical aspects of the
scene have to be documented through the crime scene photography. Far too often the tech-
nician realizes, too late of course, that no photograph of a critical item or condition was
taken by anyone. Adherence to a systematic photography technique as well as a standard
scene processing model will usually eliminate significant mistakes of this nature.
An interesting consideration regarding incomplete documentation is to consider where
the technician actually points his or her camera. Given that the majority of evidence and
artifacts in a scene are ultimately pulled to the floor or other surfaces by gravity, it is not
surprising that the majority of crime scene photographs depict the scene from a position of
head height looking downward. We hold our cameras at our eyes and point them toward
the artifacts. But recall that the purpose of the crime scene documentation is not just to
capture the artifacts, but also the entire scene in situ. The entire scene includes higher
up on walls, ceilings, and objects. Failing to take photographs of these areas may result
in claims by lawyers of evidence that was present on these surfaces that the technician
“missed.” The photographic documentation must capture the entire scene as completely as
possible, even if for no other purpose than to prove that nothing was there.

Types and Purpose of Crime Scene Photographs

Crime scene photographs are used to support and enhance an understanding of the scene
and the investigative report. They should graphically capture the condition and orienta-
tion of the overall scene, the location, orientation, and if possible, the spatial relationships
of different areas in the scene to one another as well as to the various items of evidence
found in the scene. Finally, they should allow the viewer to see the necessary detail of
specific items found in the scene. All of this can be accomplished with three basic types
of photographs:

• Overall photographs
• Evidence-establishing photographs
• Evidence close-up/forensic quality photographs

Although there may only be three types of photographs, not every item of evidence or
point of interest at a crime scene can be adequately captured with only three photographs.
At times, it may be necessary to shoot a number of evidence-establishing and close-up
photographs in order to illustrate all of the important details of a single item.

Overall Photographs

The purpose of overall photographs is to depict the general condition and layout of the
scene. The technician seeks to capture how the scene is oriented, where major visible land-
marks are (e.g., doors, furniture, bodies), and the condition of the scene prior to signifi-
cant alteration. For the latter reason, overall photographs are the first photographs taken.
These photographs are often exposed with a wide-angle lens (e.g., 28 mm lens) to allow the
Crime Scene Photography 143

Crime Scene

Figure 6.8  Overall photographs are exposed so they overlap each other. A typical procedure is
to go to the corners of a room and take a photograph in each one, looking to the opposite corner
(see Figures 6.9 to 6.12).

photographer to capture a wider field of view in a single photo. The use of a 28 mm lens
will lead to a slight level of spatial distortion, but rarely enough to affect the quality of the
photograph or prevent its use at trial. The use of extreme wide-angle lenses, such as a fish-
eye lens, can enhance the ability of a single photograph to capture a larger area, but as the
field of view increases, so too does the peripheral distortion. For this reason, a fish-eye lens
is not generally appropriate for crime scene photography situations.
Overall photographs are normally discussed in terms of shooting the room or the
scene itself. For instance, an effective method of taking overall photographs is to go to a
corner of the room or scene and take a photograph across the area to the opposite corner
(see Figure 6.8). The photographer repeats this process for each corner of the scene, result-
ing in four photographs that will generally provide overlapping coverage of the entire area
(see Figures 6.9 to Figure 6.12).

Corner or Side—You Decide

As described above, shooting the room generally involves going to each of the four cor-
ners of a room and aiming the camera across the room toward the far corner and taking
a picture. In each corner, the photographer positions himself as deep into the corner as
possible. The resulting four photographs should depict nearly all of the room with a fair
amount of overlap in the four pictures, similar to that seen in Figures 6.9 through 6.12.
The question is often asked: What about shooting from one wall of a room to the other
wall? Isn’t that just as effective? Nothing says the technician can’t, and certainly nothing
prevents the technician from shooting overall photographs from one wall to the opposite
wall, but there is a slight advantage in the corner-to-corner configuration. Consider the
simple fact that the further back we position the camera in the scene, the greater the over-
all field of view of the resulting picture. As the field of view increases, more of the scene
is captured, which should lead to greater overlap in the overall photographs. Overlap is
a positive thing and something we strive for in overall photographs. Now consider these
144 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.9  An example of an overall photograph. Evident landmarks include the desk, the
white shelf, and the dark chair.

Figure 6.10  A supporting overall photograph. Additional landmarks include the computer and
the brown chair.

two configurations in relation to a 10 ft × 12 ft room. Wall to wall, the greatest distance the
photographer can position the camera is 9 and 11 ft, respectively, but by using the corner-
to-corner configuration in the same room, the photographer can position the camera 14
ft back for each of the photographs. Corner to corner the photographer generally creates a
greater distance, more so than shooting from wall to wall. The smaller the room, the more
distinct this issue becomes.
Crime Scene Photography 145

Figure 6.11  A third supporting overall photograph. The desk, computer, and brown chair are
all evident, as well as the closet door behind the chair. The position of the red rug in the room
is fully understood as well, and additional items of evidence (e.g., the holster at the base of the
desk) are evident.

Figure 6.12  The final supporting overall photograph. The white shelf is evident along with the
entryway to the room. Combining all four figures (Figures 6.9 through 6.12), nearly every major
landmark in the room is evident, and the overall orientation of items in the room is understood.
146 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.13  An overall photograph of a bloodstain pattern. This photograph is intended to

demonstrate the pattern’s position in the room near the entryway and the extent of the pattern,
but it is not intended as an evidence close-up photograph.

This process of shooting the room captures significant detail, but not always every-
thing. Within any scene there may be a number of areas with various items of evidence
or conditions that the photographer seeks to capture, that are not captured in these four
overall photographs. Additional photographs of a more defined area can be taken as well,
the sole purpose of which is to establish the initial condition and orientation of that area
alone. Figure 6.13 is an example of an overall photograph of a bloodstain pattern on the
floor. The photograph is not intended to depict close-up detail of the bloodstain, but rather
the pattern’s overall orientation in the scene and the entire pattern. This type of overall
photograph is specifically related to the technique of road mapping in bloodstain pattern
analysis, but the crime scene investigator may find need to shoot similar overall photo-
graphs of areas or objects in addition to any standard shoot-the-room photographs.1
Overall photographs are taken in two distinct iterations during crime scene process-
ing. The first occurs prior to the introduction of any scales, photo placards, or the like. This
initial set of photographs is used effectively for eliminating any issue regarding alteration
of the original condition of the scene. If some question exists as to where an item was (e.g.,
whether a drawer was open or not), these initial overall photographs depict the scene prior
to any invasive processing activity. Later, as the technician identifies specific areas and
items of evidence, photo placards are introduced, and a second set of overall photographs
is created to aid in understanding overall orientation (see Figure 6.14). In scenes involving
multiple rooms or widely dispersed areas, additional overall photographs may be neces-
sary to properly orient the viewer as to how one room relates to another (see Figure 6.15).
Crime Scene Photography 147

Figure 6.14  A second series of overall photographs should be taken after the introduction
of photo placards. This helps identify areas of interest. For example, the item associated with
placard 1 is not immediately evident in the original overall photograph. Without the placard,
the viewer would have no idea the item was even there.

Figure 6.15  Overall photographs can also demonstrate the relationship of one area to another.
In this photograph, the doorway, red rug, and white shelf from the scene documented in Figures
6.9 to 6.12 can be seen in the background of another area containing a body and a revolver.
148 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Evidence-Establishing Photographs

Evidence-establishing photographs, also referred to as mid-range photographs, serve an

important role in crime scene photography. Oftentimes the evidence in the scene consists
of small items or artifacts, many of which will not even appear as recognizable objects in
the overall photographs. Provided with only the overall photograph and a close-up pho-
tograph of the item, the viewer has no means of determining where in the scene this item
was. The purpose of the evidence-establishing photograph is to frame the item in conjunc-
tion with some obvious landmark evident in the overall photographs.
Particularly when dealing with a number of similar items (e.g., shell casings or blood-
stains), it can be difficult to ensure that the evidence is recognizable in the establishing
photograph. The use of photo placards is the most effective means of eliminating this dif-
ficulty. Figures 6.16 and 6.17 demonstrate not only why an evidence-establishing photo-
graph is important, but also how the photo placard enhances the viewer’s understanding.
Given only Figure 6.16, a close-up photograph of a shell casing, the viewer has no way of
knowing where on the green tile floor this casing is. The addition of a placard identifying
it as item 1 and the creation of an evidence-establishing photograph (Figure 6.17) allow the
viewer to see the position of the casing in relation to the chair. This effectively places item
1 in this area. Now compare Figure 6.17 with Figure 6.10, an overall photograph of the
same area. In the overall photograph, one can clearly see the relationship of the rug, chair,
and desk, allowing the viewer of Figure 6.17 to understand the relationship of item 1 to the
overall scene. The casing, however, is not distinctly evident in Figure 6.10. The combina-
tion of an overall photograph and close-up photograph, in and of themselves, is not always
enough to effectively orient the viewer. The evidence-establishing photograph is necessary
to properly orient this item. In some instances, the introduction of photo placards can
actually decrease the number of photographs needed. If all placards are clearly evident in
the second series of overall photographs, these photographs serve as evidence-establishing
photos and additional evidence-establishing photographs may not be necessary.

Figure 6.16  A close-up photograph of item 1, an expended shell casing. Alone, this photograph
provides the viewer with no reference or understanding of where in the scene it is. Combined
with an evidence-establishing photograph (Figure 6.17), its relationship is understood.
Crime Scene Photography 149

Figure 6.17  An evidence-establishing shot of item 1. The evidence-establishing shot includes

landmarks (e.g., the brown chair, the rug, the desk corner) as well as providing a recognizable
view of the item. Combined with Figures 6.12 and 6.14, no one can argue that item 1 is any-
thing other than a shell casing or where that casing is in the scene.

Commercially manufactured evidence placards are cheap and available from a num-
ber of suppliers. In this age of trace DNA, commercial plastic placards should be thor-
oughly cleansed before reintroduction into any new area within a scene (e.g., moving from
one room to the next) or any new scene. This will prevent any claim of cross-contamina-
tion. Commercially produced disposable paper placards are also available, eliminating the
cross-contamination issue completely. One of the best innovations in terms of placards is
three-sided placards. No matter what orientation a photograph is taken from, one of the
three sides is readable in the resulting photograph. This is particularly helpful when trying
to read placards in the second series of overall photos. The tent version placards (two sided,
as shown in the various figures) don’t share this quality. There is of course no requirement
that the technician use commercially produced items. The crime scene technician can also
create disposable placards using a variety of products. One of the easiest methods is the
use of 4 × 6 in. index cards and a bold marking pen. The index cards will present a minor
issue, specifically in outside scenes. The technician must find a means of weighting them
down so that they remain in place and do not blow about in the wind. Another easy placard
method for outside scenes is to use grading flags and adhesive bold stencil letters, as seen in
Figure 6.18. These placards are produced for no more than a few dollars and either cleaned
and reused or discarded after use.
A final note on using photo placards: early on, the crime scene technician must initiate
a numbering or lettering system for any evidence discovered. Once an item is given a label
(e.g., item A) and a photograph is created, the technician cannot arbitrarily renumber the
evidence in the report or on the sketch. Doing so will create significant confusion for those
viewing the photos and then reading the report.
At times, the technician may be presented with a situation that requires a series of
evidence-establishing photographs. An item of evidence can be situated in the scene in
such a fashion that there is no easy way to demonstrate its position. Figure 6.19 is an evi-
dence close-up photograph of an expended bullet. Given the overall photographs of the
scene (Figures 6.9 through 6.12), the best guess for item 10’s location might be somewhere
150 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.18  A photo placard created from a surveyor’s grading flag. The small orange pointer
is a commercially available photo tool. Together, they demonstrate where the item is in the
photographs. The addition of the ABFO scale adds a frame of reference as to size.

Figure 6.19  An evidence close-up photograph of item 10. This item is in the same scene as
depicted in Figures 6.7 through 6.10, but where? Based on the background color, one might ini-
tially imagine it is present on the blue jacket, but that is not the case (see Figures 6.20 and 6.21).
Crime Scene Photography 151

Figure 6.20  An overall photograph of the desk and a box in the scene. Placards 2, 4, and 5 act
as landmarks and demonstrate the position of additional items of evidence.

on the surface of item 8. The blue background evident in Figure 6.19 appears to be a color
match to the jacket in the overall photographs. On closer inspection the expended bullet is
not on cloth, so where is it? Using Figure 6.20, the technician sets the stage by depicting the
file box, with an evident bloodstain on the upper left side, sitting on the desk. Figure 6.21
shows the same box, without the top, and the addition of two new placards for items 9 and
10. Together, Figures 6.19 through 6.21 allow the viewer to recognize that the bullet was
found inside of another object.
In addition to defining where an item is, the evidence-establishing shot can also
eliminate issues of orientation caused by subtle changes or mistakes introduced by the
technician. For example, in Figure 6.22, based on the way the defect in the T-shirt and
the photo placard are positioned in the close-up photograph, the viewer might interpret
orientation of the vertical axis of the photo to be consistent with the lettering on the
placard. The evidence-establishing shot shows the proper orientation of the emblem on
the T-shirt and eliminates any misinterpretation resulting from the poor orientation of
the placard.

What’s in a Name: Evidence-Establishing vs. Mid-Range Photos

The term mid-range photograph is now common in many references associated with crime
scene photography and crime scene processing. Experienced investigators understand
that the evidence-establishing photograph and mid-range photograph are one in the same
thing. The author has long argued that the term mid-range is inappropriate and misleading
to both novice and layperson alike. Why? The term mid-range suggests that the photo-
graph is taken from a middle distance, somewhere between the overall and close-up. That
was once almost technically correct; these photographs were shot from some distance in
between the overall and close-up photo, but the name implies that distance is the primary
152 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.21  An evidence-establishing photograph of item 10. In combination with Figure

6.20, it is apparent from placard 4 that the box depicted is the same but is now lacking its cover.
Placards 9 and 10 demonstrate the presence of additional evidence inside the box.

Evidence Establishing

Evidence Close-up

Figure 6.22  A close-up photograph of a defect and its associated bloodstain on a body (item B).
A viewer seeing the placement of the placard on the body in the close-up might presume that it
is oriented up and down. The insert is an evidence-establishing shot of the area, which shows
the true orientation of the T-shirt emblem. Used in combination, the three basic photographs
prevent misinterpretations of this nature.
Crime Scene Photography 153

factor. The novice crime scene investigator, not properly trained but knowing the term
mid-range, presented with an overall photograph from 15 ft and an evidence close-up from
6 in., would logically believe that the mid-range photograph should be framed at a middle
distance (e.g., taken from 7 ft 3 in.) regardless of whether that distance effectively estab-
lishes the evidence to a known landmark.
The singular purpose of this photograph is to frame the location of the evidence with
a known landmark within the scene and establish where it is. That is the only reason this
photograph is taken; it has no other value. As described in the text, with the introduction
of photo placards, most evidence-establishing photographs are now taken from an overall
position, so once again range and distance are moot issues in framing the photograph.
No matter what you choose to call this photograph, never forget its purpose; it establishes
where the item is.

Evidence Close-Up and Forensic Quality Photographs

Evidence close-up photographs are exactly that, close-up photos. Another term of art that
has appeared recently is the forensic quality photograph, which is effectively a properly
composed close-up photograph with an appropriate scale present. To achieve good quality
close-up photographs the technician must first fill the frame of the viewfinder with the
item of interest. Failing to fill the frame for a close-up photograph is one of the most com-
mon composition mistakes observed in crime scene photography. A photograph taken
from a distance of 3 or 4 ft away from an item that is ½ in. in size is not a close-up. The
second major concern in the close-up photograph is to match the film/CCD plane of the
camera with the surface of the item of interest. The camera is held as perpendicular as
possible to the primary surfaces of the evidence. The end goal of the close-up photograph
is to provide as much detail as possible while retaining its identity (the evidence must
be recognizable from all other evidence). Figures 6.16 and 6.19 are examples of close-up
photographs. Placards that were positioned for evidence-establishing photographs may
require repositioning for an evidence close-up photograph in order to maintain the “rec-
ognizable” aspect of the close-up photograph. For instance, in Figure 6.23, by reposition-
ing placard 2 from its original position on top of the file box to a point closer to the bullet
defect, the technician can show the elliptical shape of the defect and still demonstrate
its identity as part of item 2 (e.g., the bloodstain and defect). The technician should cre-
ate close-up photographs both with and without a scale of reference or placard. Lawyers
have argued that the mere placing of a placard in the scene somehow materially altered
the essence of the photograph, hiding critical evidence. Close-up photographs without
the scale of reference or placard eliminate this kind of silly attack. Additional close-up
photographs of each item of evidence are completed during and after recovery from the
scene, allowing the technician to capture all aspects of every item. Consider that the ini-
tial close-up photographs are taken before sketching, which demands the item not be
moved during the early photography effort. That forces the technician to capture only
those aspects or surfaces that are exposed, such as a pistol lying on the ground right side
up (see Figure 6.24). The condition of the left side of the pistol may be as important if not
more so (see Figure 6.25). During recovery at least one close-up photograph of each side
of an item of evidence should be taken. Additional close-up effort can be pursued back in
the lab, where light and the environment are more controlled, resulting in better quality
154 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.23  A close-up photograph of the bullet defect in the box. The placard was reposi-
tioned in order to retain the item’s identity and allow a photograph with greater detail.

Figure 6.24  A close-up photograph of a pistol as it lays in situ. Until complete documentation
(e.g., mapping and sketching) is accomplished, it cannot be moved, so initial close-up photos
are taken as it lays. But the condition of the opposite side is just as important (see Figure 6.25).

Figure 6.25  Once the collection of evidence begins, items or surfaces that could not be seen
are moved and photographed in order to capture all aspects of their condition. Where blood-
stains were not evident in Figure 6.24, here we see multiple bloodstains on the opposite side of
the weapon.
Crime Scene Photography 155

Figure 6.26  An evidence-establishing shot of the bullet defect in Figure 6.21.

Figure 6.27  This evidence close-up is not of the defect but rather the trajectory defined by the
defect. The photograph is taken as close as possible but still shows the entire aspect of the item
of interest (e.g., the trajectory rod and the box).

photographs that may highlight specific details such as serial numbers or small blood-
stains found on the item.
As the crime scene processing progresses, certain aspects or conditions evident from
the examination become significant. Using a combination of the three basic types of pho-
tographs, the technician demonstrates these aspects. For example, in order to graphically
demonstrate the trajectory evident from the bullet defect in the file box, the technician
might create an evidence-establishing shot of the defect (Figure 6.26) and combine that
with the evidence close-up of the defect (Figure 6.23) prior to insertion of a trajectory rod.
This places the defect in the scene and demonstrates its condition prior to any invasive
process (e.g., rod insertion). Figures 6.27 and 6.28 show the inserted rod, effectively dem-
onstrating the general angle and direction of the trajectory. Additional photographs such
as Figure 6.29 show the defect and trajectory rod from a shooter’s viewpoint in the room
looking back along the indicated trajectory. To depict a subject, victim, or witness view-
point is one of the few exceptions where the crime scene technician will significantly alter
the standard viewpoint when composing a picture. Finally, using a laser trajectory kit, the
technician may choose to demonstrate the path of the trajectory, as seen in Figure 6.30.
156 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.28  A combination of views of the trajectory, taken at right angles, may allow the
viewer to better understand its relationship to the overall scene.

Figure 6.29  A photograph taken in the room looking back along the trajectory. This photo-
graph in effect demonstrates the shooter’s view. Showing an individual’s perspective (victim,
witness, or subject) is one of the few occasions when the crime scene technician significantly
alters camera perspective in a photograph.

The Road Mapping Method of Photographic Documentation

The term road mapping was introduced earlier in the chapter when discussing photo-
graphs of bloodstain patterns. Toby Wolson authored the concept and described the road
mapping technique as a documentation procedure for bloodstained scenes in the Journal
of Forensic Identification in 1995.3 Since that time, it has become the default standard for
bloodstain documentation, but it is also effective in documenting bullet defects and trajec-
tory analysis as well. The concept incorporates the three basic photographs in conjunction
with a variety of placards and scales in order to accurately reflect the orientation, position,
and detail of the various bloodstain patterns found in the scene. Bloodstains and bul-
let holes always represent a significant documentation problem; a bullet hole looks like a
bullet hole, a bloodstain like a bloodstain, so it can be nearly impossible to differentiate
one item of evidence from another. For instance, given multiple radiating spatter patterns
of the same size on the same type of substrate (e.g., a basic white wall), it is difficult if
not impossible to differentiate the patterns when viewing the close-up photographs (see
Figure 6.31). Road mapping involves the introduction of a variety of labels and scales that
Crime Scene Photography 157

Figure 6.30  Using a laser trajectory kit, photographs can capture the orientation of the tra-
jectory as it extends into the room. A bullet perforated the blanket stand and the trajectory
visually explains the locations where the shooter could have been positioned. These are time-
lapse photographs that often require the photographer to enter the field of view (note the ghost
image). This technique is explained in detail in Chapter 12.

Figure 6.31  Confusion is always present when the crime scene technician takes photographs
of small similar items such as bloodstains. These 1–2 mm bloodstains on a white wall look
like every other 1–2 mm bloodstain in the scene, and without a reference of some nature, no
one could be confident where this photograph was. Road mapping is a technique designed to
eliminate this confusion.

become the landmarks in the overall photographs, eliminating any confusion on the part
of the viewer.
Road mapping, however, is a highly intrusive process. It requires the introduction of
multiple labels and scales on the surfaces being photographed, and may require the move-
ment of objects to expose patterns or defects; therefore road mapping is never a part of ini-
tial crime scene documentation (e.g., standard overall, evidence-establishing, and close-up
158 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

photographs). This particular documentation is always done in addition to the normal crime
scene documentation, and it is accomplished well after primary scene processing is complete.
Road mapping involves the following steps:

• Recognition of discrete patterns or defects

• Placement of appropriate labels and scales
• Creation of overall photographs of an area with labels in place
• Creation of overall photographs of a pattern with labels in place
• Creation of additional evidence-establishing photographs of individual stains or
details when needed
• Creation of close-up photographs of individual stains, defects, or details with
labels in place

To properly employ the procedure, the crime scene technician must first be able to
identify discrete patterns within the scene. Chapter 11 explains the basic concepts of blood-
stain pattern analysis, with an emphasis on pattern recognition. There is no expectation
that every crime scene technician should be a bloodstain pattern analyst, but every crime
scene technician must be trained to a level that allows him or her to recognize the different
bloodstain patterns. The same is true of bullet defects. Chapter 10 discusses recognition of
bullet defects in depth. The crime scene technician must be confident in recognizing what
is or is not a bullet impact site.
In the road mapping technique, once the patterns are identified, each pattern is given
a specific label (e.g., pattern 1, pattern A) (see Figure 6.32). Because many patterns such

Figure 6.32  The first step of road mapping is to identify and label discrete patterns. The tech-
nician locates the basic patterns of interest and assigns them a primary label (e.g., A or 1). To
be of value the labels must be large enough to be read from a distance. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi,
Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)
Crime Scene Photography 159

Figure 6.33  Additional sublabels for the primary patterns are introduced. These identify areas
of detail and interest in the primary pattern that the technician believes significant. Here the
technician assigns a D4 designation to the fourth of a series of pattern transfers (pattern D).
(Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

as spatter, cast-off, or spurts are made up of a number of individual stains, within any
given pattern there may be characteristics or individual stains of specific interest. This
may include directional information, the start or end of the pattern itself, or other details
manifested in the individual stains within the pattern. Each of these important stains is
given an additional sublabel (e.g., pattern A1, pattern A2) (see Figure 6.33). The labels are
easily created using adhesive notepads from office supply stores and a bold marker; there
is no specific need that the technician buy fancy placards or expensive adhesive labels.
Whatever label is used, it must be readable from several feet away. Consider that the over-
all photograph of a dynamic pattern such as impact spatter may entail an area of 5 or 6 ft
across. This may require the technician to shoot the overall pattern photo from a distance
of 7–8 ft away from the wall. The label must be of sufficient size and contrast so it can be
read from that distance. Each label is placed in the scene adjacent to the pattern or stain
in question. In road mapping, the rule is that no photograph is ever taken without at least
one label framed in the picture. This prevents the creation of any photograph where the
viewer is lost and without a proper reference. Adhesive paper scales are also added for
additional reference, oftentimes outlining an entire pattern or surface. The addition of
these scales allows the viewer to later recognize approximate positions in the scene, such
as height above the floor or distance across the wall, and or the general dimensions of the
pattern itself.
Once all labels are in place, the technician creates overall photographs of the various
surfaces or areas (e.g., walls and floors) that contain patterns (see Figures 6.34 to 6.37). At
the very minimum it is important that the primary pattern labels (pattern A, pattern B) be
readable in these overall photographs. The purpose behind these photographs of an area
is like any overall photograph, but the presence of the labels provides perspective of the
relationship of the various patterns present in that area.
The technician then creates an overall photograph of each individual pattern (see
Figure 6.38). Whenever possible, the photograph is taken with the film/media plane parallel
160 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.34  Once all labels are in place, a series of overall photographs are taken to show the
orientation of the patterns within a given area. Here the patterns on the wall can be seen and
both the labels (A, B, C, etc.) and sublabels (D1, D2, D3, etc.) are readable in the photograph. It
is critical that as a minimum the primary labels are readable in these photographs. (Courtesy
of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

to the surface of interest, but patterns may appear across multiple surfaces preventing this.
If the pattern sublabels were not completely readable at the greater distances of the area
overall photographs, the technician must ensure that all sublabels are completely readable
in the overall photograph of the pattern. If the pattern is too large (e.g., a significant impact
pattern extending across an entire wall), the technician can take multiple photographs
depicting portions of the pattern close enough to see these sublabel details. These pho-
tos allow the viewer to concentrate on a specific pattern. Once again, these photographs

Figure 6.35  An overall of the floor. Several of the pattern labels from the wall (A and G) are
evident, allowing orientation of this picture to the overall picture of the wall. (Courtesy of Cele
Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)
Crime Scene Photography 161

Figure 6.36  Another overall of the floor. Once again the inclusion of the labels and overlap
between pictures allows the viewer to know the orientation of the various patterns depicted
in all the photographs. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe,
Texas.)

serve two functions. They are still overall photographs, showing the general aspects of the
pattern of interest, but also serve as evidence-establishing photographs for the individual
stains of interest in the pattern. The presence of the labels provides perspective and rela-
tionship of the various details in the pattern considered to be of importance. Thus each
individual stain of interest along with its sublabel can be clearly seen in the overall pattern
photo, and their relationships to one another are understood. If the pattern is present on
multiple surfaces (e.g., impact spatter or spurts that extend across multiple surfaces) the

Figure 6.37  A final overall photograph showing the relationship of pattern M to the scene,
floor, and wall. The scales are introduced as desired by the technician. They allow anyone
viewing the picture to understand general position in the scene or overall dimensions of the
patterns. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)
162 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.38  After taking area overall photographs, the technician then takes an overall pho-
tograph of each pattern. No matter how large or small the pattern is, the pattern should fill the
frame of the camera. Here pattern G, a spurt pattern, is depicted in a pattern overall. (Courtesy
of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

initial overall photograph will likely appear as seen in Figure 6.39. This will require the
technician to take several additional overall pattern photographs from different directions,
each with the film/media plane parallel to the surface of interest to capture all aspects of
the pattern detail (see Figures 6.40 and 6.41).
In most instances of the road mapping process, with the labels and sublabels pres-
ent, the overall photograph of a pattern will serve as an evidence-establishing photograph.
There may be occasions when this is not true. Patterns or bullet defects may be present on
an obscure surface that simply cannot be captured in the overall photograph in any effec-
tive fashion. When presented with such instances, the technician simply takes any nec-
essary evidence-establishing photographs from whatever position best demonstrates the
position of the stain or defect of interest. The road mapping rule remains in effect; each of
these additional evidence-establishing photographs should have at least two labels framed:
the label for the stain of interest, as well as a label for the pattern it is being framed in rela-
tion to. This too may require odd-angled photographs, but given the limited purpose (to
frame two pattern labels in a single picture), this is an acceptable exception to the rule of
keeping the film/media plane parallel to the surface.
The technician then photographs the individual stains of interest within the pattern
itself (pattern C1, pattern C2) using evidence close-up photographs (see Figures 6.42 and
6.43).  The details of interest in individual stains may include directional and impact angle,
position of the beginning and end of a pattern such as a cast-off or spurt, details evident
in pattern transfers (e.g., ridge detail or fabric impressions), or any other aspect thought
by the technician to be of significance. A problem associated with these close-up photo-
graphs is the labels themselves. Use of the office supply adhesive labels is the most effective
Crime Scene Photography 163

Figure 6.39  Patterns will often extend across multiple surfaces, requiring the technician to
take a photograph where the film plane is not parallel to the surface involved. Pattern E, a spurt
and gush, extends from the floor onto the wall, requiring a downward angle in the photograph.
Figures 6.40 and 6.41 resolve this, by photographing each surface alone. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi,
Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

technique, but this means that the close-up will not have an adequate scale of reference.
Thus the technician will have to add some appropriate scale when taking this photo.
Various photographic scales are available from any number of distributors for introduc-
tion into close-up photographs. Some have adhesive backing and will stick to the surface;
others have no adhesive backing and on horizontal surfaces are simply laid flat in the field
of view. On a vertical surface, the nonadhesive scales can be taped in place or the techni-
cian can use reusable rubber adhesive (available at office supply stores) to hold them on a
surface. Using the scales or adhesive, the technician must control any cross-contamination
issues by cleaning the scale and changing the adhesive before moving it to a new area (see
Figure 6.44).
An additional issue associated with the labels is that a close-up photograph is always
taken in such a manner as to fill the frame of the viewfinder with the stain or detail of
interest. The sub-label, however, was created and positioned so it could be read in the over-
all photographs and it is usually of a similar size as all the other labels. When taking a
photograph of a 3 mm sized stain, properly framing the stain will effectively remove the
sublabel from the picture. To retain the identity of the stain, a small adhesive millimeter
164 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.40  In addition to the complete pattern as seen in Figure 6.39, those aspects of pattern
E on the wall are photographed again with the film plane parallel to the surface eliminating
any possible distortion. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe,
Texas.)

Figure 6.41  Those aspects of pattern E on the floor are also photographed with the film plane
parallel to the surface. Together with Figures 6.39 and 6.40, all aspects of pattern E are captured
fully. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)
Crime Scene Photography 165

Figure 6.42  A close-up of the detail present in pattern L1 allows anyone to see the size of the
stains and angle of incidence when they struck the wall. The technician captures any detail
thought to be important in close-up photographs. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County
Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

label with a scale is introduced, and the identification from the large label is placed on it
(see Figure 6.45).
One particular problem associated with bloodstain pattern documentation is the
impact pattern. Impact patterns are a specific bloodstain pattern created when blood
is exposed to an external force or impulse at a point source. The force breaks the blood
mass into small droplets that radiate outward from that point. The significance of impact
patterns is that in many cases area of origin evaluations are possible. The area of origin

Figure 6.43  A close-up of small spatter in pattern M. The addition of the millimeter scale
allows others to understand size and identity (pattern M1), and the red arrow better illustrates
the spatter’s directional angles. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office,
Conroe, Texas.)
166 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.44  Using only the notepad labels (label D2), no adequate scale of reference is present.
Photographic scales of varying types are introduced into the picture to allow for recognition of
size. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

effectively defines where the blood source was in three-dimensional space when it received
the force. To accomplish area of origin analysis, the bloodstain pattern analyst must have
close-up photographs of a number of individual spatter stains (the individual elliptical
stains in the pattern) and must know where those stains were on the surface involved. A
bloodstain analyst usually chooses between 10 and 15 stains for an area of origin analysis.
The choice of what stains to choose and why requires a significant level of training and
experience. Unfortunately, bloodstain pattern analysts are not always on scene, and this
represents a significant disconnect for the crime scene investigator. The crime scene inves-
tigator is left to decide what stains to document and how, hoping that his or her effort will
allow for subsequent analysis at a later date. The following documentation steps provide
the crime scene investigator, even if untrained in bloodstain pattern analysis, a functional
way to capture sufficient information for subsequent off-site area of origin analysis.
Remember that these steps apply only for impact patterns, radiating patterns made up
of small circular and elliptical-shaped stains. These patterns are easily recognized and their
characteristics are discussed in Chapter 11. In Figure 6.34, pattern B is such an impact pat-
tern. The first step in documentation is to locate the core of the pattern. Think of the core
as a point closest to the area from where the pattern originated. An easy way to locate the
core is to go to either edge of the pattern and align a straight edge in-line with the long axis
Crime Scene Photography 167

Figure 6.45  Identity of the pattern is important in close-up photographs. As we get closer to
the subject to capture important details, the larger label (label K) is pushed from the field of
view. This requires the introduction of smaller millimeter or inch scale labels. The techni-
cian simply transfers the label identification to this smaller label. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi,
Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

of any of the stains. Follow the straight edge back to the end of the pattern. The core will
generally consist of the most circular stains in this area. Once this general area is identi-
fied, mark it (see Figure 6.46). The core is not any specific point; it is a generalized area that
will serve as a reference for obtaining a sampling of stains.
Once this generalized core is identified, the technician measures forward from this
point to the end of the primary pattern. Once again, the technician is not looking for the
absolute last stain in the pattern, but rather the end of the primary pattern (the area where
the highest concentration of stains is present) (see Figure 6.47).
Using this measurement as a guide, the technician will break the primary pattern into
two parts. This is accomplished by using a marker on a string measuring ½ the overall pat-
tern length. The string is anchored at the core point and a semicircle is drawn to break the
pattern into two areas. For instance, if the overall length of the pattern from the core to the
outer edge was measured at 20 in., the string length is 10 in. (see Figure 6.48).
Once the pattern is split in this fashion the technician then splits the two sections into
four areas, by drawing a line down the approximate middle of the pattern. The technician
locates this middle by finding the outer edges of the pattern, and then splits the distance
between them (see Figures 6.49 and 6.50). If the pattern is significantly large, rather than
drawing a single line, the technician can draw two lines creating six sample areas.
The result of this effort by the technician is four to six distinct areas identified within
the pattern. The technician then places a standard ABFO (see Chapter 2) or similar shaped
scale of reference in each area. Each scale is given a unique identifier (e.g., B1, B2) (see
Figure 6.51). Each of these areas is then photographed to document the stains present. The
positioning of the scale is accomplished in such a fashion that as many symmetrical and
elliptical stains as possible are present in the resulting photograph. Whenever possible,
the area being photographed should have at least 6–10 individual stains evident. The scale
must be oriented either up or perpendicular to the nearest wall. On a vertical surface, this
168 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.46  Complete documentation of an impact pattern requires sampling of the stains
throughout the pattern for subsequent area of origin analysis by a trained bloodstain pattern
analyst. This sampling needs to capture stains throughout the primary pattern. The first step
in this effort is to locate the core of the pattern and mark it. The core is the area of the pattern
closest to the impact event (where the stains tend to converge) and will generally have the most
circular stains present in it. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office,
Conroe, Texas.)

Figure 6.47  After locating the core of the impact pattern, the technician measures from the
core outward to the end of the primary pattern (the farthest point in the pattern that holds a
significant number of stains). Using this measurement, the pattern will be split into two sec-
tions. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)
Crime Scene Photography 169

Figure 6.48  Using nothing more than a string half the measured length for the overall pat-
tern, the analyst draws a circle or semicircle, splitting the pattern into two parts. (Courtesy of
Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

Figure 6.49  The technician now splits these two sections into four parts. To do this, the
technician locates the outer boundaries of the pattern and marks them. Note the boundary
marks extend well past the semicircle previously created. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery
County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)
170 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.50  With both the outer boundaries marked and the overall pattern split in two by
the semicircle, the technician measures the distance between the outer boundary marks and
locates a point on the semicircle half this distance. A line is then drawn from the core mark
through the mark on the circle, creating four areas for photographic sampling. (Courtesy of
Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

Figure 6.51  The end result of these steps is the creation of four sampling areas. An ABFO
scale is introduced into each; it is uniquely labeled and then photographed. (Courtesy of Cele
Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)
Crime Scene Photography 171

Figure 6.52  To be of value for later area of origin analysis, the scale must be oriented to a
vertical or horizontal plane. In this instance, the scale is oriented to the vertical plane by using
the angle finder. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

is accomplished by aligning the scale with an angle finder (see Figure 6.52). On a horizon-
tal surface, the technician can use a carpenter’s square or laser.
To be of value, each scale is fixed and located in relation to the surface it is on. The
technician measures from the inside corner of the scale, downward to the floor, and then
from the same point across the surface from the furthest left reference point (e.g., a corner).
On a vertical surface, the use of a plumb and a tape measure at floor level is the most effec-
tive way of accomplishing this (see Figure 6.53). The measurements for each of the four
areas sampled by the crime scene technician are critical and the technician’s notes must
clearly distinguish what measurements belong to what scale. These measurements allow
the bloodstain pattern analyst to later define the specific position of any stains chosen from
the photograph for use in the area of origin analysis.
After completing these steps, each individual scale is photographed close-up (see
Figure 6.54). With each scale uniquely identified and fixed in relation to the scene, a blood-
stain pattern analyst can use the photograph at a later date to locate appropriate stains
for use in the analysis. As a scale of reference is present in each photograph, the physical
position of each stain can be correlated from the photograph, and since each scale was
oriented to a vertical or horizontal reference, the directional angle of the stain can also be
correlated, allowing area of origin analysis.
The end result of the entire road mapping procedure is complete coverage of the stains.
No photograph is without a label of some nature, and each overall photograph will have a
number of labels evident. This allows the viewer to always know orientation and location
no matter what photograph he or she views. In effect, the labels and scales become the
landmarks; they prevent the viewer from ever being lost in the scene. If the road map-
ping is done properly, any bloodstain pattern analysis accomplished off-site through the
documentation effort should achieve the same results as if the analyst had actually been
on scene.
172 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 6.53  To conduct area of origin analysis, each of the scale’s position on the surface
must be fixed. The most effective method of doing this is to measure from the inside corner
of the ABFO scale downward, as seen on the right side of the picture. This establishes the
height of the ABFO scale. Then using a plumb and a tape measure at the base of the wall, the
analyst measures how far to the right the scale is from a given reference (e.g., corner of the
room). These measurements are critical. (Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s
Office, Conroe, Texas.)

A Basic Methodology to Crime Scene Photography

No matter what a crime scene technician is trying to photograph, crime scene photography
demands more of the technician than simply taking out a camera, pointing it in an arbi-
trary direction, and snapping a quick photograph. The technician has to consider what is
important, what he or she wants to illustrate, and how to best illustrate that information.
With a little thought and using a combination of the three basic types of photographs dis-
cussed, a technician can effectively demonstrate almost any aspect of the scene.
The application of a basic photography methodology, which is consistently employed,
will aid the crime scene technician by preventing mistakes of omission. A functional meth-
odology includes the following procedures:

• Document the entire scene as soon as possible in situ, using overall photographs.
• Photograph all fragile items of evidence (e.g., footwear marks, bloodstain patterns
on the body) as soon as possible, using both evidence-establishing and evidence
close-up photographs.
• Place photo placards in the scene on all items of interest and reshoot a second
series of overall photographs.
• Document all known evidence items with evidence-establishing shots and evi-
dence close-up shots. Use photo/evidence placards whenever possible to clearly
differentiate the various items of evidence from one another.
Crime Scene Photography 173

Figure 6.54  The resulting documentation will include four close-up photographs of numer-
ous spatter stains from the pattern. Impact angles can be determined from these images. The
orientation of the vertical scale allows for identification of the directional angle, and the mea-
surements from the inside corner of each scale (the small marker point) allow the bloodstain
analyst to correlate the exact position of each spatter. Combined, this information will allow
subsequent area of origin analysis by a bloodstain pattern analyst who was not on scene.
(Courtesy of Cele Rossi, Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Conroe, Texas.)

• If items are discovered in the latter stages of the processing methodology (e.g.,
during second or third rechecks), ensure that appropriate photos are created. This
may require creating additional overall photographs, even though the rest of the
scene has been altered.
• Using the road mapping technique, create photographs that clearly demonstrate
the result of examinations such as bloodstain pattern analysis or trajectory analy-
sis. Recognize that these photos will show the scene in an altered condition. That
alteration is unimportant; the photos are created to demonstrate something spe-
cific and are not intended to replace the initial crime scene photos taken before the
scene was altered.
• Always use a film roll reference card and a photo log. The film roll reference card
is photographed as the first frame of each new roll/media. It identifies the basic
information of what, when, and who produced the photos. A photo log keeps track
of each photograph, ensuring that the purpose and subject matter of each photo is
understood. See Figure 6.55 for an illustration of a crime scene photo log.

The primary purpose of the photographs is an investigative one. The photographs

support the other scene documentation and graphically illustrate the condition of the
scene as found. For that reason, there are no holds barred; the technician does not edit
content because the scene is grotesque or disconcerting. Technicians will investigate
crimes involving significant aspects of violence, sexual violence, and levels of inhu-
manity that are at times difficult to fathom. Crime scene photographs must capture
174 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Crime Scene Photo Log

Case no.: 02-01-0045 Date: January 13, 2002
Camera used: Nikon F2a Time: 1830–1940 h
Film type: ASA 400 Scene: 3567 Wayland Dr.
Photographer: S.A. Brown Film roll no.: 1
Photo Distance
Time No. Depicting (ft) Remarks
1830 1 Overall of master bedroom from NE 13 28 mm
1832 2 Overall of master bedroom from SE 12 28 mm
1835 3 Overall of master bedroom from SW 15 28 mm, from hallway
1837 4 Overall of master bedroom from NW 12 28 mm
1840 5 Evidence establishing shell casing  7 Placard 1, 50 mm
1842 6 Evidence close-up of shell casing  6 Placard 1, 55 mm macro

Figure 6.55  The crime scene photo log keeps track of each photograph taken. The photo log
can be as simple or detailed as desired. To be useful, it should include basic administrative
data and, at the very minimum, identify the subject of the photo and the exposure number.
Additional data such as the distance, time the photo was taken, and any remarks can certainly
support the overall documentation effort, but they may not be needed or desired.

this information. A supplemental purpose of photographs, however, is to illustrate the

scene condition to the court. For a photograph to be admissible in court, it will likely
have to withstand several tests. First and foremost, the question will be asked: Does the
photograph accurately depict the scene? If it does, the next issue becomes: Is the pho-
tograph generally free of distortion? If the photograph is accurate and generally free of
distortion, the issue becomes: Is the photograph material and relevant to some aspect
of the case at hand? Without compromising the primary purpose of taking the photo-
graphs, the technician can take certain steps to meet these legal requirements. These
steps include:

• Know how to use the camera so the focus and lighting of the resulting photo-
graphs are the best they can be.
• Do not introduce abnormal angles in the photographs unless there is no other way
to get the picture. Crime scene photography is not fashion photography, where
the cameraman dances about shooting any and all angles. The technician has to
square the lens plane of the camera with the subject matter (Figure 6.56).
• Do not overuse the wide-angle lens (28 mm and under), since it introduces distortion.
• Choose the right lens for the right reason. Most crime scene photography work
is accomplished with a 28 mm (overall photos), 50 mm, or 50 mm macro lens
(evidence-establishing shots and evidence close-ups). A fish-eye or telephoto lens
has limited application in normal crime scene photography.
• After capturing all relevant details, do not take grotesque or salacious photographs
simply because they are sensational. Such photographs tend to incite juries. You
cannot remove the violence (e.g., blood, gore, or sexual content) from overall pho-
tographs or those photographs created to depict the condition of the victim, but
the technician does not have to revel in it either. Deal with these scene aspects
professionally and without introducing unnecessary sensationalism.
Crime Scene Photography 175

Figure 6.56  When taking evidence close-up photographs, the camera lens should be parallel to
the plane of the evidence. In this case, the lens is placed parallel to the wall where a fingerprint
is being photographed. If the camera is too close and the flash is left attached, it may result in
an overexposure. To remedy this, the flash is attached through a sync cord to the camera and
held at a 45° angle some distance from the surface being photographed.

Camera Control Issues

We identified the two main reasons why crime scene photography is poor. One reason
is a failure to understand what crime scene photography is intended to capture, a lack of
proper composition. The discussion of overall, evidence-establishing, and evidence close-
up photographs dealt specifically with this issue. The second reason cited was a lack of
experience in handling the camera and camera equipment. This text is certainly not a
substitute for a good camera course, but it can highlight some basic camera control aspects
that will enhance the scene documentation product. To produce quality photographs, the
technician must control three basic aspects of the camera:

• Physical control
• Light
• Focus and depth of field

Good photography starts with a stable camera. Physical control of the camera is noth-
ing more than stabilizing the camera while the shutter is released. Any movement of the
camera as the film/media plane is exposed will result in a loss of clarity and focus in the
resulting photograph. This is true for standard cameras as well as digital cameras. In the
vast majority of crime scene photographs, a two-handed grip by the technician is more
than adequate for ensuring a stable camera. Operating a camera with a focal length of 55
mm and under, the technician should be able to control the camera at any shutter speed
of 1/60th of a second or less. If the technician is using a lens with a focal length of greater
than 100 mm, the minimum shutter speed for hand holds should be increased to 1/250th
176 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

of a second.2 If a situation requires the technician to decrease the shutter speed below these
ranges or if the camera must be held in a difficult position, it may be best to place the cam-
era on a monopod, tripod, or similar stabilizing device.
Light is everything in photography. Too much and the photo is bleached out, result-
ing in loss of detail. Too little and the picture is dark with loss of detail as well. The best
advice in crime scene photography is to use fill flash. No matter what the lighting condi-
tions, a flash should be employed. Fill-flash techniques ensure consistent lighting across
the spectrum of photographs produced at the scene. With the introduction of automatic
cameras that have integral flash devices, the level of effort by the technician to match and
use the flash has been significantly reduced. Many “smart” cameras sense lighting needs
and adjust the level of the flash accordingly.
One problem that presents itself when creating close-up photographs is overexposure.
Oftentimes, the camera lens will be situated inches away from the subject matter (e.g.,
when photographing fingerprints). A flash operated from its standard position on the cam-
era will almost always produce an overexposure. In these situations the use of offset flash,
oblique lighting, or a ring light will correct and eliminate overexposure and bleached-out
photos. In offset flash, although the camera lens is only a few inches from the subject, the
flash is held at a 45° angle (obliquely to the subject) and at a greater distance (typically arm’s
length), as seen in Figure 6.56. Offset and oblique lighting requires a camera with a detach-
able flash and a sync cord, so these items are a mainstay for crime scene work. In addition
to using offset lighting, the technician can diffuse the light by attaching a commercial
diffuser to the flash or by taping a piece of white cloth over the flash. Either technique
cuts the power of the flash directed onto the surface, allowing on-camera flash at a close
range. Some flash systems have an adjustable flash head that rotates from a normal 90°
position (flash facing directly forward) to a vertical position (flash head facing directly up).
By changing the angle, light can be bounced off adjoining surfaces, which will effectively
illuminate the picture and reduce overexposure. This will work when shooting pictures
at some distance (e.g., 12 in.), but at extreme close-up range, bounce lighting is not likely
to eliminate the overexposure issue. Ring lights attach directly to the lens and generally
consist of banks of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) that provide 360° of lighting coverage. The
technician can usually adjust the brightness of the ring light and the lights come in various
colorations, so the technician has both a white light for standard photographs and a blue
light for photographing fluorescing objects. This ring light often provides effective close-up
lighting, without creating hot or dark spots.
When working with a manual camera (one with an adjustable f-stop and shutter
speed), the technician must recognize the correlation of f-stop in relation to light and
the resulting depth of field. Depth of field relates to the focus of objects in front of and
beyond the subject of the photo. If we focus the camera lens properly, our subject will
always be in focus, but objects that are at a greater distance than the focus point may
or may not be as clearly focused. The same is true of objects that appear in the fore-
ground. The f-stop determines how wide the lens aperture opens, thereby controlling the
amount of light the film/media is exposed to. The higher the f-stop number, the smaller
the aperture, resulting in the introduction of less light. The more we can limit light for a
given exposure, the greater the depth of field of the resulting photograph. When creat-
ing evidence close-up photographs, a short depth of field is generally not a problem. An
expended casing or even a pistol requires a limited depth of field. If any part of the item
is in focus, then for the most part all of the item will be in focus. If the camera lowers
Crime Scene Photography 177

Aperture F 5 Aperture F 20
Focus set at Placard 1 Focus set at Placard 1

Figure 6.57  Depth of field is affected by the amount of light a lens allows into any exposure.
The f-stop helps determine this. The smaller the f-stop, the more light the lens allows in; the
larger the f-stop, the less light the lens allows in. The two photographs in the figure were
exposed under the exact same conditions with the focus set at placard 1. On the left, with an
f-stop of 5, the remaining placards are readable but out of focus. On the right, with an f-stop of
20, all of the placards are in clear focus.

the f-stop in order to introduce a greater amount of light, this generally doesn’t affect
depth of field in the resulting photo. In overall and evidence-establishing photographs,
the technician wants and needs greater depth of field. The underlying purpose of the
photograph is to show an area; therefore the more items that are in clear focus, the better.
If the camera is allowed to lower the f-stop to take in more light, in this situation it will
impact negatively on the resulting photograph (see Figure 6.57). Thus it may be in the
crime scene technician’s best interest to forego the use of automatic features when taking
overall photographs.
For the most part, the technician singularly determines the focus of the photograph.
Good focus begins with being practiced at using the camera and understanding how the
focus system works. The best focus system for crime scene work is a split image. This focus
system is typical of many film single-lens reflex (SLR) cameras; however, most SLR dig-
ital cameras have automatic focus capability that uses various focus modes. These may
include single point, multiple point, area, or dynamic area. All of these variations once
again demand the technician understand his or her equipment and be practiced in its
use. Whatever system of focus is utilized, one technique that is effective in close-up pho-
tography is to position the viewfinder over the straight thin lines of the ruler/scale; the
technician or camera can then achieve the best focus. The fact that these scales and rulers
are made of high-contrast colors also works in the favor of the technician. This technique
is particularly effective when focusing on small objects that lie close to or in the same
plane as the ruler. Of course, the technician must also consider depth of field. If the scale is
located on the floor and the subject matter extends up toward the camera lens any distance,
it is possible to have areas closest to the lens out of focus.
178 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Focus problems will often arise in the digital cameras, where sensors figure out where
the actual focus should be. In some instances, it may be necessary for the technician to
turn off autofocus features when shooting various photographs, particularly close-up pho-
tographs. Digital cameras require sufficient light in order to find focus and register that an
image is available. In low-light conditions, even where the human eye can see effectively,
depending on the quality of the camera, it may not register that any image is available.
Arson scenes in particular can prove quite difficult. To overcome this problem, the techni-
cian can have another scene processor shine a flashlight on the point where the technician
wishes to focus. Once a focus is achieved, the picture is taken. The light should remain on
and stationary throughout the entire process; otherwise the camera may lose this focus
point. This additional light will allow the camera to “see” enough to take the picture, while
the use of fill flash on or off the camera will ensure a good quality photograph.
At night or in extreme low-light conditions, when shooting overall type photographs,
it is often impossible to achieve sufficient lighting with a single flash. Paint with light is
a flash technique that allows the crime scene technician to capture greater detail using
multiple flashes in the same exposure. Presented with an exterior crime scene at night
in which evidence is scattered across a wide area, basic overall or evidence-establishing
photographs are still required. Unfortunately, a single flash initiated at the camera’s posi-
tion will not sufficiently illustrate these areas. As a result, the photographs end up poorly
illuminated. In paint with flash, the technician mounts the camera on a tripod. Once the
camera is focused, the camera is placed on the B (bulb) setting. This setting keeps the
aperture of the lens open so long as the shutter release is pushed. Using a shutter release
cable, the technician can keep the shutter open even while away from the camera. After
opening the shutter, the technician moves to various points on either side of the camera,
manually initiating the flash in the direction of all of the evidence in the viewfinder. The
combined illumination presented by multiple flashes provides a more detailed photograph
(see Figure 6.58). In totally dark areas, the technician can walk directly into the area con-
tained in the viewfinder. This allows the technician to initiate the flash from several angles
on either side of the primary area, but at a position closer to the evidence than the camera.
As long as the technician keeps the flash in front of his or her body, pointed away from
the camera, and remains on the periphery of the area in the viewfinder, no ghost image
of the technician is captured. Paint with light also works in low-light conditions such as
periods at dawn or dusk, but in these cases the technician cannot step directly into the
area captured by the viewfinder. The limited light present under low-light conditions offers
just enough illumination that a ghost image of the technician may appear. Current digital
cameras allow bracketing of exposure times and immediate feedback to the photographer.
So the technician can often find a functional exposure time in low-light situations that
adequately illuminates the scene without using the paint-with-light technique.

Video Photography

Video is a functional supplement to crime scene photography, but video footage (even
digital video) is not a replacement for crime scene photography. Video is best used both
as an initial effort by the technician and later in the processing when demonstrating the
entire scene. Upon arrival at a scene, the crime scene technician should take the nor-
mal overall photographs of the scene, before any further alteration can occur. Once this
Crime Scene Photography 179

A - Single automatic flash

at the camera.

B - Multiple flashes while

the camera was on the bulb
setting.

Figure 6.58  An exterior nighttime overall photograph. The darker photograph was exposed
with a flash attached at the camera. The lighter photograph is the same scene at the same time.
This photograph was exposed using the paint-with-light technique. The camera was set on a
tripod and the shutter placed on the B (bulb) setting. Once open, three manual flashes were ini-
tiated, one on either side of the camera and scene and one at the camera. Note the differences
in illumination.

is accomplished, the technician can utilize a video camera as well. Using a nonintrusive
walk-through, the technician captures as much of the scene as possible without disturbing
anything. After all of the physical evidence has been identified and photo placards are in
place, a second video effort is used to document the scene and the items of interest found.
Video is also effective at later stages in the processing methodology to explain specific
aspects such as trajectory analysis or bloodstain pattern analysis.
There are a number of precautions to consider when using a video camera. First and
foremost, remember that the camera does not see or focus as effectively as the human eye.
The technician can go into a room, pan it quickly by eye, and capture information. The
camera will not capture the same information in the same way. Routinely, video footage is
filled with abrupt movements between points of interest or short periods where the camera
is trained on an item of interest and then moved almost instantly. The photographer will
zoom in and out on an item of interest, never stopping to show details, or the footage will
contain dark images with little detail. Video camera movement must be thought out and
deliberate. When panning from one point to another, move slowly. The camera person
should not start on one side of the room, pan to the opposite side, and then pan back to the
far side. Think out the sequence of points of interest and move methodically through the
room. Once an area of interest is in the field of view and in focus, the technician should
silently count out at least a 10 s period before moving the camera to a new point of interest.
Use of the zoom function should be limited. Treat the zoom and wide-angle function the
same as panning, making a deliberate effort to transition from one zoom angle to the next.
Once a new view is accomplished, maintain the picture in a steady position for at least 10 s.
180 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

In interior or low-light scenes a camera strobe is always a necessary piece of equipment

when using video. Flashlights and the like will not suffice when trying to illuminate dark
or dimly lit areas. Treat video photography the same as standard photography. Fill flash or,
in this case, fill lighting is necessary to capture appropriate detail.
Another precaution when using the video camera concerns the audio portion of the
recording. For a number of reasons, the early video footage (e.g., documenting the scene
on arrival) should be shot without audio. Off-color comments by others, wild theories, and
the like can be captured and forever preserved. If narration is desired, the narrator should
be confident of the information he or she offers, leaving out subjective comments. Anyone
not directly involved in making the video should be removed from the scene so as not to
capture unnecessary audio background. Narration is usually necessary when demonstrat-
ing trajectory or bloodstain pattern analysis. Once again, the narrator should think out
what he or she intends to say rather than trying to shoot the video off the cuff.

Summary

Crime scene photography is not just a matter of point and shoot. Through improper pho-
tography techniques, the technician can produce identification and orientation problems
and interject confusion for those viewing the scene through photographs. Identification
problems occur when viewers cannot tell from where the photo was taken or what they are
looking at. Orientation problems occur when it is impossible to determine from the pho-
tograph up, down, right, or left in relation to the actual scene. Confusion arises from both
of these problems and from situations where the technician takes multiple photographs of
similar items or of the scene in altered conditions without a proper photo log. Any of these
issues can impact on the ability of the photographs to clearly represent the true condition
of the scene as observed by the crime scene team.
Three basic photographs are used in crime scene work: the overall photograph, the
evidence-establishing photograph, and the evidence close-up photograph. Although other
terms may be applied when describing these three photograph types, the nature of what
each photograph depicts is very forthright. Overall photographs depict the overall condi-
tion and orientation of the scene. They are usually taken from the corners of the room and
overlap, allowing nearly every aspect of the scene to be observed. Evidence-establishing
photographs capture specific items of evidence in the scene in relation to obvious land-
marks (e.g., doors, large objects), allowing the viewer to understand exactly where the evi-
dence item is in relation to the scene. Evidence close-up photographs show as much detail
as possible of the evidence item itself. These photographs are often taken both with and
without a scale of reference. They are taken as the item lies in the scene (in situ) and as it is
recovered in order to capture all relevant aspects of the evidence. A version of the evidence
close-up is the forensic quality photograph, which is always taken with an appropriate scale
of reference. An effective way of capturing scene context in photographs is the use of photo
placards. These numbered or lettered placards make it easier for the viewer to identify
where items of evidence are in the scene.
To produce good quality photographs, the technician must follow a standard docu-
mentation methodology and effectively employ whatever photographic equipment he or
she has. This includes controlling the camera, light, and focus. The camera is controlled by
holding it steady with two hands or by using a tripod when necessary. The use of fill-flash
Crime Scene Photography 181

photography best controls light; this may include offset flash, oblique lighting, or the use
of a ring flash. No matter what the lighting conditions, the flash is used to reduce shadows
and improve detail. Focus is a matter of understanding the specific camera that the tech-
nician is using and the f-stop. To achieve greater depth of field for overall and evidence-
establishing photographs, the technician uses a smaller f-stop. In close-up photographs
controlling depth of field is less of an issue.

Suggested Reading
Duncan, C.D., Advanced Crime Scene Photography, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2010.
Ramirez, C., and Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL, 2011.
Redsicker, D.R., The Practical Methodology of Forensic Photography, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2000.
Robinson, E., Crime Scene Photography, 2nd ed., Elsevier Press, Burlington, MA, 2010.

Chapter Questions
1. What are the four key elements of crime scene documentation?
2. Describe how a photograph might create an identification problem.
3. Describe how a photograph might create a confusion problem.
4. What are the three basic photographs associated with crime scene photography?
5. What is the purpose of an overall photograph?
6. What is the purpose of an evidence-establishing photograph?
7. What are the minimum requirements to include in a crime scene photography log?
8. How does the f-stop affect the resulting photograph?
9. How can a crime scene technician prevent overexposure or bleaching out of close-
up photographs when using fill-flash techniques?
10. Describe at least three critical mistakes that occur when using video cameras in
the crime scene?

Notes
1. Road mapping is a term that was first used by Toby Wolson, Miami Dade County Police, relating
to capturing all pertinent aspects of bloodstain crime scenes. (Wolson, T., Bloodstain Pattern
Documentation, presentation to the International Association of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts,
Colorado Springs, CO, September 26, 1992.)
2. Sirene, W., Surveillance Photography Guides, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Washington, DC, 1979, p. 7.
3. Wolson, T., Documenting Bloodstain Patterns, Journal of Forensic Identification, 4(45), 1995,
396–408.
Crime Scene Sketching
and Mapping
7
In general conversation, crime scene sketching and crime scene mapping are often con-
sidered one and the same. Any difference would be a matter of semantics (e.g., a freehand
drawing compared with a to-scale drawing), but for the purposes of this chapter, the text
will draw a distinction between the two terms. Consider the sketch as an actual drawing
of the scene. As one might imagine, there is a significant range in the quality of crime
scene sketches. The sketch may be nothing more than a freehand drawing with no scale of
reference, or it could be as intricate as a computer-generated document. To create a sketch,
other than a simple freehand drawing, the technician goes through a process of measuring
and fixing the items present in the scene. Crime scene mapping is this process of taking
and documenting these measurements.
Whatever the quality of the crime scene sketch, it serves as a graphic document to
show the layout, orientation, and interrelationships of the scene and the evidence. The
sketch supports the photographs and notes and will ultimately complement the final
report. Because it is a graphic document depicting pertinent portions of the scene, it allows
the viewer to easily and quickly comprehend the interrelationships between the scene and
the evidence. Scene sketches are also an important document for the investigator, as the
crime scene sketch is quite helpful in subsequent analysis or reconstruction efforts. The
documentation produced from the crime scene mapping effort helps in physically recon-
structing the entire scene or portions of the scene. These techniques of reconstructing the
scene will often assist a jury in recognizing the spatial relationships and limitations present
in the scene.
The level of effort directed at crime scene sketching and mapping varies widely. The
primary factors in deciding how much effort to direct at a scene are the severity of the crime
and the importance of the evidence interrelationships. In major crimes such as homicides,
the scene sketch will be in depth, with significant crime scene mapping documentation.
Such effort will generally allow for the creation of a to-scale sketch if required. In simple
crimes, such as a business burglary, where the interrelationships of the evidence are less
likely to be of importance, a rough freehand sketch may be all that is needed.

Essential Sketch Elements

The crime scene diagram prepared on scene is rarely a work of art (Figure 7.1). The con-
centration at the scene is on the measurements and general evidence placement. Work of
art or not, this document should be graphically correct. This doesn’t mean it will depict
every item, footwear mark, or bloodstain present in the scene, but rather it will demon-
stratively illustrate where the primary evidence was. General room layout and furniture
placement should be consistent with the conditions found in the scene. From this initial
document, the technician will usually create the formal crime scene sketch. The formal
sketch, whether hand drawn or computer generated, has five basic elements:

183
184 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.1  The rough sketch prepared on scene is rarely a work of art. This document generally
lacks a heading, legend, or scale of reference, but it will include the layout of the area, signifi-
cant articles and furniture, and specifics on evidence and measurements. Although lacking in
aesthetic value, it must still be an accurate representation of the scene.
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 185

• Heading
• Diagram area
• Legend
• Title block
• Scale and direction notations

The heading is a notation that indicates why the sketch was created. The technician
may create a number of sketches, each with a specific purpose. Some examples include the
normal sketch depicting evidence or measurements, a sketch depicting a single evidential
aspect such as bloodstains or bullet trajectories, or a sketch depicting placement of the
actual scene in a larger area. Whatever the purpose of the sketch, the heading informs the
viewer of that purpose.
The diagram area is the drawing itself. The diagram should graphically depict the
scene and primary evidence. A significant problem in creating any diagram is clutter and
the resulting confusion when too much information is included. When creating the formal
crime scene sketch, the technician may decide to simplify the diagram. He or she does this
by eliminating items that were noted and fixed during the scene examination but that are
considered less important to the investigation. There is nothing wrong with simplifying a
sketch so long as the essential character of the scene is not lost and the rough sketch created
during the actual scene mapping is retained.
The legend tells the viewer what the various labels used in the diagram depict. Space
in the diagram area of the sketch is always lacking. Lack of space forces the technician to
place small circles and labels on the diagram, rather than attempting to draw shell casings,
bloodstains, or whatever. The use of labels allows the technician to include more informa-
tion without creating clutter or confusion, but each label must be defined in some fashion.
It is best when the legend is included on the sketch, as this ensures a ready reference for the
viewer. An important aspect of scene documentation is ensuring that the various elements
of documentation complement and support each other. This is particularly true in relation
to placards in the crime scene photographs and the labels used on the crime scene diagram.
If the technician shoots a photograph depicting a shell casing with a placard labeled as A, it
creates confusion if the scene sketch arbitrarily uses a 1 to depict the same item. Whenever
possible, ensure that there is consistency between the photographs and the sketch.
The title block of the sketch provides important information relevant to the location of
the scene and the creator of the sketch. Different organizations may require different items
of information, but this section typically includes the report number, the physical address of
the scene, the name of the sketch creator, and the time and date when the sketch was created.
Finally, two annotations should be present on the sketch to identify the orientation of
the sketch in relation to compass direction as well as to inform the viewer if there is some
scale of reference used in creating the sketch. With regard to compass direction, it is often
claimed that every sketch should be created with north facing the top of the page, but such
an orientation is neither practical nor advisable in all situations. Rather, set the diagram
area in the most effective orientation to depict the scene, and then simply identify where
north is in relation to this orientation. The scale reference identifies whether a scale is used
and what that scale is. A “not to scale” annotation is more than adequate for the typical
freehand drawing. Some computer-generated sketch systems report the scale automatically
in the resulting legend, but the use of “not to scale” is often appropriate for these more
refined sketches as well.
186 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Utility Room
H Sketch Depicting
G
F 2 Primary Evidence

Loc: XXXX Mountain View Pass,

Stone Mtn, GA
Case: 08-XXXXXXX
Date/Time: 06/09/XX 1430
E
Prepared by: SA C. XXXXXXX
I

UP
Basement Level Legend
Pool Room
0" 1 - Victim J. XXXXXX
'1 C
15 2 - Victim L. XXXXXX
A - 40 caliber casing
B - 40 caliber casing
C - 40 caliber casing

D - S/W 357 revolver

J E - Bullet defect w/recovered 357 bullet
F - Impact spatter
G - Expectorate pattern
A H - 357 bullet on rug beneath victim
9' 1 1 I - US Currency ($322)
0"
J - Position described by husband

B
D TV/Recreation Room

Rear Entrance Not Drawn to Scale

Figure 7.2  The final sketch is a demonstrative document that serves to show relationships
between the scene and objects of importance. It cannot show every single item in the scene, nor
can it depict the scene as effectively as photographs, but it supports the other scene documenta-
tion. If done properly, it is one of the most effective ways to help a jury quickly understand a
scene. For the sake of simplicity, most measurements are left off the final sketch; however, in
this instance the husband’s claim as to his position (annotated as J on the sketch) and distance
from the two victims is probative and an important aspect of this scene.

Eventually, some final version of the sketch is prepared. This sketch accompanies the
report and is used at trial to assist both counsel and jurors in understanding the scene.
For the sake of simplicity, measurements are not generally included in this final version.
The final sketch remains demonstrative. Once again, it is not intended to replace photo-
graphs of the scene; therefore not every bloodstain or item that was present at the scene
is included. Many articles of evidence, rather than being drawn, are given a label and the
label is appropriately placed in the sketch. All of this leads to a more understandable docu-
ment that will serve the jurors’ needs (see Figure 7.2).

Variations of View in Sketches

The standard crime scene sketch is presented as a bird’s-eye view of the scene, as seen in
Figure 7.3. Only horizontal surfaces are evident, and typically only evidence on horizontal
surfaces is included in the sketch. Items on vertical aspects can be interjected, but some
note in the legend is helpful, indicating the item is on a vertical surface. This type of sketch
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 187

4
10 17
30B
5 2
Propane 28
Tank 6
3
11 8 7 1
12
9

31
Pooled Blood

32

Bloody
Footprint

Figure 7.3  The typical crime scene sketch is that of a bird’s-eye view. It looks down on the
scene from above and effectively captures elements found on any horizontal plane (floors, tables,
counters, etc.). (Courtesy of Ranger John A. Martin and the Texas Rangers. With permission.)

is clearly suited for the vast majority of crime scenes and provides the viewer with a more
rounded and comprehensive understanding of the scene and evidence. But there are times
when additional viewpoints are necessary as well. There are several variations of view for
the crime scene sketch. These are:

• Cross-projection or exploded sketch

• Elevation sketch
• Three-dimensional sketch

A cross-projection sketch or exploded sketch combines the standard bird’s-eye view of

the horizontal surfaces of the room, while at the same time “laying down” a wall or walls
in order to depict evidence that is present on these vertical surfaces. The cross-projection
sketch allows the viewer to see the orientation and interrelationships of items of evidence
on both the vertical and horizontal surfaces of the scene. It has been argued that to create
a true cross-projection sketch, the creator must lay down all walls, but arbitrary rules have
188 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.4  A cross-projection sketch or exploded view lays down vertical surfaces adjacent to
the horizontal surface, allowing evidence on both to be displayed. This view helps the viewer
to understand interrelationships between various articles.

no place in forensics. The sketch creator can lay down a single wall, multiple walls, or any
combination that seems appropriate. This sketch technique is quite effective when dealing
with walls that have bloodstain patterns or bullet holes in them. Figure 7.4 is an example
of a cross-projection sketch.
An elevation sketch is drawn depicting a side view of some portion of the scene, typi-
cally an interior wall or similar vertical structure. Elevation sketches can be used to map
and document evidence such as defects, stains, or other evidence on walls or other surfaces.
The elevation sketch can also be used to draw an extended exterior scene, depicting in side
view the orientation of various buildings and the like. This might be a functional approach
when trying to depict a bullet trajectory. Figure 7.5 shows an elevation view.
The three-dimensional sketch or view offers an ability to present the crime scene infor-
mation in a more realistic perspective. These techniques include everything from hand-
drawn sketches to computer-created sketches and views. Creating quality hand-drawn
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 189

Figure 7.5  The elevation view in a crime scene sketch allows the technician to capture infor-
mation relevant to vertical surfaces and the orientation of various vertical surfaces to one
another.

three-dimensional sketches is an art form. Lacking such skills, a variety of software

packages allow the scene mapping information to be used to create a virtual scene (see
Figures 7.6 and 7.7). Once created, a virtual camera can be positioned anywhere (within the
limits of the program), allowing a semirealistic perspective of the scene from that position.
Three-dimensional software allows us to put the jury virtually in a scene to observe spatial
relationships, limitations of sight caused by the scene layout, and other information that
may ultimately be pertinent to claims by suspects and witnesses. Figure 7.8 is an example
of a scene photograph and virtual view of the same scene from a slightly different position.
These virtual views are prepared as needed to show important spatial relationships or to
eliminate excessive gore, while still demonstrating the physical layout of the scene.
A major concern in choosing software for such purposes is the utilities provided. A
necessary component of the software is flexibility in changing and resizing furniture.
Many software packages provide a “standard” furniture library that cannot be changed.
These packages are too limiting to be of significant use in crime scene work. A second
utility necessary is the ability to freely place the camera. The more freely and effectively
the software allows for camera placement, the more functional the software is as a crime
scene utility. Finally, the package must allow export of the “camera view” as an image file.
190 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.6  A three-dimensional sketch is generally created through some form of software. It
allows the crime scene technician to effectively capture a scene. Consider this photograph of a
living room and the decedent. Figure 7.7 shows the same scene in a three-dimensional aspect.

This is important because the most effective mechanism of presenting these views to a jury
is not within the software itself, but rather in presentation software such as PowerPoint.1
Unfortunately, most of the software manufacturers have failed to recognize police organi-
zations as a viable customer, and thus the minor changes necessary to make these packages
effective crime scene applications have not been made. On the other hand, some manu-
facturers took off-the-shelf software that sold for $30 to $40, added limited police-specific
libraries, and then quadrupled the price of the package without bothering to make the
additional changes necessary to round out the package as a crime scene tool. Simply put,
the author has found no single software package that meets all of the crime scene investiga-
tion needs.

Methods for Crime Scene Mapping

In order to create an accurate scene sketch, there must be supporting documentation that
defines the size of the scene and where in the scene various items were. Crime scene map-
ping is the process the technician uses to identify this information. In all but the most pre-
liminary rough sketches, the technician documents the size of the scene, elements within
the scene (e.g., furniture and doors), and then “fixes” the evidence in some fashion. Fixing
evidence allows the investigator to functionally place the item back in the scene with some
level of accuracy. The specific method used to fix evidence is primarily a matter of habit
as well as circumstance. As the severity of the crime increases, the likelihood increases
that the scene and evidence interrelationships will become important at subsequent trial.
In that situation, the more precise methods are employed. In a simpler crime, these scene
relationships may not be as significant, and the less precise fixing methods may be more
than adequate. The physical circumstance the technician finds at the scene (e.g., outdoors,
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 191

Skillets

Hall
Broken bakelite
fragments

TV
Shirts

Baggies

= Handle
She-

Dish
Coffee table lves

S bedroom

Phone cord

Cloth

= Footwear blood
transfer stains

Closet
Baggie

Door

Figure 7.7  A three-dimensional sketch created from the crime scene documentation of the
scene in Figure 7.6. Even with the significant amount of data used (the scene measurements)
to produce this drawing, it is still demonstrative. For example, the placement of the bloody
footwear transfers is not intended to be exact. The sketch demonstrates their generalized posi-
tions and orientations, whereas the scene photographs will effectively establish their specific
positions and orientations if this is at issue.

indoors, no landmarks) also plays a role in choosing the crime scene mapping method.
Some methods are more practical in certain circumstances. The most common mapping
methods used are:

• Rectangular coordinates
• Triangulation
• Baseline coordinates
• Polar coordinates
• Triangulation or rectangular coordinates on a grid
• Triangulation on a baseline
• Total station systems

Keep in mind that the overall sequence of the crime scene processing technique is
still important. In standard processing practice, the scene is photographed in situ prior
to initiating the sketch and crime scene mapping methods. The process of mapping
the scene is itself intrusive, requiring the technician to move about the scene in order
to take the various measurements. In practice, no matter which mapping method the
technician uses, the technician fixes all evidence first. Later, the technician measures
192 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.8  This is an example of a virtual scene depiction based on the actual scene. Various
forms of computer software allow creation of virtual scenes based on the crime scene mea-
surements. Once prepared, virtual cameras can be placed at specific points, thus allowing the
technician to demonstrate spatial relationships that might not have been evident in the photo-
graphs or to show some aspect of the scene without the accompanying gore. The use of virtual
methods demands accurate, detailed mapping by the crime scene technician.

walls, furniture, and other static items. This sequence prevents inadvertently moving
an item of evidence before its position is fixed. As there are several different mapping
methods that require discussion, it is appropriate to take this latter task of detail-
ing the general scene conditions (e.g., walls and doors) out of sequence and identify
the general measurements required for the sketch and supporting notes. The techni-
cian should document the length, width, and heights of all walls, doors, windows, or
openings, and the specific location in the wall where such openings occur. Furniture
items should be measured fully, identifying length, width, and height. Furniture is
fixed using the same techniques used for evidence, unless an item is found to be flush
against a wall. In that instance, a single measurement from a known point where the
item is flush to a standard reference point on the same wall will accurately place the
item in the scene.

Rectangular Coordinates
The rectangular coordinate method is best suited for crime scenes with clear and specific
boundaries (e.g., interior walls). It is well suited for interior crime scenes and is a fast and
effective method, particularly when using a sonic, laser, or infrared (IR) measuring device.
The technician fixes the evidence by measuring at right angles from the evidence to the sur-
rounding walls and surfaces. Applying rectangular coordinates, the technician generally
uses only two measurements from the center of mass to document each item of evidence.
Thus this method is less precise than other techniques such as triangulation. Consider the
pistol in Figure 7.9. The pistol is fixed in the scene by taking two measurements from the
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 193

North

West East

South

Figure 7.9  Rectangular coordinates used to document two specific articles of evidence, a pair
of pants and a pistol. Rectangular coordinates require only two measurements from any item of
evidence, but even with these measurements, the pistol can still be rotated 360°, and thus it is
not fixed. Rectangular coordinates are effective, but they are not as precise as other techniques.

center of mass, to the south and west walls. Although this places the pistol at a specific
location, it does not “fix” the evidence, since the pistol can be rotated in that position in a
full circle of 360°. Although not typically done when using rectangular coordinates, noth-
ing prevents the technician from taking two measurements from two different points on
a regularly shaped object (e.g., two measurements from the butt and two measurements
from the forward sight). Irregularly shaped objects are always treated the same in rectan-
gular coordinates, requiring two measurements from the center of mass to a surrounding
surface. For example, in Figure 7.9, the pants are placed in the scene by a measurement to
the west and south walls. Furniture items in the scene are fixed in much the same way as
other evidence. The love seat in the northwest corner can be placed by a measurement from
the southwest base corner leg to the north wall and a measurement from the northeast base
corner leg to the north wall. Of course, it should be evident that movement east or west of
this item is not limited by these measurements; therefore a third measurement to the east
wall is necessary as well. So a minimum of three measurements in this instance fixes the
love seat.
There are problems associated with the rectangular coordinate method. The method is
less precise than triangulation because it is based primarily on the use of only two measure-
ments for any given article. Another problem associated with the method is that it can be
difficult to measure accurately at right angles to walls that are 5 to 10 ft away. Nevertheless,
rectangular coordinates are a functional and effective method so long as the technician
recognizes the inherent level of imprecision. If the technician desires a to-scale drawing as
a final product, this is not the best method to employ.
194 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Triangulation
Triangulation is an effective method for fixing evidence. Triangulation’s underlying rules
are based on whether the item has a regular or irregular shape. Items that have a regu-
lar shape, which will not change with movement and contain specific identifiable points,
are fixed using a minimum of four measurements. Examples of regularly shaped items
include furniture, guns, or knives. In order to fix the item in the scene, the technician
takes a total of four straight-line measurements from two distinct landmarks in the room
to two distinct points on the article. Each pair of measurements in effect creates a triangle.
Figure 7.10 shows the fixing of one end of a shell casing using two reference points along
the wall. Two more measurements from the opposite end of the casing would complete the
triangulation process. Irregularly shaped items have asymmetric shapes with no specific
identifiable points and also include items that will change shape when moved. Irregularly
shaped objects are documented using two measurements from the center of mass of the
item to two distinct landmarks, as well as a measurement of the overall width of the item.
Examples of items with irregular shapes include blood pools, clothing, or a circular drink-
ing glass that is upright. For example, the clothes in the center of the floor in Figure 7.9
could be placed in the scene any number of times and never end up in the exact position
they were found in. Thus two measurements from the center of mass to the nearest corners
are more than effective at fixing them in the scene.
Typical landmarks used in triangulation are base corners of walls and doors. In crowded
or cluttered spaces the technician may have to create reference points to eliminate land-
mark problems. To do this, the technician simply locates a ready reference point (RP) along
a wall, identifies it with some marker (e.g., a Post-it note), and then measures the distance of
the reference point to a nearby base corner, as seen in Figure 7.11. This single measurement
places the reference point, allowing it to be used like any other standard landmark.

Figure 7.10  Triangulation is a more precise method of fixing evidence than rectangular coor-
dinates. As in the instance of the shell casing, a set of measurements from two distinct points
(RP1 and RP2) to one end of the casing creates one triangle. A similar series of measurements
from the opposite end of the shell casing would effectively set the casing in a very specific
position.
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 195

Figure 7.11  Additional reference points are established in the scene in a simple fashion. The
reference point is placed along a wall or similar surface and marked so that it is recognized
(using the yellow sticky note). A single measurement from a known point (the corner of the
room) identifies where this RP is.

In triangulation, regularly shaped articles end up with two triangles (four measure-
ments), and irregularly shaped objects end up with one triangle (two measurements). These
idealized triangles formed by the measurements can be seen in Figure  7.12. The gun is
measured from the heel of the grip to RP1 and the southwest base corner of the room,
creating triangle 1. The barrel tip is measured to RP2 and the southwest base corner of
the doorway, creating triangle 2. These four measurements fix this item exactly, with no
movement or rotation possible. The clothing in the center of the scene, as an irregularly
shaped item, is measured from the center of mass to RP3 and the southeast base corner of
the room, creating a single triangle.
Furniture is treated the same as evidence when using triangulation, with the exception
of items that are flush against walls. In Figure 7.13, the bed is flush against the north and
west walls; thus measuring its dimensions alone sets and fixes it inside the room without
further effort. The dresser on the east wall is flush against the wall, and the technician
would measure its dimensions as well, but in order to fix it on the east wall, at least one
measurement must be taken from a known landmark. A measurement from the southeast
base corner of the dresser to the southeast base corner of the room effectively places it in
the room. The love seat in the northeast corner presents a more difficult problem. It is free-
standing in the room, not flush to any surface. Like any other item of evidence, four mea-
surements from two points on the love seat to room landmarks are necessary to fix it in the
scene. The measurements from the northeast base corner leg of the love seat to the north-
east base corner of the room and to RP3 create the first triangle, while the measurement
from the southeast base corner leg to RP2 and the southwest base corner of the door create
the second triangle.
There is one caution when using triangulation techniques. The technician should not
triangulate from items that are themselves fixed in the scene by triangulation. For instance
in Figure 7.13, after fixing the love seat in the northeast corner of the room, the technician
would not use the base corners of the love seat as landmarks for other items of evidence.
196 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

North

RP3

West East

RP1

RP2
South

Figure 7.12  An example of triangulation used to fix regularly and irregularly shaped articles.
Regularly shaped items require two triangles (four measurements), and irregularly shaped arti-
cles require only one triangle (two measurements).

North

RP3

West East

RP1

RP2
South

Figure 7.13  The same rules apply in triangulation for furniture items, unless an object is
flush against a wall. The bookcase located flush along the east wall can be fixed by making a
single measurement from the southeast base corner of the case to the southeast base corner of
the room. The love seat, however, is not flush against a surface and is fixed using two triangles
(four measurements).
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 197

Figure 7.14  Most of the basic measurements taken during the crime scene mapping are anno-
tated directly on a rough sketch, but not all can be included. To supplement those measurements,
it is appropriate to use an evidence measurement log. This is a triangulation measurement log
that defines what item was fixed, where it was fixed to, and the resulting measurement. Not
all of these data will make it to the final sketch, but the measurement log documents every
measurement for future reference, such as when producing a to-scale drawing or using three-
dimensional sketching software.

The bed, on the other hand, could be utilized as a landmark without fear of introducing
any error because it is flush against two walls.
The use of a standard form for documenting the measurements taken on scene will
reduce and eliminate errors or omissions. Figure 7.14 is an example of a triangulation mea-
surement log associated with the sketch in Figure 7.1.

Baseline Coordinates
The baseline method of fixing evidence is very similar to the rectangular coordinates
process. Baseline is best suited for exterior scenes without evident landmarks, although
it can also be used inside. Baseline begins with a datum point, a location from which
the baseline will extend. In an exterior scene, the datum is set by triangulating it to a
198 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.15  When using mapping techniques such as baseline or grids, the datum point must
be fixed in the overall scene in some fashion. Here, the datum point is tied to a nearby garage by
use of triangulation. Because the datum point is a single point and not an object, two measure-
ments will effectively fix this point in space.

set of nearby landmarks. For instance, in Figure 7.15, the datum point is fixed by mea-
suring from the southeast and northeast base corners of the nearby garage. Once the
datum is set, the baseline is extended along a cardinal direction (north, south, east,
or west) as far as necessary. The best method for baseline is to extend an actual tape
measure, as seen in Figure 7.16. If this is not possible (e.g., when there is a need for an
extended baseline), the baseline can be formed by a line or string, with reference points
marked along the line. There is one major caution regarding the baseline technique: the
baseline must be a straight line. The practice observed in accident investigation, where
a baseline is identified by a sidewalk or curb, is not accurate and not appropriate for
crime scene investigation.
Once the baseline is established, the technician measures the distance from each item
(either from its center of mass or from identified points on the object) at a right angle to the
baseline, as seen in Figure 7.17. This distance from the baseline is recorded. The technician
then notes the distance along the baseline (the distance from the datum point) where the
evidence measurement transects the baseline. These two measurements fix the evidence in
relation to the baseline and datum. The use of a nonstretching fabric tape measure as the
actual baseline allows for easy identification of the distance from the datum point to the
point where the line from the evidence crosses the baseline. If a string is used as the baseline,
the technician must stretch a second tape measure from this transect point to the datum
point to determine this distance. This requires additional effort and introduces additional
error. As in the case with rectangular coordinates, it is important to square off the tape
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 199

Figure 7.16  When using the baseline technique, the most effective method is to extend a
nonelastic tape measure as the actual baseline. Here, the technician sets the tape measure as
a baseline, aligning it with a stake to keep it on a straight line with the datum point and at a
consistent horizontal height. Using the tape measure as the baseline allows the technician to
read the baseline measurement immediately without further effort.

Figure 7.17  Once the baseline is in place, items of evidence are measured at a right angle to
the baseline using a second tape measure.
200 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.18  As shown in this photograph, it is important to ensure that the measurement
from the evidence to the baseline is at a right angle by visually squaring the two tape measures.
The position on the baseline (the white tape measure) and the measurement off the baseline
(the yellow tape measure) create a fixing coordinate for the evidence that is similar to that
obtained using rectangular coordinates.

measure to the baseline, as seen in Figure 7.18. Infrared or laser measuring devices that have
both a receiver and transmitter can be an effective tool when taking baseline measurements.
The outdoor scene in Figure  7.19 will serve to illustrate the differences using three
additional exterior mapping techniques. The grading flags in the photograph identify items
of evidence in a widely distributed field of evidence. This field will allow the reader to
compare the ultimate mapping product of each technique. Keep in mind that multiple
sketches are often produced for each scene. It is uncommon to try and place both the evi-
dence and every measurement on a single sketch, as this produces a cluttered document

Figure 7.19  The various mapping methods create quite dissimilar measurement sketches.
This open field of evidence (the various evidence items are marked by the surveying flags) will
serve as an example to compare three methods: baseline, polar coordinates, and triangulation
on a grid.
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 201

Figure 7.20  An example of a baseline measurement log for the field of evidence shown in
Figure 7.19. Note that each item of evidence is fixed with two measurements, the same as when
using rectangular coordinates. In this case, the technician obtains a measurement from the
evidence to the baseline (at a right angle) and a measurement from that point along the baseline
to the datum point.

that has limited value. One version of the sketch has a singular purpose, to demonstrate
graphically the evidence measurements. So a standard sketch (see Figure 7.2) and a mea-
surement sketch are often created separately to eliminate this confusion. Figure  7.20 is
an evidence measurement log created using the baseline method, while Figure 7.21 is the
resulting sketch depicting measurements using the baseline method.

Polar Coordinates
The polar coordinate method is an effective technique for mapping exterior scenes in which
the evidence is significantly scattered over a relatively open area. Typical examples include
aircraft crashes, scattered remains, or even bombing scenes, where bomb debris is widely
distributed. The polar coordinate method is not suited to situations where line of sight is
limited by heavy woods or other obstacles.
202 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.21  An example of a measurement sketch prepared using the baseline method. The
five items of evidence from the field of evidence in Figure 7.19 are mapped.

Polar coordinates are based on surveying techniques. Using a sighting device, the tech-
nician measures two to three basic measurements (depending on need) from a known
point to the evidence in question. These three measurements are the horizontal angle, the
horizontal distance, and the difference in elevation (when recording elevation data). The
sighting instrument used can be a surveyor’s transit, a laser sighting device, or (in a worst
case) a handheld compass.
Horizontal angle is measured as rotation of the sighting instrument from north in
the horizontal plane, a measurement of 1 to 360°. Horizontal distance is measured as the
distance between the datum point and the evidence item. If the technician is not record-
ing elevation data, horizontal distance is simple to record. The technician measures the
straight-line distance from the datum point to the evidence using any acceptable measur-
ing system (e.g., tape measure). If there is a need to record elevation data, horizontal dis-
tance must be a true horizontal distance; i.e., the distance must be measured along a true
horizontal plumb. In this case, the use of a laser or IR measuring device is more appropri-
ate. Lastly, elevation is measured as the difference in height from a benchmark (the datum
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 203

Figure 7.22  Polar coordinates begin with setting a datum point. Whatever sighting device is
used, the datum point is at the ground level directly beneath it. As in this example, a piece of
metal rebar is used to mark the datum point. Once the sighting tripod is in place, the techni-
cian uses a laser device or a plumb line to ensure that the rebar is directly beneath the point of
rotation of the sighting device.

point elevation) and the evidence. Elevation data are not always necessary, and the techni-
cian must decide in advance whether to record this information. Elevation is recorded by
aiming an optical or laser instrument (using a horizontal line of sight) at an elevation rod
held in place at the evidence item. Before recording elevation, the technician must accom-
plish two additional steps. First, he or she determines the difference between the datum
point elevation and the sighting instrument (the height of the instrument above the datum
point). This distance is subtracted from the elevation reading to establish the actual eleva-
tion difference between the datum point (on the ground) and the evidence. Second, the
technician must properly place the sighting device in the scene, ensuring that the sighting
device is at a higher elevation than any evidence items. Failure to accomplish this last task
will make it impossible to gather elevation data.
As with every other exterior mapping method, the polar coordinate method starts
with setting a datum point. The datum point can be set by use of a GPS device, triangu-
lation to evident landmarks in the area, or (in a worst case) by physical location using a
metal pipe or rebar. For instance, in Figure 7.22 the officer sets the datum point using a
short piece of rebar. Lacking any other method of precisely placing the datum point, once
the scene mapping is complete, the rebar is driven into the ground. This will allow the
technician to return at any later date and locate its position using a metal detector. When
polar coordinates are used, the datum point should be set in a position from which the
majority of known evidence items can be seen. In a widely distributed evidence field, it may
be necessary to place the datum point in the center of the field. This allows a full circle of
sightings to be used, rather than a narrow band of degrees.
204 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.23  In polar coordinates, a sighting device is used to measure the angular direction of
the evidence from the datum point. For this measurement to be accurate, the sighting device
must be aligned with magnetic north. The technician uses a compass to align the barrel of the
sighting device after the tripod and datum point are set.

Once the datum point is in place, the sighting device is placed over it and centered.
Centering can be done with a plumb line or a laser, as seen in Figure 7.22. Centering the
sighting device ensures that it is rotating from a position directly over the actual datum
point, which is at ground level where the rebar was staked. Once centered, the tripod
should be securely positioned so that any inadvertent jarring or movement will not upset
its position. Once this is complete, the technician rechecks the centering. An alternative
method is to reverse the sequence of placing the datum point and tripod. Because the posi-
tion of the datum point is arbitrary, it really does not matter where the datum point ends
up. Therefore, it is often easier to securely set the sighting instrument tripod first. Once
the tripod is in place, the rebar can then be placed using the laser or plumb to identify the
centered position beneath the device. Either sequence is effective.
If the technician is measuring elevation as part of the data set, the datum point must
be placed in a position at a higher elevation than the surrounding evidence. In this case,
the technician must also measure and record the distance between the height of the transit
or laser sighting device and the ground beneath (since the actual datum point is at ground
level). This distance is subtracted from any elevation readings that are ultimately recorded
for evidence.
Once centering is complete, the sighting mechanism must be aligned with magnetic
north, as seen in Figure 7.23. The transit or laser has a 1–360° scale with a sighting mark
that rotates independently of the sighting device. The sighting mark and 1/360 are aligned
while the instrument is aligned with magnetic north; once this is done, the sighting mark
ring is locked down. From that point on, any rotation of the sighting device rotates the
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 205

Figure 7.24  Depending upon the sighting device used in polar coordinates, a sighting mark
will be present somewhere on the rotating portion of the device. Once the device is aligned
with the evidence, this mark will align with an angular scale on the base of the device. In this
case, the azimuth or angle to the evidence is 253.5°.

sighting mark on the degree scale in relation to north, as seen in Figure 7.24. Use caution
when setting the sighting mark. For ease of reading this scale, it is usually manufactured
with an offset. The sighting mark actually aligns at either the right or left of the sighting
device rather than directly beneath the barrel of the sighting device. This offset allows the
technician to look down at the side and see the reading, rather than trying to look under
the barrel of the sighting device. A failure to recognize and set up the instrument with this
offset will result in inaccurate readings. It is imperative the technician know his or her
instrument and set it up properly. The final adjustment to the sighting mechanism is to
level the transit or laser sight using bubble levels on the device.
Once the sighting device is set and centered, mapping of the scene can begin. The
technician has a coworker stand in position at the evidence item, placing an elevation rod
at the base of the evidence item, as seen in Figure 7.25. If available, a rod level should be
used to prevent holding the sighting rod at an odd angle. When using a surveyor’s transit,
alignment of the sighting device and the sighting rod is evident through the optical lens
of the transit. With a laser device, alignment is evident when the laser dot appears on the
sighting rod. When the device is aligned, the technician notes the position of the sight
mark in degrees on the scale. Once the direction from the datum point is established, the
technician measures the distance from the datum point to the evidence. This distance can
be measured using a tape measure, as seen in Figure 7.26, or with a laser measuring device.
When measuring elevation data, the laser method is preferred. These measurements estab-
lish a specific vector (direction and distance) from the datum point to the evidence, fixing
it in the scene. If the technician is collecting elevation data, the point where the transit or
206 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.25  To find the correct azimuth, an assistant stands at the evidence item and places
a sighting rod at the base of it. The technician then aligns the optical or laser sighting device
on the sighting rod.

laser aligns on the vertical scale of the sighting rod indicates the elevation off the datum
point, as seen in Figure 7.27. This measurement is annotated as well. This measurement,
minus the distance measured between the sighting device and the datum point (the instru-
ment height), identifies the elevation of the evidence relative to the datum point.
Because line of sight is an important aspect of polar coordinates, there may be occa-
sions where multiple datum points will be necessary to map a scene. This is particularly
true when trees or other obstacles prevent direct line of sight from a single datum point
to all evidence. In such instances, the technician can set a second or third datum point
at alternative positions that eliminate the line-of-sight issues. There are no limitations on
the number of datum points the technician can use. When using multiple datum points,
however, it is preferable to keep a separate measurement log for each and not combine

Figure 7.26  Once an azimuth is determined, the horizontal distance from the datum point to
the evidence item is measured with either a tape measure or laser measuring device.
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 207

Figure 7.27  In some instances, elevation data are required when using polar coordinates.
Elevation is determined by aligning the optical device and reading where the device aligns
with the sighting rod or, as in this case, by using a laser device. To calculate elevation data, the
user must know the vertical distance between the sighting device and the datum point. In this
case, the point where the laser appears on the elevation rod is 4 ft, 2 in. above the evidence. The
vertical distance between the datum point and the sighting device is subtracted from this 4 ft,
2 in. to place the item in relation to the datum point.

data from multiple points on the same log. All of the information can certainly be plot-
ted on the same sketch, but mixing datum information on the log can lead to confusion
or error.
The resulting documentation using the polar coordinate method is somewhat differ-
ent than that created by baseline or triangulation techniques. Figure 7.28 is the evidence
measurement log created using polar coordinates, while Figure 7.29 is the resulting sketch
depicting measurements.

Triangulation or Rectangular Coordinates on a Grid

In some instances, it may be necessary to create a grid system to map the evidence
accurately. Grids are effective for large-scale scenes where there are multiple teams
actively mapping an area with no significant landmarks or in small-scale scenes such
as gravesites.
In large-scale scenes, such as those involving scattered remains, triangulation may be
the most appropriate method to employ with the grid. The grid is created and identified
though the use of stakes, which in effect become the triangulation landmarks. Although
the technician can lay out barrier tape to identify the sides of the grid squares, in larger
scenes the tape becomes a hindrance to movement. In smaller scenes such as gravesites,
rectangular coordinates are often the preferred method for documenting measurements
208 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.28  An example of a polar coordinate measurement log for the field of evidence shown
in Figure 7.19.

to the grid. The entire grid must be laid out, as in archeology techniques, or a rigid grid is
overlaid onto the site.
Creating the grid is the most time-consuming aspect of using the grid technique. The
most effective method for setting up the grid is to follow standard Cartesian coordinates,
using only positive numbers. To accomplish this, the datum point is set in the lower left
corner of the grid, as seen in Figure 7.30. The left border of the grid becomes the positive
Y-axis, and the lower border of the grid becomes the positive X-axis. In this fashion, the
known field of evidence is contained in the upper right quadrant of the coordinate system.
If, at some point in the processing, evidence is discovered outside of this area, the grid can
be extended in any direction, and the evidence can be accurately and effectively added to
the sketch.
As with previous mapping methods, the process begins by setting the datum point
(in Cartesian coordinates the datum point is 0,0). Additionally, the technician must
decide in advance the size for each grid (e.g., placing each stake 10 ft from the next).
The size of each grid is typically dependent upon the overall area involved and how
distributed the evidence is. From the datum point, the technician extends a primary
baseline of the grid to the right for whatever distance is required. This creates the lower
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 209

Figure 7.29  An example of a measurement sketch prepared using the polar coordinate method.

two corners of the grid (the X-axis). Once these corners are staked, the technician sets a
second baseline at a right angle to the first (the Y-axis), extending it out from the datum
point the same distance as the primary baseline. This is best accomplished using a com-
pass or transit to ensure that the two lines are at right angles to each other. These two
lines establish three outer corners of the grid. Before proceeding further, the technician
checks the square of the grid by measuring across the grid and applying the 3-4-5 rule. 2
From a point three units from the grid corner on one axis, to a point four units from
the same corner on the adjacent axis, the distance between the two points is five units.
So if the grid stakes are set 10 ft apart, from a point 30 ft up the Y-axis to a point 40 ft
along the X-axis, the distance is 50 ft, as seen in Figure 7.31. Verifying this measurement
allows the technician to be confident that the sides are aligned properly at right angles to
the datum point. Once this check is made, the fourth corner can be staked, and it too is
checked using the same technique.
The technician measures and places stakes along the baseline at whatever interval was
chosen for the grid. The technician repeats this process for the opposite side of the grid. The
entire process is then repeated for the remaining two sides, resulting in all four exterior
210 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Y Axis

(Positive Y Axis)
3
Known field of evidence
2

X Axis
–4 –3 –2 –1 1 2 3 4
(Positive X Axis)
–1

Datum point is 0,0 –2

–3

–4

Figure 7.30  Grid systems require setting a datum point and establishing, at a minimum,
positive X- and Y-axes. The datum point is set in the lower left corner of the grid (point 0,0).
Whatever the size of the grid, the upper right quadrant should encompass the known field of
evidence. If for any reason evidence were later found outside of this area, the grid could be
expanded using standard Cartesian coordinates to include any item found in any relationship
to the original grid.

sides of the grid being staked at the appropriate interval. Use of a string or laser will help
keep the stakes on opposite sides of the grid in alignment. Once the outer limits of the
grid are in place, rows of interior stakes are placed across the grid. The technician uses the
exterior sides to ensure alignment of these interior stakes. At any point in the process, the
technician can check an individual interior grid to ensure that it is square by using the
method described in Figure 7.31.
Once all stakes are in place, the stakes should be physically marked, identifying each
uniquely within the Cartesian coordinate system (e.g., stake 0,5, stake 10,10). Once the grid
is in place and marked, the technician triangulates the evidence to the surrounding stakes,
as seen in Figure 7.32. Figure 7.33 is a simplified grid/triangulation measurement log, and
Figure 7.34 is the resulting sketch depicting measurements.
Rectangular coordinates can be used in a grid system as well. This method is often
employed in gravesite excavation, where evidence is measured at right angles to the grid
side. In these small localized areas, rectangular coordinates are an effective and precise
method. For ease of plotting and recognizing where in the overall grid the evidence is,
each intersection becomes a subdatum point that identifies a specific interior grid. In
Figure 7.35, the intersection of 5,5 would be a subdatum point identifying the grid defined
by the stakes 5,5, 5,10, 10,5, and 10,10. The technician would first identify the grid (e.g., grid
5,5) and then the corresponding rectangular coordinates for the evidence using the X and
Y position of the evidence/point in relation to the adjoining grid sides. So in Figure 7.35,
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 211

3 units Pythagorean
Theorem

4 units SA2 + SO2 = H2

5 units 32 + 42 = H2

9 + 16 = H2
3 units 25 = H
5=H

Side Opposite
4 units Hypotenuse
(H)

(SO)
3-4-5 Rule
For any triangle where the sides at right
angles to each other are 3 units by 4 units,
the distance between the two points is 5 units. Side Adjacent (SA)

Figure 7.31  Squaring the grid. After creating X- and Y-axes for the grid, it is important to
ensure that the two lines are at right angles to one another. The most effective way to square
the grid is to apply the Pythagorean theorem or a simplified version known as the 3-4-5 rule.
The interval of the grid junctures is always the same along each axis (e.g., every subgrid is 10 ×
10 ft). Based on this rule, the distance between any point three intervals (30 ft) along one axis
to a point four intervals (40 ft) along an adjoining axis will be equal to five intervals (50 ft). This
relationship is true anywhere in the grid configuration, and a quick measurement between any
two points will verify that portion of the grid as square.

points A and C on the body are measured from the line 5,5–5,10, while points B and D are
measured from the line 5,5–10,5. In print, this all might seem somewhat confusing, but in
practice the technique is efficient and effective. By measuring within the smaller grid (grid
5,5), the technician does not have to extend his or her measurement scale from the outer
edges of the overall grid.

Figure 7.32  Once the grid is in place, the technician measures from the various grid junctures
to the evidence. The mapping method used can be rectangular coordinates or, as in this case,
triangulation.
212 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.33  An example of an evidence measurement log for the field of evidence found in
Figure 7.19 using triangulation on a grid. Note that each stake in the grid has a distinct identity
(e.g., stake 0,10 is zero intervals along the X-axis and ten intervals along the Y-axis).

Triangulation on a Baseline
In situations involving exterior crime scenes where the field of evidence is not too widely
scattered, but where there are no adequate landmarks, the technician can apply a com-
bination of baseline and triangulation, as seen in Figure  7.36. The baseline is created
across the field of evidence. Use of a tape measure as the baseline is unnecessary; a cloth
tape or string will suffice. Once established, both ends of the baseline are triangulated to
surrounding landmarks, fixing the position of the baseline in the scene. The technician
then marks reference points (RPs) at recurring points along the baseline (e.g., every 5 or
10 ft) and uniquely identifies each RP. Once the RPs are marked on the baseline, the evi-
dence is then triangulated to these reference points using standard triangulation rules.
For example, the pants in Figure 7.36 as an irregular object require two measurements
from the center of mass to two different RPs (e.g., RP3 and RP4). The pistol, however,
is a regular-shaped object, and thus two distinct points (the butt and muzzle) are each
measured to two different RPs. The baseline and reference points become the landmarks,
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 213

Figure 7.34  A measurement sketch for the field of evidence found in Figure 7.19 created using
triangulation on a grid. Compare the differences between Figure 7.21, Figure 7.29, and this fig-
ure. All present the same information in different fashions.

and normal triangulation technique is used to fix the evidence as accurately as possible
to the baseline.

Technology in Support of Crime Scene Mapping

Total Station Mapping

Total stations are automated surveying systems that use methods very similar to polar
coordinates. A total station combines transits, lasers, and computer technology. This
allows the technician to capture and download data from the scene into computer-aided
drafting (CAD) software, creating accurate scaled drawings, as seen in Figure 7.37. Total
214 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

10,10
5,10
a

Cartesian Coordinates
25

b
20
c
15
d
5,5 10,5
10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Figure 7.35  The use of rectangular coordinates in a grid system. This method is most effective
when excavating gravesites and other localized areas. The measurements are made from the
evidence to the nearest interior grid side and not to the exterior of the overall grid. The interior
grid in effect becomes a subdatum point. Oftentimes, to aid in making these measurements, a
fixed grid (constructed of wood or PVC pipe) is placed over the area, rather than running strings
between the stakes of the grid.

Survey Mark

Tree

RP4 RP3 Baseline RP2 RP1

Datum Point

Light Pole

Tree

Figure 7.36  Triangulation on a baseline. In exterior scenes that lack specific landmarks, an
effective method is to place a baseline in the scene and establish a number of reference points
(RPs) along the baseline. The evidence is then triangulated to the RPs. As with any baseline,
the datum point must be fixed in the scene (triangulated to the survey mark and the light pole).
If possible, the endpoint of the baseline should be fixed as well (triangulated to the two trees,
with each tree marked with a metal forestry seal).
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 215

Figure 7.37  Total station systems combine methods similar to polar coordinates with com-
puter technology to produce very accurate crime scene sketches. (Courtesy of Nikon, Inc. With
permission.)

station systems found their first foothold in forensics in traffic accident investigation,
allowing accident investigators to quickly and accurately document extensive scenes
involving debris, vehicles, skid marks, and the like. The systems ultimately made their way
into the hands of homicide investigators and have been used extensively in exterior scenes
(Figure 7.38). Eventually, these systems were also successfully used in interior homicide
scenes. Based on their applicability, manufacturers created crime scene-specific systems.
In a manner similar to polar coordinates, total stations create an accurate survey devel-
oped from three basic measurements taken from a known datum point: horizontal angle,
vertical angle, and slope distance. The accuracy of the total station survey is based on the
system’s ability to measure distance and angle. A total station system can measure angles
to a precision of 0.0013888° and distances to within a few millimeters, depending upon the
nature of the internal electronic distance meter (EDM).3 Interestingly enough, the internal
survey that a total station creates requires no reference to magnetic north. Once properly
leveled in the scene, alignment of the total station to magnetic north is an unnecessary
step and one that is not recommended.4 The reasoning behind this is the accuracy of the
total station. Given that the instrument cannot be aligned using a magnetic compass to the
same level of accuracy that the total station can measure an angle, surveying techniques
suggest simply assigning a convenient north. The internal survey created is still accurate
because the total station is set in the scene by sighting on several known landmarks.
216 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.38  Use of a total station system in an exterior crime scene. Although total stations
suffer the same problem as polar coordinates (the need for a line of sight between the instru-
ment and the evidence), total stations allow the investigator to quickly establish multiple
datum points. Even in an area with numerous trees, the system can be moved to accommodate
line of sight while keeping all of the datum points tied to one another. (Courtesy of Roy Heim
and the Tulsa Police Department. With permission.)

The sighting device of a total station is aimed either at a laser reflector, which is posi-
tioned by the evidence in a similar fashion as the elevation rod used in polar coordinates in
the older reflector models, or at a specific point in the scene using the reflector-less mod-
els. The system identifies the horizontal angle in the same way as polar coordinates, but
with a greater level of accuracy. Vertical angle is measured as the angle up or down from
a vertical plumb from the device to the reflector. Unlike the leveled line-of-sight devices
used in polar coordinates, the relative elevation of the total station (higher or lower) to the
evidence is not a matter of concern. Lastly, the total station measures the slope distance
as the distance between the device and the reflector. This measurement is made by the
EDM, an internal infrared or laser measuring device. Using trigonometric relationships,
the computer can calculate the horizontal distance (described in polar coordinates) using
the vertical angle and slope distance, as seen in Figure 7.39. Because these systems are true
surveying devices, they are far more functional than any other method of mapping, par-
ticularly when operating on difficult terrain.
Functionally, any point in the scene can be accurately measured and a total station
records that information. This efficiency allows the technician to take readings from a
variety of points on neighboring landmarks, roads, trees, or whatever, which allows more
detail to be incorporated into the survey. If multiple datum points are necessary, the sys-
tem is moved and the datum points are tied to one another through a technique known as a
back sight. To create a back sight, the reflector rod is positioned at the new datum point and
a reading is taken to this new point from the total station’s original position. The machine
is then moved and leveled at the new position, and a reading is taken with a reflector held at
the previous datum point. The back sight helps ensure that the internal survey is accurate.
Total station systems do present some limiting considerations. First, they are expen-
sive. A reflector-less total station costs between $6,000 and $12,000. Second, the learning
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 217

Vertical Plumb

Reflector
Height
ce
eDistan
Slop
Angle off
Vertical

Horizontal Distance

Instrument
Height
Hypotenuse (H)
Side
Opposite
ø (SO)
Datum Point
Side Adjacent (SA)

SA = H * Cos ø
SO = Tan ø * SA

Figure 7.39  Total stations work on similar measurements as the polar coordinate method, but
the technology enables the system to read a sighting to evidence located either below or above
its position. The sighting device measures the slope distance and the vertical angle. Using
trigonometric relationships, the total station combines both of these known measurements to
determine the true horizontal distance to the object. Elevation is captured in a similar fashion
as polar coordinates. The system takes into account the instrument height and the reflector
height, and then determines the relative elevation of the evidence to the datum point.

curve to properly employ them in the field is a little more extensive than any of the other
crime scene mapping methods, but as technology has advanced, so too has ease of opera-
tion. They are also prone to a variety of errors. These errors can be eliminated with proper
use, but that demands an experienced operator. As with any equipment, the crime scene is
not the place to learn how to use a total station. The most significant error issue involved
in the total station’s use is movement or jostling of the machine once leveled at a datum
point. Remember, the total station is measuring distance to the millimeter and angles to
1/1,000th of a degree. Once the total station is placed in the scene, any rough handling
can lead to minor error. Although the chaotic conditions of the crime scene have dimin-
ished significantly by the time any crime scene mapping is employed, experienced opera-
tors have found it prudent to assign someone to guard the total station once it is placed at
a datum point.5 Another consideration is environmental conditions that affect visibility
(e.g., fog or smoke), as they can also impact the total station survey. Nevertheless, total sta-
tions represent a significant tool for the future of crime scene mapping.

Scan Station Mapping

A total station records specific data points identified by an operator. Although nothing
limits the operator from measuring a significant number of points, because it is a manual
procedure, it takes time. Scan Stations developed out of total station technology and are
the current state-of-the-art commercial survey system. A Scan Station is designed to auto-
matically scan and record literally millions of points in an arc of 360 and 270° around the
218 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

system. The Scan Station can document over 3.5 million points in a mere 2 min, even when
set on a low resolution. Additionally the Scan Station captures a panoramic image of the
survey, which is correlated to the physical points. The data derived from this collection are
called the point cloud. These data accurately capture the three-dimensional aspects of the
scene. Often referred to as total stations on steroids, these systems automate the documen-
tation process significantly and when needed, can be georeferenced with Global Positioning
Systems (GPS) in order to document the scene’s exact location. This latter aspect is impor-
tant when dealing with isolated scenes with minimal recognizable landmarks.
The Scan Station instrument looks much like a total station theodolite. This instrument
is placed in the scene at the discretion of the crime scene investigator. It can be positioned
on the ground or on an object (e.g., a counter) or positioned on its tripod. The placement
position is made after consideration of the field of evidence and line-of-sight concerns.
Setup to completion of the scan requires approximately 20 min per station (station is a
term used to describe the physical scanning position). The Scan Station cannot see through
objects, and of course it has a blind spot associated to its placement position. Therefore,
positioning is not an arbitrary decision and requires some thought, but like a total station,
scans can be completed from various viewpoints and the data combined. Each new posi-
tion is “registered” to previous positions using three mechanisms. The technician can use
a traverse registration, which is similar to conducting a back sight on a total station. The
technician can also use common object registration, in which easily recognized objects are
chosen from the scan by the technician and the system automatically correlates the data
using those objects. Finally, the technician can choose cloud-to-cloud registration.
Scans can also be accomplished from the same position in layers, allowing the tech-
nician to capture superposition issues as well as documenting any hidden evidence lying
beneath other objects in the scene. Of significant value is the scanner’s ability to accurately
capture small details. For example, once a technician positions a trajectory rod in a bullet
defect, the scan data will capture the horizontal and vertical angles of the actual trajectory
rod. Manipulated with software, this virtual rod can then be extended out in a virtual
environment to any scene limits. This will quickly and accurately show limitations of tra-
jectories in that scene. This detail capturing capability can overcome many difficult scenes.
Imagine a large exterior scene where the field of evidence is scattered in knee-high grass.
The artifacts are below the grass and not visible to the scanner, but using surveyor stakes
(as described in Chapter 6), the scan will capture the survey stake. If the stake is appropri-
ately oriented (flag facing the Scan Station), the system will capture not only the specific
position of the stake, but also the placard number. The scan data, when correlated back to
standard crime scene photographs, will allow accurate positioning and documentation of
the evidence. This approach would also be effective when dealing with scattered remains.
Operation of the Scan Station is accomplished either at the device or through a wire-
less device (e.g., a computer or a manufacturer remote). This latter capability can play into
standard risk management concerns, removing the operator from direct and extended
exposure in dangerous environments.
Although relying on well-established technology, the technician is expected to uti-
lize control mechanisms that help validate that the scanner is working as designed. Two
approaches are currently used. The first is to take validation measurements of several scene
characteristics using an independent measuring device (e.g., a laser distance finder). These
measurements are compared against the EDM measurement of the Scan Station to show
the scanner was operating as expected. Another mechanism is the use of a dual-target pole
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 219

available from the manufacturer. The targets on the pole are a known distance (1.7 m ± 1
mm) apart. The dual-target pole is used as a back sight when applying traverse registration,
or it can simply be placed in the scene as a validation mechanism. If a question arises as to the
validity of the scanned data from a specific scene, the distance between the two targets on the
pole is used to show the system was acting within limits and accurately measuring objects.
The value of Scan Station technology is primarily twofold. First, it captures data that
simply would not or could not be captured through manual mechanisms. Once completed,
the technician can revisit the virtual scene and obtain measurements of objects or to and
from objects that were not initially considered important. These are data that in a manual
effort wouldn’t have been collected at all. Second, the data collected can be viewed in a
number of different fashions. This includes immediate data dumps while on scene that
can be viewed by command and staff, allowing them to virtually see a scene without com-
promising scene integrity or complete integration of the point cloud into CAD and three-
dimensional software, for forensic animations (see Figure 7.40). The point cloud produced
by the scan will effectively meet a number of needs throughout the life of the investiga-
tion, from initial analysis and on-scene command and control, for use in extended formal
analysis after the scene has been released, right up to trial for demonstrative exhibits that
aid the jury and the court. These systems are not cheap, but they should also be looked at
as more than a crime scene documentation tool. They have many governmental/police uses
in addition to their crime scene capability, such as homeland security considerations (e.g.,
pre-event scanning of high-risk buildings like hospitals and schools).
In terms of technology aids, there are certainly some limiting factors above and
beyond price. There simply are some scenes (e.g., a scene located in a thick stand of trees)
that technology tools can’t handle and standard crime scene documentation procedures
have to be used, but all in all these technology devices offer significant enhancement to
the crime scene investigator. There is little question that they are the future of on-scene
documentation. An additional aspect of total station and Scan Station technology is the
ability to produce very effective demonstrative aids for the courtroom. These virtual views

Figure 7.40  Scan stations allow immediate creation of virtual views that can be viewed by
detectives and command staff. Additionally, nearly any measurement required can be obtained
from the point cloud. (Courtesy of Tony Grissim and Leica-Geosystems.)
220 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 7.41  A demonstrative aid developed for the courtroom. The scene and evidence items
were captured with the total station, then using information associated with the trajectory, the
vehicle, victim, and trajectory were inserted to demonstrate the general orientation. Technology
aids allow us to put the juror in the scene in nearly any orientation or position required. This
allows him or her to better grasp the testimony presented. (Courtesy of David Dustin, Dustin
Productions, Atlanta, Georgia.)

allow the jurors to visualize ideas and concepts that are difficult to explain otherwise (see
Figure 7.41).

Summary

The crime scene sketch serves to graphically demonstrate the position and interrelation-
ships of the various items of evidence within the physical scene. When combined with
photographs and notes, the sketch provides a greater understanding of the scene. This
document is of value to the investigators for developing and checking investigative theo-
ries, but it can also assist the jury in recognizing the various interrelationships within the
scene.
The effort directed at crime scene mapping and sketching by the technician is very
much a product of the severity of the crime and how important the various interrelation-
ships of the scene are to any investigative questions that may exist. In simple crimes such
as burglaries, the more basic methods may be effective at detailing these interrelationships.
In more significant cases such as homicides, the techniques employed should “fix” the evi-
dence as precisely as possible in the scene. No matter which method is employed, a crime
scene sketch has five basic elements: heading, diagram area, legend, title block, and scale
and direction notations.
The vast majority of crime scene sketches are produced in a bird’s-eye view; i.e., the
view is from above looking down. From this point of view, all horizontal surfaces are eas-
ily demonstrated. Additional variations of view, such as the cross-projection sketch or the
elevation sketch, allow the technician to more effectively demonstrate evidence present on
vertical surfaces.
Crime Scene Sketching and Mapping 221

The methods used for crime scene mapping include rectangular coordinates, where
the technician takes two measurements from the evidence at right angles to the surround-
ing surfaces. Although rectangular coordinates effectively place evidence in the scene, they
are not the most precise method for fixing evidence. Another method of fixing evidence
is baseline coordinates. In this method, a baseline is extended out along a cardinal direc-
tion, and a measurement is made from the evidence at a right angle to the baseline. The
most effective method of fixing evidence is triangulation. In the triangulation technique,
two to four measurements are made from two distinct points on the evidence to distinct
landmarks in the scene. The number of measurements is a function of whether the item
is regularly shaped or irregularly shaped. Regularly shaped items require four measure-
ments, while irregular items require two measurements. Polar coordinates use a sighting
device to establish an azimuth reading from a known point to the evidence. This is com-
bined with a linear measurement between the two points, effectively fixing the item in the
scene. Total station and Scan Station systems capture crime scene data using computerized
sighting devices. The data collected are used to produce computer-generated crime scene
sketches and three-dimensional virtual scenes.

Suggested Reading
Hochrein, M.J., Crime Scene Mapping, Federal Bureau of Investigation, St. Louis, MO, 2002.
Ramirez, C., Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL, 2011.

Chapter Questions
1. What is the primary purpose of the crime scene sketch?
2. What are the five essential elements of the crime scene sketch?
3. What are two variations in creating a sketch that will effectively allow the crime
scene technician to document evidence on vertical objects?
4. In rectangular coordinates, how are fixing measurements made to surround-
ing walls?
5. Give an example and describe fixing a regularly shaped object with triangulation.
6. In what circumstance is baseline mapping most effective?
7. What two additional steps are required when using polar coordinates to map a
scene in which elevation data are required?
8. In what situation are rectangular coordinates on a grid particularly effective?
9. In what situation would triangulation on a baseline be effective?
10. Why is it unnecessary to orient a total station to true north?

Notes
1. PowerPoint is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corp.
2. Skinner, M. and Lazenby, R.A., Found! Human Remains, Archeology Press, Simon Fraser
University, Burnby, British Columbia, 1983, p. 19.
222 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

3. Cruikshank, K.M., Use of the Total Station: Introduction and Basic Techniques, Portland State
University, OR, n.d.
4. Cruikshank, K.M., Use of the Sokkia Set 4Bii Electronic Total Stations, Portland State University,
OR, 1997.
5. Meaux, C., Harris County Sheriff ’s Department, verbal discussion, February 2003.
Narrative Descriptions
Crime Scene Notes and Reports
8
As discussed in Chapter 6, crime scene documentation consists of four key elements: pho-
tographs, sketches, and the narrative descriptions found in both notes and reports. This
chapter outlines the nature of the narrative documentation.
The crime scene technician has the purpose and mission of objectively identifying the
condition of the entire scene, which will lead to recognition of events that occurred at a
scene. If the technician is to accurately document the condition of the scene in as pristine
a condition as possible, it is imperative that narrative scene descriptions be:

• Detailed, with all pertinent facts and conditions documented

• Accurate, with few inferences or subjective evaluations included
• Understandable, i.e., logical and organized

Keep in mind that while creating the narrative description, rarely does the technician
have any idea of the issues and alibis that may be in contention at trial. So the narrative
must be completed in the hope of answering any and all questions that may ultimately be
posed by the investigation or trial. Any given observation may be the critical detail that
will support or refute some claim regarding what happened on scene. Besides answer-
ing investigative issues, there is another simple fact that the crime scene technician can
be assured of: the report narratives are the primary document that outsiders will use to
judge the overall competency of the investigation. Counsel and other investigators view
the narrative report, and portions are often read to the jury. Media can and will access
this document as well. The narrative need not be a prize-winning piece of writing, but the
professionalism of the technician will be judged based upon its content.

Investigative Notes

Investigative notes are a staple of any crime scene examination. The crime scene tech-
nician’s notes should begin with notification of the crime, identify specific actions upon
arrival, and provide a clear and detailed record of all observations and actions taken
while in the scene. Descriptions of techniques employed, areas where the techniques were
employed, and the results of such techniques are all appropriate for inclusion in the notes.
This is particularly important when a method meets with negative results.
When an investigative technique is employed with positive results, additional effort
in the way of photographs, annotations to the crime scene sketch, and specific mention
in the crime scene report is used to document that result. For example, the recovery of a
latent print or chemical enhancement of a bloody footwear mark will merit specific men-
tion in the crime scene report. Positive effort always leads to descriptive documentation
in the final report; the technician found evidence and wants others to know what was
found and where he or she found it. A negative result, however, causes the technician to

223
224 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

move on to additional areas or attempt some other technique. Technicians rarely report
all of the places where investigative effort met with negative results while fingerprinting
or using some other investigative process. Similarly, technicians often do not comment
on situations in which they observe no evidence, such as rooms that are undisturbed.
Unfortunately, lawyers have a way of making much ado about nothing with regard to such
negative results. They often make claims of inappropriate effort or improper procedures
on the part of police, using this claim as a basis to let the jury know that the police “lost
the crucial exculpatory evidence.” Granted, in some instances a failure to act by the crime
scene investigator will result in the loss of evidence, but far too often this claim is nothing
more than rhetoric used to confuse the jury. Therefore it is important that the technician
comment in some fashion on efforts that fail as well as making observations on conditions
that are otherwise unremarkable. In the formal crime scene report, negative efforts may
get nothing more than a sentence or two. For example, a simple statement such as “exami-
nation of the west wall failed to locate any latent fingerprints” clearly makes the point
that effort was expended but met with no result. Whenever possible, the technician’s notes
should explain what methods were employed and specifically where they were employed.
If challenged in court, the notes provide documentation that will effectively eliminate wild
and unsubstantiated claims by counsel.
Other areas of specific interest in the technician’s notes include actions recorded
during the initial observation and during the overall observation steps defined in
Chapter 4. All notes should accurately reflect action and effort, but when describing the
scene in these two specific steps, it is imperative that the notes be detailed and concise.
Synopsized paragraphs with generalized information serve little, if any, function at a
later date when trying to answer questions. Detailed narrative descriptions, however,
will often assist the investigator in evaluating some point that may not be clear from a
photograph or sketch. The following is an example of the detail that might be appropriate
given what can be observed in Figure 8.1.

Describing the Victim

There is a white male present in a prone position on the east side of the floor approxi-
mately 15 ft from the south end of the hallway. The victim appears to be in his mid-
30s, short in stature, with brown hair. The victim is lying in the hallway with his head
oriented to the north, legs oriented to the south. The victim’s left hand is outstretched
to the west, palm down. The right arm is bent at the elbow, with the right forearm
directly adjacent to the east wall. The hand is positioned palm down. The victim’s feet
are spread slightly, with both feet facing to the east. The victim’s head is on the left
side, facing east as well. The victim is wearing a pair of dark blue pants, a light gray
T-shirt with a multicolored emblem on the back top third of the T-shirt. On the left
shoulder (west side) of the T-shirt there is an evident defect in the shirt. The defect is
circular in nature with slightly abraded edges and surrounded by what appears to be a
saturation of blood. There is no evidence of stippling or powder burns in or around the
defect. The saturation stain extends in a generally circular shape around the defect for
approximately 5 cm in all directions. There are no other injuries, bloodstains, or exu-
dates noted. Approximately 5 ft to the north of the victim’s head there is a .38-caliber,
21/2 in. barreled revolver. The revolver is oriented with the barrel pointing to the north-
west, and the base of the grip oriented to the south. There are what appear to be four
Narrative Descriptions 225

Figure 8.1  An overall photograph of a body in a crime scene. The narrative description sup-
porting this photograph cannot be simply: “There is a body on the floor, with a revolver 2 ft to
the north.” Narratives are used to supplement photographs, answering details the investigator
can see while on scene, details that may not be evident from the photograph alone.

unexpended bullets in the cylinder and one expended bullet that is directly beneath
the hammer.

Including all of this detail might seem unnecessary, particularly given that complete
photographic coverage of the scene will be forthcoming as another product of the crime
scene processing. But any of these details could be important in trying to understand what
did or did not happen. Often small details that are present in the notes allow the investiga-
tor to verify some detail that is only suggested by a photograph. Once again, the notes in
conjunction with the sketch and photographs are used to corroborate and support each
other. Using the detail in the written notes, the crime scene technician will ultimately pull
out salient facts and observations for inclusion in the formal crime scene report. Crime
scene notes may never be used for anything other than this purpose, but the bottom line is
that all of the details of what the technician observed are still documented. If some question
arises at a future date, the notes may be functional in answering the issue. Far too often, the
author encounters crime scene documentation in significant scenes (e.g., murder scenes)
that is both incomplete and worthless for answering these critical questions. Whether this
is an organizational training failure, a lack of leadership, or individual incompetence, it is
unacceptable by any standard. Peers and the criminal justice system alike ultimately judge
the professionalism of the crime scene technician and his or her organization based upon
the documentation effort.
226 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 8.2  This single page represents the totality of investigative effort by a crime scene
investigator (notes, sketch, and crime scene report) at a homicide scene. This document fails to
discuss bloodstains present in the scene and other evidence. The scene was more than a four-
sided box, yet this documentation fails to provide any clue as to the character or condition of
this scene. This is more than incompetence; this is laziness and fails on every level to meet the
basic duties expected of a crime scene technician.

Case Example: Professionalism Demonstrated through Work Product

Figure 8.2 represents the total scene documentation produced by a major metropolitan
detective bureau, including the “crime scene sketch” in a robbery homicide crime scene.
The organization involved is not a five-man police department, but rather an organiza-
tion with a dedicated homicide division serving a city with a population of more than
1 million. This documentation was backed up by a whopping total of seven crime scene
Narrative Descriptions 227

Figure 8.3  This figure represents a single page of detailed notes taken from 23 pages of notes
prepared by one crime scene investigator at a homicide scene. This type of crime scene docu-
mentation is accurate, detailed, and clearly shows the competence and professionalism of the
writer.

photographs. Figure 8.3 represents a single page of notes from a single investigator at a

homicide scene. The supporting notes of this investigator alone included an additional
23 pages of documented effort of similar detail and quality. The overall crime scene
documentation from his organization included over 250 photographs and multiple to-
scale crime scene sketches.
In evaluating the professionalism of the organization that produced Figure 8.2, one
might quickly assume mere incompetence of the detective. But the example demon-
strates far more than incompetence. This organization clearly lacks leadership. This is
a homicide scene, and the death of a human being in this organization rates a single
page. In this organization, the detectives have become nothing more than garbage col-
lectors. One must either believe that the chief of police has no concept of the quality of
effort expended by his or her detectives or simply does not care. The chief of detectives
and whatever supervisory investigative staff that may exist in the chain of command
228 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

have absolutely no excuse. As they are paid to supervise the investigations, either they
are not doing their jobs or they have made the decision to accept such mediocre effort.
In contrast, Figure 8.3 demonstrates obvious concern on the part of the individual
investigator, as well as an organizational mindset that places value on quality and pro-
fessionalism. This is an organization where standards are set and individuals are held
accountable to those standards. Organizations of this nature build pride and compe-
tence in their investigative personnel.

After comparing the quality of work product in Figures 8.2 and 8.3, every crime scene
technician must ask himself or herself a simple question: Which work product would I pre-
fer to have my name associated with? Pride, professionalism, duty, no matter what moti-
vates the technician; something must drive the technician to meet his or her obligations
to achieve an acceptable standard. There simply is no excuse for failing in this endeavor.
To prevent that point from being misused—and specifically for the sake of any attorney
reading this passage—the author would reiterate that rarely will good crime scene docu-
mentation be without error or omission. It is impossible to capture every nuance in the
crime scene or realize the importance of every small detail. No one expects the crime scene
technician to be perfect. The technician’s standard is not zero defects, but neither is it zero
effort, as demonstrated in Figure 8.2. There are a lot of different levels of competence dem-
onstrated every day in crime scene work, but honest competent effort is readily recognized.
The crime scene notes will tell the tale. Either the technician was competent and actively
pursued his or her duty at the scene, or the technician was merely a garbage collector.
Although it should not be necessary, the retention of crime scene notes is an area of
concern requiring comment. Notes are the investigator’s best evidence. Notes usually hold
far more specific detail than the formal crime scene report, and more importantly, they are
a contemporaneous record. Although they may not be works of art or completely error-
free, notes tend to be more accurate as to the true conditions observed. The final report
will be neatly printed and spell-checked, but do not doubt that errors can creep into a final
report. Typical mistakes include compass directions that become mixed up, or numbers
related to lengths, or heights that are subsequently transposed during dictation or final
typing. That is not to say that similar errors will not be found in the technician’s notes, but
because the notes are contemporaneous, they are far less likely to hold these transposition
and typographical errors. For this reason alone, once the final report is written, notes do
not become redundant or unnecessary. They cannot be disposed of. The crime scene tech-
nician’s notes should become an integral part of the case file and maintained for as long
as the formal case file. Even today, the author continues to hear of police organizations
that not only suggest that investigative notes be destroyed once the report is prepared, but
demand it! There is no nice way to describe this action; it is reprehensible at best and more
to the point, unethical by any standard of modern investigations.

Crime Scene Reports

Ultimately, the technician must combine all of the salient facts, observations, actions, and
effort into a functional organized report for inclusion in the investigative report. Once
again, there is no one right way to format the crime scene report, particularly given the
Narrative Descriptions 229

variety of investigative report formats that exist from agency to agency. Whatever the for-
mat used, the technician must ensure that the crime scene report is not:

• A cursory discussion of the central theme items found in the scene (e.g., the body,
the gun) and nothing more
• A rambling discourse on why the suspect “had to” have committed the crime
• A description of only the evidence that fits a particular hypothesis

The difficulty of creating a crime scene report for any complex scene is in maintaining
some level of organization that allows all pertinent aspects to be discussed and yet does
not end up rambling on and on. The technician must pull the salient facts from his or her
notes and observations, as not every single detail can be included, while still attending to
the important aspects that will allow the reader to understand the scene. The most effective
way of doing this is to organize the crime scene report into sections that deal with specific
issues. This format works effectively whether the crime scene report is a stand-alone docu-
ment or simply a supplemental report filed by the technician. A suggested format for these
sections would include:

• Introduction
• Characteristics of the scene
• Conditions of the scene
• Environmental conditions
• Factors pertinent to entry and exit
• Scene documentation
• Collection of physical evidence
• Search for latent prints
• Additional examinations

Introduction Section
The introduction is intended to identify who worked the scene examination, where the
scene was, the time and date of the examination, and a short explanation regarding the
reason for the scene examination. An example of the introductory section might include
the following:

Example: Introduction
Between 1400 and 2335 h, 10 January 2002, Detectives G. Smith and R. Hanson con-
ducted an examination of a reported death scene located in Apartment 3A, 4657
Jonesboro Road, Lake City, Georgia. The following conditions, observations, and
actions were noted.

Characteristics of the Scene

The “Characteristics of the Scene” section is intended to provide a general description of
the scene (e.g., building, room, or area) and associated features of the scene such as doors,
windows, openings, and geographical features of exterior scenes and their relationship to
230 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

the surrounding area. Furniture, appliances, and other standard artifacts that would be
present in the scene day to day are described in some detail as well. This section describes
stable and static conditions at the scene. Some examples for a “Characteristics of the Scene”
section include the following:

Example: Characteristics of the Scene—Exterior Scene

The rape scene is located on the northernmost section of the LC Center, a small busi-
ness strip mall. Smith’s Laundry is the last business located on the northern side of the
one-story strip mall. All businesses are contained in a single building. From the north-
west corner of the laundry, the building extends at least 150 ft to the south. A sidewalk,
4 ft in width, runs along the north side of the building from the northwest corner of the
laundry, 60 ft to the east. At this point the building extends to the south then east again,
creating a small corner. A chain-link fence begins at this corner and extends east to the
rear of the strip mall; the fence effectively encloses and eliminates access to this rear
area. To the immediate north of the building is a small parking area, which is bordered
by a landscaped barrier that rises at least 10 ft in elevation to the parkway. Lighting
on the north side of the street is minimal, and the rear area where the dumpster is
located is dark. The view of passing traffic on the parkway is significantly obscured by a
number of pine trees that line the roadway. The sidewalks are of concrete construction,
while the parking area is asphalt.

Example: Characteristics of the Scene—Interior Scene

5396 Lakeland Road is a single-story cinderblock business, one part of a larger strip
mall operation. The business is set up as a karaoke bar. The main business entrance
is located on the west side of the building; the entire west wall consists of tinted pane
glass. There are two employee/service entrances located at the rear (east side) of the
building. The southernmost service entrance on the east side of the building was the
apparent point of entry. This door consists of a heavy metal door, with a single in-door
locking mechanism. Mounted on the inside of the door there is an additional sliding
bar mechanism. This entrance leads through a small tiled foyer, into the primary busi-
ness. The main floor plan is set up with multiple small tables and chairs (15 tables), a
number of video machines, and a small service counter. The main floor is tiled. The
service counter is located in the northeast corner of the main floor. The counter is set
in an L-shape, extending off the east wall, with the L opening to the north wall. On
the customer side of the counter, the height of the counter is approximately 5 ft. On
the service side of the counter, the height is approximately 4 ft. On the section of the
service counter extending from the east wall, there is a single cash register. There are
a number of additional items present on the counter to include a receipt book, a note-
book, and miscellaneous items. Adjacent to the east wall is a sound system/amplifier.
An entryway to the immediate east of the service counter leads into additional storage
and service areas. There is a single wood-frame door located to the immediate north of
the service counter; this door is closed and locked.

Example: Characteristics of the Scene—Interior Scene

The apartment is a ground floor, two-bedroom apartment. There is one entryway lead-
ing from the north side of the building into the living room and one entryway leading
Narrative Descriptions 231

from the north side of the building into the kitchen. A screened-in sitting porch is pres-
ent on the west side of the building, with no entrance/exit way from the porch itself to
the exterior. The sitting porch and living room are connected through a double sliding
glass door. The living room connects to a small hallway and dining area, which is to the
immediate south of the kitchen. The hallway extends south approximately 20 ft, with
two bedrooms on the west side and a bathroom on the east side. The master bedroom
is located at the far southwest side of the apartment, and contains a single queen bed,
a standard dresser, and one night table. There is a large window in the west wall, with
curtains in place. The smaller bedroom has two twin beds in it, a chest of drawers, and
one small night table. It has a single window with small venetian blinds, closed and in
place. The kitchen, where the victim is located, is oriented with cabinetry and sinks on
the east side, with a washer and dryer located at the far northeast side. There is a cabinet
and stove combination on the northwest side and a refrigerator in the southwest corner.
A small window is present in this area that looks out on the front porch.

Conditions of the Scene

The “Conditions of the Scene” section is intended to identify the specific conditions that
are pertinent to the investigation. This includes identifying the cleanliness, level of disar-
ray, descriptions of items of evidence (including transient evidence), and other pertinent
aspects. Rooms or areas that are undisturbed or lack specific items of evidence should
be commented on in some fashion (e.g., the kitchen was found to be unremarkable).
The “Conditions of the Scene” section, in any significant case, can become extensive.
Oftentimes, the most effective method of describing the conditions is to break this sec-
tion into subsections, dealing with each subset room or area. Whenever possible, do not
include subjective factors and inferences formed from the scene condition in this section.
Try to report the conditions objectively without inference. This can be very difficult to
accomplish, particularly when describing circumstances involving negative evidence, i.e.,
situations in which something that the technician would expect to be present is not.

Example: Condition of the Scene—Exterior Scene

The sidewalk leading from the front of the strip mall along the north side of the build-
ing is unremarkable. There is a large pile of pine needles 44 ft east of the northwest
corner of the sidewalk, which extends into the parking area at least 7 ft. The pine nee-
dles are undisturbed. Alongside the chain-link fence is an area of mud and debris and
another pile of pine needles. Examination of the entire area fails to show any recent
disturbance. A check after completing the scene examination determined that simply
walking in this area caused evident footwear marks. At the end of the fence line, the
building orientation creates another corner. Adjacent to this location is a dumpster,
set approximately 5 ft east of the building. Once again the area is muddy, with another
pine needle collection created as a result of runoff. The only disturbances in the mud
are those caused by the movement of one wheel of the dumpster. The total movement
evident is only 2 or 3 in., and it is unclear if this is recent. Between the building and
dumpster are two pieces of paper. One is a local newspaper, dated January 19, 2000; the
other is an 8 × 10 in. folded piece of paper. Beyond being waterlogged, neither paper has
been stepped on, muddied, or damaged. Beyond the dumpster, the parking lot extends
232 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

eastward to the very rear of the strip mall grounds. There are substantial amounts of
red clay present, which is situated in the most direct line of departure for anyone leav-
ing the area to the rear. There are no footwear marks or disturbances present with the
exception of large tire marks that appear to be from a commercial-sized vehicle. These
marks do not appear fresh. This rear alleyway behind the strip mall extends to the
south to North Jones Drive, but a locked chain barrier prevents entry or exit of vehicles
on the south side. Beyond those items described, there was nothing else remarkable
noted.

Example: Condition of the Scene—Interior Scene

The service entryway on the east side of the building was standing open, with evident
pry marks caused by a two-pronged instrument. The overall blade width of this instru-
ment appears to be in excess of 1½ in. The metal screws holding the sliding bar on the
inside surface of the door have been forced from the metal frame door, allowing the
bar to disengage. Examination of the tiled floor of the foyer fails to locate any evident
dust prints.
The main café is unremarkable, with the exception of a missing cash drawer from
the cash register. There were no evident pry marks present on the opening to the reg-
ister. Approximately $24 in U.S. currency is located in the rear of the cash register
cash drawer opening, suggesting that some item was inserted in an attempt to open
the drawer. Although the position of the cash register on the counter indicates it was
displaced and moved in some fashion, other items on the counter show little evidence
of displacement or movement.
Examination of the main room located three dust prints of possible significance.
One was located on the tile floor of the main room (placard 2), leading to the foyer
and the point of forced entry. This shoe mark was a complete tread, possibly of a heavy
running shoe or boot. The orientation of the mark was with the toes pointed to the
southeast. An additional mark was located on the main floor (placard 3). This mark was
a tennis shoe style tread. The toes were oriented facing south. A third dust print was
located behind the counter facing the south (placard 5) but failed to produce a lift of
any value. A fourth dust mark was evident on the wood door, to the immediate north
of the service counter (placard 4). This door was later identified as additional storage
and the location of the video tape recorder for the surveillance system. This print was
similar to the tread design observed behind the counter. No other items appeared to
have been damaged, and there was no immediate evidence to suggest that the internal
doors had been jimmied in any fashion.
It should be noted that the alarm system was active and operational. However,
motion detectors in the building are set to only activate when there is motion in or
around the west wall (the main entrance). While conducting scene processing, these
motion detectors did not activate until the main doors were approached.

Example: Condition of the Scene—Interior Scene Involving a Body

The living room was unremarkable, with no signs of evident disturbance. The din-
ing room was unremarkable as well; there were a pair of men’s shorts and a shirt
draped across a small wooden stool, located in the northeast corner of the dining
area. The master bedroom was unremarkable. The bed was made and no bedclothes
Narrative Descriptions 233

were evident on the floor. The smaller bedroom was unremarkable, with both beds
made and no apparent clothing out. The bathroom was clean, unremarkable, with no
evident wet linen, or toiletry items out. In the southeast counter area of the kitchen
there was a cup of coffee, which was approximately 2/3 full, a spoon was sitting adja-
cent to the cup. Alongside this area was a small religious type book, opened to page
64/65. The annotations in the book were apparently messages for the day. The book
was open to the appropriate timeframe (Sunday 7/15). The sink was cluttered, but no
dirty dishes were present, nor was there evidence in the immediate area of any meals
being prepared. The stove had a single clean aluminum pot on it, but this item was
empty and not on a burner. Neither the burners nor the stove was on. There was a
telephone located on the south wall, on the east side of the kitchen. The phone was on
the hook. There was a small plastic bag with garbage present on the top of the dryer.
With the exception of the victim’s presence, the kitchen is unremarkable with no sign
of disturbance.
An elderly black male was lying on the kitchen floor. He was wearing a white T-shirt
and a white pair of briefs. His head was oriented to the north, with his feet extending
back to the south. His position was immediately north of the counter that held the cup
of coffee. The man’s right arm was bent at the elbow, almost parallel with the upper
arm. This arm was lying adjacent to the right side of the body, against the dryer and
cabinet. The left arm was beneath the body, bent at an approximately 45° angle. There
were no evident injuries noted on the posterior side of the individual and no defects in
the clothing. There was no incontinence noted, other than minor urine discoloration
in the briefs. Although not significant in volume, a brown and red exudate was evident
to the east side of the individual’s face. Rigor was set in the lower and upper extremi-
ties. No evident livor was noted. Upon turning the individual over, a 45 mm laceration/
abrasion was noted over the right eyebrow co-located with a large knot. The injury is
linear and lies relatively horizontal with the eyebrow. There are no injuries evident
on the knees or elbows, and no other injuries or defects are noted on the body and
clothing.

Environmental Conditions
The “Environmental Conditions” section reports on any weather or scene conditions noted
at the time of the investigation. If a known timeframe exists for the event or crime, this is
a good place to identify any known weather conditions that existed during that timeframe
(e.g., type of precipitation, amounts, and temperature ranges). The impact of any existing
conditions on the scene should be noted as well (e.g., rain washing away bloody areas, wet
shoe prints drying on asphalt).

Example: Environmental Conditions—Exterior Scene

On arrival the roadway and entire scene was wet, with light to medium rain falling as
the scene was processed. The rain had been steady for some hours prior to the reported
event. The rain did not impact on the characteristics of the scene, but made movement
across the muddied areas impossible without leaving some evidence.
234 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Example: Environmental Conditions—Interior Scene

A light rain fell over the previous two days. As a result, the sidewalk leading to the
apartment was noted to have standing water present. At the time of scene examination,
external temperatures were in the 50s. The apartment thermostat was set at 82° and the
heater was on. The air inside the apartment was noted to be hot and dry.

Factors Pertinent to Entry and Exit

The “Factors Pertinent to Entry and Exit” section is intended to deal with both known and
possible avenues of approach and departure from the scene. First and foremost, the technician
should identify the objective characteristics of the entry/exit. However, some level of inference
is also necessary in evaluating the likelihood that a given approach was or was not used.

Example: Factors Pertinent to Entry and Exit

The victim placed the suspect in the scene as having approached from the east or rear
of the strip mall. It would nearly be impossible for anyone exiting this area on foot to
pass without running across multiple locations of mud and debris. Any vehicle located
at the rear would have to exit via the north side, adjacent to the laundry. As previously
noted, there is no evidence to suggest such an entry or exit.

Example: Factors Pertinent to Entry and Exit

There was no forced entry evident. The lock on the garage door was intact when fire
units arrived. The window in the east wall was determined to have been devoid of any
pane material, prior to the fire. Galvanized steel beams that are still in place, how-
ever, prevented access by a person, but objects could easily be introduced through this
opening.

Scene Documentation
The “Scene Documentation” section is intended to describe the basic efforts taken to pho-
tograph and sketch the scene. The technician can describe the equipment used, the nature
of the documentation created (e.g., a rough sketch, detailed total station sketch), and if
considered necessary for immediate reference, details about which photo placards relate to
which items of evidence.

Example: Scene Documentation

Photographs were exposed of the general area using a Nikon F2A camera, employing
both a 50 mm lens and a 55 mm macro lens, with 400 ASA color film. A rough scene
sketch was prepared detailing the general characteristics and measurements.
In the photographs, placards were placed at four locations depicting the following:

Placard 1: Large pile of pine straw adjacent to the north sidewalk, undisturbed
Placard 2: Smaller pine straw pile adjacent to the fence line, undisturbed
Placard 3: Pine straw collected from runoff at the corner of the building, undisturbed
Placard 4: Location of the two papers, between the dumpster and building
Narrative Descriptions 235

Collection of Physical Evidence

The “Collection of Physical Evidence” section can be used in a variety of ways depend-
ing upon custom, SOP (standard operating procedure), and the nature of other evidence
collection documents that the organization utilizes. If custom or SOP demand creating a
consolidated written log of all evidence collected at the scene (which many organizations
use), then there is no purpose in recreating that information in the report (Figure 8.4). In
that instance, a short description of major items of evidence that the technician feels are
important can be included. This will provide an immediate reference to the reader, without
having to refer to the evidence log. If the organization does not use a consolidated evidence
log, then a description of what was seized and where it was found is a very functional inclu-
sion to this section of the report.

Search for Latent Fingerprints or DNA

Since fingerprints and DNA are standard items of interest at nearly any scene, a section
of the crime scene report is directed at both. This section should identify the areas where
fingerprinting was attempted, where it succeeded, and the nature of the prints recovered
(e.g., partial latent prints, palm prints, footprints). In the current environment where trace/
touch DNA examinations are an integral part of major crime scene investigations, an addi-
tional but similar section detailing DNA collections efforts is appropriate.

Figure 8.4  A crime scene evidence log is often used in lieu of other documents to show where
all items of evidence were located in the scene and by whom. When such a document is used,
it is rarely necessary to repeat this information in the narrative report.
236 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Example: Search for Latent Fingerprints

A brush-and-powder examination was made of the door and door frame. The interior
handle of the apartment was superglued and then dusted. Several partial latent prints
were recovered here. The coffee table in the living room was examined under ALS,
using fluorescent powder, resulting in the recovery of three more partial latent prints
and one partial palm print.

Additional Examinations
Once these standard sections are dealt with, the remaining format of the crime scene
report is open to describe any additional evaluations or examinations, dependent upon
the specifics of the crime and the efforts directed at the scene. Sections or descriptions that
might be included are:

• Evident fire patterns and fire flow evaluations at fire scenes

• Trajectory analysis in shooting scenes
• Bloodstain pattern analysis in violent scenes
• Electrostatic lifter examination for footwear
• Specialized chemical enhancements (e.g., luminol, amido-black, or fluorescein
enhancements) and their results

General Considerations
Reporting investigative conclusions is one of the more difficult aspects of the crime scene
report. Conclusions are for the most part a function of a crime scene analysis, which is
dealt with in depth in Chapter 14. Whatever the nature of the report format utilized by an
organization, it is best to try and keep a clear distinction between those parts of the report
that define objective observations and actions (processing) and any conclusions drawn
from those observations and actions (analysis).
Remember also that the crime scene report is a postscene product, created as a result
of effort and observations made on scene and from the detail found in contemporane-
ous notes, photographs, or sketches. It is not possible for the technician to include every
single act and observation accomplished at the scene, nor is it necessary. But considerable
thought by the technician is important to prevent arbitrarily rejecting for inclusion in the
final report any information and observations that perhaps do not support a particular
hypothesis or that in some fashion may be exculpatory. Objectivity is the critical compo-
nent of any final crime scene report. It is also important that the technician review the
final document thoroughly. Details of directions, measurements, and orientation are often
inadvertently skewed in the final document. Typographical errors in this type of informa-
tion can affect the substantive information contained in the report. These aspects should
be checked against contemporaneous notes and sketches produced while on scene.
Finally, remember always that although the technician has a responsibility and duty to
accurately report the details found in the scene, that detail will often come back to haunt
him or her. Counsel on both sides will effectively try to misrepresent the crime scene report
using that detail. Trials are anything but pure searches for truth. Counsel (prosecution and
defense) will actively seek to present the technician’s information out of context if they
Narrative Descriptions 237

feel it serves their purpose. Unfortunately, there is no easy answer for this dilemma. One
cannot ignore the duty to factually report information. Thus the often encountered answer
presented by jaded investigators of “report as little as possible” is not appropriate. One-
page documents without detail serve no function in answering the questions the court will
expect answered. Never doubt that the technician will be held accountable for whatever he
or she writes, but he or she must write in sufficient and appropriate detail.

Summary

Crime scene documentation in the form of narrative descriptions is produced at two distinct
periods. The first includes all of the crime scene notes taken contemporaneously while con-
ducting investigative efforts on scene. The second includes the crime scene report, which
consolidates and synopsizes the relevant details that the crime scene technician thinks are
important. Both narratives must be detailed, accurate, and understandable. Short, synop-
sized narratives that speak to only central theme items in the scene will serve little function
in supporting other crime scene documentation or in resolving specific investigative issues
that may develop months or even years later.
Crime scene notes should document all of the investigative effort. This is particularly
important when a technique is employed on scene but achieves negative results. Since
no evidence was located, rarely will this information be listed in any other crime scene
document. A mention in the notes will prevent attorneys from misrepresenting what was
or was not present in these areas.
The format of crime scene reports is very much a matter of custom and SOP. Whatever
the format, it is best to break the report into functional paragraphs that deal with specific
issues and aspects of the scene. This format should include a description of the static condi-
tions of the scene, its current condition, environmental aspects, a discussion of entry and
exit points, and any specific techniques employed to recover physical evidence. Whatever
the level of effort spent in writing a narrative description of the crime scene, the technician
can be assured that everyone will judge his or her professional competence and the quality
of the investigation based on this document.

Suggested Reading
Bevel, T., and Gardner, R., Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene
Reconstruction, 2nd ed., chap. 9 and 10, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2001.
Geberth, V.J., Practical Homicide Investigation, 3rd ed., chap. 4 and 22, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1997.
Ramirez, C., and Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL, 2011.

Chapter Questions
1. Name the three general attributes that all crime scene report narrative descrip-
tions should have.
2. Why is it important to document investigative efforts that fail to produce evidence?
238 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

3. Why must the crime scene technician retain crime scene notes even after the crime
scene report is completed?
4. What type of information is described in the “Characteristics of the Scene” section
of the crime scene report?
5. What type of information is described in the “Conditions of the Scene” section of
the crime scene report?
6. Why is some level of inference allowable in the “Factors Pertinent to Entry and
Exit” section of the crime scene report?
Basic Skills for Scene
Processing
ROSS M. GARDNER
WITH CONTRIBUTIONS BY DON COFFEY,
9
JEREMY JOHN, AND TOM ADAIR

Every crime scene represents an individual challenge. Each has its own unique problems
and its own unique issues, and the scene technician must meet these with a mixture of skill
and knowledge, all the while employing a healthy dose of flexibility. Beyond these unique
challenges, within almost every crime scene, the technician will encounter basic evidence
recovery issues. The skills needed to meet and resolve these problems include using light
technology, recovering fingerprints, and casting a wide variety of impressions.

Applying Light Technology

Clean white light is the most important tool the crime scene technician uses in any crime
scene. Light allows the technician to see, which allows the technician to identify evidence.
If evidence is not seen, then it is not collected; missed evidence serves no function in defin-
ing the nature of the event being investigated. So the most basic consideration of light (as
detailed in Chapter 5) is ensuring the presence of sufficient illumination on scene in order
to conduct a thorough search. The full spectrum of light, however, serves a far more impor-
tant role at the scene than ever before. Alternative light sources (ALSs) allow the crime
scene technician to employ a variety of narrow wavelengths of the light spectrum in an
effort to identify, visualize, and document a variety of different types of physical evidence.
As Houseman and Maloney wrote, “As forensic investigators, limiting ourselves to evi-
dence which is only visible under the visible light spectrum would be like refusing to allow
a criminalist to use a microscope in a trace evidence examination.”1 In order to understand
the full application of an ALS at the crime scene, it is necessary to look into the nature of
light and basic theories of radiant energy.
The nature of the most basic properties of light and radiant energy continues to elude
modern science. Visible light is simply that portion of the electromagnetic spectrum that
we humans visualize as colors. Light has properties consistent with particles and proper-
ties consistent with waves. To date, physics has yet to define a consolidated theory of this
very complex phenomenon. Despite its dual nature, all radiant energy is measured by the
length of its wave (from peak to peak), and this quality is measured in nanometers (1 bil-
lionth of a meter). Thus the radiant energy spectrum we visualize as color includes violet
(400 nm) through red (700 nm).
However, the spectrum of visible light is just a small part of a much broader band of
radiant energy, which includes everything from gamma rays to radio waves (Figure 9.1).
The radiant energy spectrum starts with gamma and x-rays (1 to 200 nm) and includes
the phenomena we feel as heat (12,000 nm). An interesting feature of these radiant energy
waves is that the lower the wavelength, the greater is the energy level. The greater the energy

239
240 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

400 nm 700 nm

1–200 nm 200–400 nm 700–2,000 nm 2,000–12,000 nm

Gamma/X-rays UV Energy Visible Light Infrared Energy Heat Energy

Figure 9.1  The full range of the light and radiant energy spectrum includes gamma and x-rays
up to heat energy and radio waves. Visible light is only a small portion of this spectrum, rang-
ing from 400 to 700 nm.

level, the greater the penetration the wave has on an object. A classic example of the power
of this penetrating wave is the x-ray. X-rays, with their very short wavelengths, penetrate
soft tissues more effectively than they do the more dense bone structures. As a result, by
capturing the x-rays that pass through the tissue on an x-ray film, medical professionals
can observe and visualize denser objects (bones, bullets, and other foreign bodies) and
damage, such as bone fractures (Figure 9.2). The x-rays’ behavior as a penetrating wave
provides a rather significant utility in forensic science.
When light energy encounters an object, it can act on the object in four basic ways.
The energy will be reflected, absorbed, transmitted, or converted (or any combination of
the four). Reflected light defines the color of any object we visualize; for instance, blood
absorbs all light rays except that of red. The red wavelengths are reflected back, and we
visualize them as the color red. White represents a reflection of all wavelengths, while the
color black is the absorption of all wavelengths. In between these two points, we see a vast
array of wavelength combinations that allow our eyes to distinguish about 250 different
shades of color. Transmission of light relates back to its penetrating power; light energy

Figure 9.2  The penetrating power of radiant energy has been applied in medical imaging for
a number of years. This technology has been an integral part of forensic work, as seen in this
radiograph, which demonstrates the presence of a projectile in a corpse.
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 241

can pass through an object. In terms of visible light, the object involved plays a significant
role in whether light is transmitted or not (e.g., an object that has translucent or transpar-
ent properties is a good transmitter of light). The final behavior of light—conversion—is
of significant concern to the scene technician. Light energy can be converted from one
wavelength to another, creating the condition known as luminescence. This luminescence
occurs as both fluorescence, which happens so long as the object is exposed to an active
energy source (e.g., the continued presence of an ALS), and phosphorescence, in which
the object continues to give off light in the converted wavelength even after removal of the
energy source.2 It is in the conversion of light energy where the ALS finds its widest use at
the crime scene. Items that would otherwise be difficult (if not impossible) to see undergo
fluorescence when exposed to varying wavelengths of light energy, thus allowing the evi-
dence to be visualized, photographed, and collected.
To understand conversion as it is utilized at the crime scene, remember that radiant
energy acts as both a wave and a particle. When an object is exposed to a radiant energy
(e.g., an ALS), some of that energy in the form of specific wavelengths is reflected back, giv-
ing the object color. At the same time, some of that energy is absorbed. The absorption of
light energy as particles (photons) excites existing electrons in the object. As these excited
electrons stabilize and fall back to a normal energy state, they release the extra energy once
again as light. But this release is at a much lower state of energy than the original energy
wavelength (see Figure 9.3).
An ALS allows the crime scene technician to create light energy of a specific wave-
length. Then, by employing an appropriate barrier filter for the eyes or the camera lens,
the technician eliminates the original wavelength, leaving only the converted light energy
from the object to be observed. Through the barrier filter, the technician will observe
the fluorescence. As it happens, many objects of significant concern to the crime scene

1. Excitation Filter
4. Barrier Filter
Creates specific wavelength
Barrier filter keeps original wave-
of light.
length from passing, but allows
fluorescence energy to pass and
be seen.
1

3. Release of Energy
The excited electrons fall back
2 3 to normal energy state, releasing
2. Light Strikes Substance energy as light. This release is
Some energy is absorbed, exciting electrons at a lower energy state than the
in the substance. Some energy is reflected. original light.

Figure 9.3  Conversion of light is an important technique in forensic work. An ALS produces
a specific wavelength of light, part of which is reflected and part of which is absorbed. The
absorbed energy excites electrons in the substance, and when these electrons fall back to a
normal state, the excess energy is released as light but at a different wavelength. A barrier filter
allows the original wavelength to be eliminated, while the remaining fluorescence is left to be
observed by the technician.
242 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

technician fluoresce brightly, including biological fluids like semen and spittle, and trace
evidence such as a variety of fibers.
Converting the visible light spectrum in this fashion is certainly an important aspect
of using light in the crime scene, and the full spectrum of radiant energy utilized in foren-
sics is far greater than one might imagine. Its recognition certainly predates the advent of
lasers and other high-capacity ALS. As mentioned previously, medical imaging in the form
of x-rays has been a standard feature in forensic medicine for some years. Predating the
development of the “blue light” or ALS was the Wood’s lamp or miner’s light, an ultraviolet
(UV; 200 to 400 nm) light source that was used extensively in searching out stains in scenes
or recognizing alterations of documents as early as the 1940s. Additionally, infrared light
sources were once quite popular in surveillance photography, allowing photographs to be
exposed in complete darkness using an infrared flash without the subject ever realizing a
photo had been taken. Today, the spectrum involved in forensics includes everything from
x-rays to heat energy.
Depending upon need and circumstance, light technology can be used in a variety of
applications in any crime scene. The following is a discussion of the applicable wavelengths
and their crime scene function.

Shortwave Ultraviolet Light (180 to 254 nm) and

Reflected Ultraviolet Imaging Systems (RUVIS)

Shortwave UV (UVB/C) light is used primarily in an application known as reflected UV

imaging systems (RUVIS). In a nutshell, RUVIS technology allows the visualization of latent
prints before dusting or development on most nonporous surfaces, as well as visualization of
other evidence such as latent footwear patterns. It provides the technician with an enhanced
search and documentation capability. RUVIS systems are not associated with traditional ALS
systems and are sold as separate kits. When using RUVIS, the technician is equipped with
both a shortwave UV light source and a handheld video viewer. The viewer combines video
with technologies developed in night vision optical devices to enhance the UV image. As a
result, without any other processing, latent prints in the scene are detectable to the technician
through the video viewer. RUVIS technology is also effective at enhancing cyanoacrylate or
“superglue” latent prints. Although current systems are unwieldy and still require effort to
properly manipulate, they offer a capability beyond any other technology currently available.
The primary RUVIS system includes a UV/C light source and the imager. Two filters
are supplied, one clear and one mirrored. The clear filter is used for photographing back-
ground patterns or for viewing bloodstain patterns in a luminol reaction. The mirrored
filter is used for examining undeveloped fingerprints and can potentially locate latent foot-
wear marks. RUVIS operates using only UV/C (254 nm) light; all other light is blocked from
the imager by the filter. This means RUVIS can be operated under any lighting conditions.
When searching for latent fingerprints, the imager is held at a 45° angle, anywhere from 5
to 10 ft from the surface being examined with the imager lens set at f/3.5. The primary issue
for success of RUVIS is adjusting the angle of incidence for the light source. The UV/C light
source is best when oriented to the surface at a 45° angle. As viewed through the imager,
latent prints appear light silver or gray (see Figure 9.4). Once located, for photography pur-
poses the imager is brought in closer, reoriented to a 90° position, while the UV/C light is
adjusted to produce the best contrast with the least glare. An interesting aspect of RUVIS
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 243

Figure 9.4  Reflected ultraviolet imaging system (RUVIS) images. The print on the left was
superglued. The print on the right is completely undeveloped. Latent prints, when viewed
with RUVIS, appear silver or light gray. (Courtesy of David Alford, FBI ERT (Ret.), Quantico,
Virginia, and Sirchie Fingerprint Laboratories, Youngsville, North Carolina.)

is its ability to remove offending background patterns on which a latent may be deposited.
The background can prevent visualization of the latent details. As will be discussed for IR
light, some backgrounds will not reflect specific wavelengths of light. This may allow the
entire background pattern to be removed from the picture, or at least lightened in such a
fashion that the latent print is more visible (see Figure 9.5).
Photographing the undeveloped latent using the RUVIS imager is a bit complicated.
The imager must be set (adjusted for the best image given the circumstances) and then
attached to a digital camera, which involves using both a 58 mm adapter and a series of set
screws. The resulting photographs, however, are sufficient for examination and evaluation.
Current R&D efforts include a simpler camera adapter, which will accept a variety of digi-
tal cameras, as well as making the overall system easier to use in the scene.
Although designed as a latent print search tool, through practical use it became evi-
dent that RUVIS will also visualize latent footwear marks that are not apparent under nor-
mal or even oblique lighting. Figure 9.6 demonstrates a latent footwear mark as observed
under normal light and under RUVIS. Although certainly a significant search tool, an
additional advantage to RUVIS technology is the ability to document a latent print without
any development. Developing a latent print requires the technician to touch the print and
surface with powders and brushes, which always represents a potential to damage the print
itself. RUVIS is literally a no-touch technique that captures all of the print detail in situ.
After initial creation of the primary RUVIS system, known as the Krimesite, Sirchie
Laboratories developed its cousins, which are also handheld devices. These devices are
intended as scan-and-find search devices, operating with a wider-angled lens, that make
searching the scene for prints quicker and easier. Thus one technician can search using
the smaller device, while a second technician documents any latent prints found using
the Krimsite® tool. This technology has significant potential in the crime scene search and
could ultimately revolutionize our approach to searching scenes.
244 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Clear Visible Filter Mirrored RUVIS Filter

Figure 9.5  RUVIS can assist in removing background patterns. The photograph on the left is
the area imaged with a clear filter under RUVIS; note the background lettering. The image on
the right is the same area viewed with the barrier filter, where only UV light is transmitted
through to the lens. The background is eliminated and the latent print visualized. (Courtesy
of David Alford, FBI ERT (Ret.), Quantico, Virginia, and Sirchie Fingerprint Laboratories,
Youngsville, North Carolina.)

Figure 9.6  Through practical experience, it became apparent that many latent footwear marks
are visualized under RUVIS. The small inset photograph is a latent shoe mark visualized using
RUVIS that overlays the wood floor seen in the larger photograph. (Courtesy of David Alford,
FBI ERT (Ret.), Quantico, Virginia, and Sirchie Fingerprint Laboratories, Youngsville, North
Carolina.)
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 245

One caution when searching with a RUVIS is in recognizing that UV/C is destructive.
UVB/C energy penetrates human skin and can cause disruption in the form of UV burns,
similar to sunburns. Additionally, UV eye protection is necessary when employing any UV
light source, including RUVIS. UV/C can also damage DNA in the scene; therefore any
areas in the scene where potential DNA exists should be protected from extended undue
exposure to the UV light source prior to DNA collection efforts.
Other handheld UVB/C lights are available for a variety of purposes in the crime lab.
Many biological fluids fluoresce under UVA/B/C. As described above the technician should
use these devices with caution.

Longwave Ultraviolet Light (365 to 415 nm)

Longwave UV (UVA) has myriad applications in the crime scene without the potential
side effects of shortwave UV (UVB/C). One effective use of UVA light is as a quick check of
possible bloodstains. A bloodstain exposed to any UV light source absorbs all light, reflect-
ing nothing back. Thus the stain will appear black under UV. Although not a conclusive
test for blood, it is an effective presumptive test and can often eliminate the unnecessary
collection of stains that appear to be blood but which are actually from some other source.
This property is also effective for providing sufficient contrast of bloodstains that are found
on red- or violet-colored objects. Such stains often fade into the background so well that
it is impossible to photograph them. UVA can aid in creating sufficient contrast between
the background and stain to allow the stains to be visualized in a photograph, as seen in
Figure 9.7.

Normal Light

UV Light

Figure 9.7  Bloodstains on some purple or purple-red backgrounds are difficult to visualize as
seen in the inset. Under normal light they may be nearly impossible to photograph. A UV light
source causes the stains to absorb all light and appear black, giving greater contrast with the
background.
246 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

UVA is also an effective tool for visualizing biological stains such as semen, spittle, or
saliva. These stains will fluoresce a lime green color when observed with UV, even without
a barrier filter. Although UVA has a less penetrating wavelength than UVB/C, as a precau-
tion the scene technician should wear UV goggles when employing a UVA light.

Near-UV and Violet/Blue Light (415 to 485 nm)

Near-UV and violet light serve a variety of functions in the crime scene. At 450 nm, this
wavelength—when combined with a yellow barrier filter—can be effective in searching for
and visualizing bite marks and bruises on human skin. Wavelengths between 455 and 485
nm are used to visualize fluorescein reactions with latent blood. The barrier filter employed
in this method is typically the yellow filter, but an orange filter can be effective as well, par-
ticularly when using the higher wavelength. The use of fluorescein is described in detail in
Chapter 11. At 455 nm, biological fluids are easily observed in combination with an orange
barrier filter. At 485 nm, latent fingerprints developed in ninhydrin can be visualized using
a yellow barrier filter.

Crime Scene Search with Blue Light (485 to 530 nm)

Depending upon the particular light source involved, many crime scene search (CSS) fil-
ters employ a broad passband filter encompassing wavelengths between 390 and 520 nm.
This is especially true for a typical “blue light” source. Most ALS systems also have a CSS
setting, but these are often a more discrete blue/cyan wavelength (490–520 nm). In combi-
nation with an orange barrier filter, either will cause any number of biological fluids, fibers,
or hairs to fluoresce (Figure 9.8). If engaging in a general fiber search, the technician should
consider using a wide range of wavelengths, as no one wavelength will affect every single
dye encountered. In searching for hairs, remember also that red and blond hairs tend to
fluoresce, while darker hairs do not. Oblique white light may be the most effective method
for locating dark hairs. Wavelengths of 525 to 530 nm, in combination with an orange bar-
rier filter, are also excellent for developing and visualizing latent fingerprints with many of
the fluorescent powders available.

Orange-Red (570 to 700 nm)

The orange and red wavelengths are effective for viewing inks on items present in the scene
as well as questioned documents at the crime lab. Wavelengths of 570 to 700 nm may assist
in visualizing subcutaneous bruising, depending upon the age of the bruise. A red barrier
filter is used at these higher wavelengths.

Infrared (700 to 2,000 nm)

In the past, infrared light was primarily a tool of the crime laboratory, most often used
in questioned document examinations. For example, when different inks are utilized in a
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 247

Figure 9.8  A small fiber fluorescing brightly in the presence of an ALS light source and
orange barrier filter. This fluorescence allows the crime scene technician to more readily
observe these small trace items of evidence. (Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden.
With permission.)

forged document, applying various combinations of IR light and barrier filters may allow
visualization of the altered aspect of the document. With the advent of digital camera
technology, infrared photography now represents a significant tool for the crime scene
processor as well. Although infrared photography is certainly nothing new, the techniques
and tools using a standard film camera are quite demanding and unforgiving. With digital
camera technology, the IR photography technique is accomplished with minimal train-
ing and experience. Infrared digital cameras, however, are expensive. If an IR camera is
available to the crime scene processor it will assist in documenting several very important
forms of on-scene evidence.
To understand IR photography, consider that humans visualize light in a very discrete
spectrum that entails wavelengths between 400 nm (purple) and 700 nm (red). Ultraviolet
(UV) light lies just below the visible spectrum while infrared (IR) light lies just above the
visible spectrum. The reader will recall that some substances fluoresce when exposed to
UV light, while blood, because it absorbs all light, will appear black under UV light. This
fluorescence or absorbance of the UV light results in an increase in contrast with back-
ground substrates, allowing better visualization. Infrared light is used in a similar way to
increase contrast in photographs, but in a slightly different fashion. Some substrates reflect
infrared light. An IR reflective surface that would appear dark or multicolored in normal
light will be visualized as white or lighter when viewed only with IR light. This results in
increased contrast when visualizing or photographing dark evidence such as soot, gunshot
residues (GSR), or blood.
To understand how IR light works consider that the charged coupling device (CCD)
in a digital camera captures the light reflected from an object in the range of 380 nm
up to about 1,000 nm, wavelengths outside normal human perception. When the CCD
reads this additional IR light, it often results in unnatural colors producing a slight red hue
248 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

along with washed-out shades of green. To combat this problem, camera manufacturers
place a filter in front of the primary mirror of the camera, preventing the introduction of
the unwanted wavelengths, ensuring natural color photographs. Digital IR photography,
however, capitalizes on this capability of the CCD by removing the internal camera filter.
External barrier filters are then used to prevent visible light from entering the lens, while
allowing different levels of IR light to pass through to the CCD. This technique reduces
or eliminates colors reflected by the visible light, resulting in a substrate that is white or a
light shade of gray. Evidence such as blood and soot found in gunshot residue absorb the IR
light, so they appear dark on this lightened background. Figure 9.9 depicts a dark-colored
fabric with both gunshot residues and bloodstains. The visible light photograph on the
right prevents effective visualization of the evidence. The photograph on the left depicts
the same fabric photographed with an IR camera. With the majority of the visible light
eliminated, the fabric appears white and this increased contrast produced by the IR light
allows the viewer to better see the full extent of the pattern. In many instances, the IR light
will completely eliminate background colors and or patterns (see Figure 9.10).
The primary issue for the IR photographer is that there are few, if any, rules that pre-
dict what substrates will reflect the IR wavelength. Particularly when discussing clothing,
this IR reflecting character appears to be more a function of the dyes used to produce the
substrate color than the actual substrate. For example, in Figure 9.9 the dark blue cotton
fleece is IR reflective, so the fabric appears light. Figure 9.11 depicts a pair of jeans also
made of cotton where the dye is not IR reflective. Under IR light, this fabric appears much
as it would if seen in visible light.
Lacking any predictability, in practice the photographer must use a trial-and-error
approach, first checking to determine if the substrate is IR reflective and then finding the
best barrier filter that will produce the greatest contrast. This is accomplished by setting

IR Lighting

Normal
Lighting

Figure 9.9  The combination of digital imaging and infrared light now allows the analyst to
capture evidence on hard-to-see backgrounds. The photograph on the right was taken in normal
light. The photograph on the left was taken with an IR camera. GSR residues at placard A are
far more apparent, as are the location and nature of the bloodstains on the jacket.
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 249

Figure 9.10  IR photography allows for better contrast and can be effective in removing back-
ground patterns. The photograph on the left was taken under normal light and shows the plaid
fabric pattern. The photograph on the right is the same area photographed with an IR camera.
The colors and thus the pattern are completely removed and a GSR pattern becomes evident.
(Courtesy of Jeff Borngasser, Oregon State Crime Lab, Portland, Oregon.)

Normal IR Lighting
Lighting

Figure 9.11  Not all background problems can be resolved with IR photography. In these photo-
graphs, the dye of the jeans is not IR reflective and appears much as it would under normal light-
ing conditions. Dyes, not fabrics, appear to be the controlling factor regarding IR reflectivity.
250 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

the IR camera up on a tripod and rather than threading the filters to the lens, holding each
IR filter up to the lens while viewing the result in the cameras preview or live mode. Using
the live image on the camera LCD screen, the best filter is selected. The photographer may
be tempted to introduce a strong IR light source (e.g., using an ALS and streaming pure
IR onto the surface being photographed), but this is often counterproductive. Introducing
too much IR often results in overexposed (bleached out) photographs. Normal on-scene
light sources such as sunlight, incandescent or halogen bulbs, or even a flashlight (any
non-LED style works) typically produce sufficient IR light. By adjusting the f-stop, the
photographer can usually find an effective exposure for the conditions encountered. One
final consideration when photographing with IR light is the focus point. On first glance
it might seem that focusing the camera in visible light, without a barrier filter in place,
would be a prudent technique, but the resulting IR photograph will be slightly out of focus.
IR light focuses at a slightly different point than visible light, so focusing the lens must be
accomplished with the barrier filter in place.
In addition to bloodstains and soot associated with GSR, bruising on both live and
dead individuals is an appropriate subject for IR photography. Bruises are produced by
blood that escapes into the tissue after injury; therefore the bruised area will absorb the IR
light like all blood, while surrounding tissues tend to be more IR reflective. IR photogra-
phy of bloodstains, soot deposits, and even bruises takes some practice and is best accom-
plished under controlled conditions (e.g., in the lab or evidence processing room). When
items are located at the scene that cannot be collected or if collection has the potential to
alter or destroy the original context of the evidence, IR photography is an appropriate on-
scene approach.
There are only a limited number of infrared cameras currently available on the mar-
ket. If availability or cost is an issue, a functional approach is to create one. Organizations
routinely update older equipment with newer models. This is particularly true of digital
cameras, where the newer models offer higher-resolution photographs. But the replaced
cameras are still quite functional. Many of these older digital cameras, which would oth-
erwise sit in a storage room, can be professionally altered to remove the internal IR filter.
Once this is accomplished, the altered camera is effectively no different from the infrared
designed cameras. All the organization needs to purchase are the IR filters. One addi-
tional approach to infrared photography is night vision-capable video cameras. These are
generally part of the technical equipment for surveillance units. They can also be used to
document stains and other IR appropriate subjects on evidence or surfaces in the crime
scene. If the video camera has no still mode capture capability, digital captures of the video
imagine may be possible using secondary software. Although the quality of the resulting
photograph may not be as good or as detailed, shooting IR subjects with a video camera
will suffice to better visualize these hard-to-photograph subjects.

Heat Energy and Thermal Imaging (12,000 nm)

Thermal imaging is a very fluid and changing technology. Thermal imaging devices are
routinely employed in police air operations (e.g., forward-looking infrared radar (FLIR))
because they allow police officers to see in total darkness. More recently, thermal imag-
ing devices have been used to identify travelers with raised temperatures as a means of
preventing the spread of infectious disease. Heat energy as a crime scene application is
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 251

Figure 9.12  Thermal imaging offers promise for the future of forensic work. This photograph
shows a handprint observed on a wall using a handheld thermal imaging device. The hand was
placed on the wall for 30 s, and this image was taken 10 min later. The residual heat of the
hand is still evident, even in this first-generation device. If the technology advances, imagine
the possibilities for searching crime scenes for fingerprint evidence. Thermal imaging devices
are currently used to search for decomposing corpses, grow houses (marijuana), and other heat-
related signatures.

a relative newcomer. Thermal imaging FLIR systems have been used effectively to locate
decomposing bodies and to find hot spots in fire scenes. This technology is now available
to law enforcement in the form of a portable, handheld, battery-operated device. It has
been used successfully to distinguish between recent and older tire marks in serious acci-
dent scenes and works as a surveillance tool as well. In terms of our typical crime scene
application, the question is just how quickly this technology will advance. Figure 9.12 is a
video capture by a handheld thermal imaging device showing a 10 min old handprint on
a wall. Despite the time lapse, the thermal imager is able to “see” the temperature differ-
ences between the wall and the radiant energy left by the hand. Imagine the utility of what
future devices might do. Both RUVIS and thermal imaging technology have the poten-
tial to make locating fingerprints and trace DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) a focused effort,
compared with the general search techniques we now utilize.

Choosing an Alternative Light Source

There are a number of variations of ALS technology available to the crime scene techni-
cian. In most departments, the decision of whether or not to use ALS is often a function of
budget. Whatever the department’s budget, never doubt that some form of ALS is neces-
sary for conducting a valid crime scene search, particularly in serious crimes against per-
sons (e.g., rapes, aggravated assaults, and homicides). Unfortunately, not every department
can afford to outfit its crime scene team with a fully functional ALS. In deciding which
type of light source to purchase, the technician must consider how the device will be used,
the capabilities of the device, and budget constraints.
At the low end of the equipment spectrum, an organization may choose to buy a simple
UVA or CSS light (e.g., a blue light). As discussed previously, UVA lights are available as
a stand-alone product. CSS lights run the gamut from small light-emitting diode (LED)
252 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

penlights, to quartz-halogen flashlights outfitted with a broadband excitation filter, to even

larger handheld lights with similar broad excitation filters. The cost of these devices can
run anywhere from $50 for the small penlights to several hundred dollars for the more
sophisticated devices. However, these devices suffer from one primary limitation: they
offer only a single wavelength for use in basic crime scene searches. They are rarely effective
for providing clean, color-corrected white light for a general scene search, and they provide
no flexibility when additional wavelengths are needed for other specialized applications.
A fully functional ALS system and its cousin, often referred to as a forensic light source
(FLS), offer a wider variety of wavelengths while also serving as a source of white light.
With a fully functional ALS, the technician simply dials up a specific wavelength or rotates
through a variety of preset filters attached to the ALS light wand (Figure 9.13). An ALS is
also capable of directing clean white light in hard-to-search areas, or it can be used to illu-
minate items of evidence during detailed examinations (see Figure 9.14).
The FLS system—a hybrid light source that lies somewhere between the ALS and the
typical blue light—attempts to provide utility to the technician without the associated
costs. Technology advances have benefited the forensic community and specifically the
quality of the FLS systems available over the past decade. Forensic lights systems are much
more common, and with competition between manufacturers, quality has increased while
cost has decreased somewhat. These types of systems are much more capable than they
were a mere 10 years ago. The output of these handheld devices has increased dramatically,
making them far more effective in the crime scene search (see Figure 9.15). They have the
ability to provide discrete wavelengths across the full spectrum of light as well as produc-
ing clean white light for search efforts (see Figure 9.16).

Figure 9.13  A fully functional ALS device. An LED displays the current wavelength of light,
which is controlled by the operator using a small remote control. The light wand consists of a
liquid light guide. The cost of these fully functional devices is restrictive for small departments.
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 253

Figure 9.14  A handheld ALS used to illuminate fluorescent fingerprint powder. This unit
comes with several filters that can be exchanged in the unit for specific purposes. Although
such units do not provide the full flexibility of a lab-based ALS, they do offer far greater capabil-
ity than a simple “blue light.”

Figure 9.15  The power and illumination available in current forensic light sources make them
much more effective tools at scenes of crime, without demanding that the technician operate
under darkened conditions. (Courtesy of Labino SB, Solna, Sweden.)
254 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.16  Current forensic light sources are lightweight, extremely portable, powerful in
terms of illumination, and provide a broad spectrum of lighting capability, including clean
white light for searching. Although expensive, these are indispensible tools for the crime scene
investigator. (Courtesy of Labino SB, Solna, Sweden.)

Recovering Fingerprints

The ability to lift fingerprints is a basic skill necessary to process a crime scene. At the same
time, fingerprinting is also very much an art form. Anyone can throw powder around a
scene, but not everyone can routinely or effectively recover usable latent fingerprints. With
a little practice, however, technicians can master the basic techniques and learn to recover
fingerprints from most of the surfaces they are likely to encounter.

The Science of Fingerprints

Fingerprints have been used as a means of identification and as evidence in criminal

investigations for well over 100 years. The science of fingerprints is based on two fun-
damental principles relating to friction ridge skin, which is found on the palmar side of
the hands and fingers and the plantar side of the feet. Friction ridge skin aids in grip and
locomotion. If the skin on the fingers and feet were smooth like other skin on the body,
picking up and holding items and walking without footwear would be tedious; remember
humans haven’t always had shoes. These two well-established principles are individuality
and permanence.

• Individual. No two fingerprints have ever been found to be exactly the same; not
from direct comparison, classification systems, computer databases, or even from
identical twins. Fingerprints are unique to the individual.
• Permanence. Fingerprints develop about the third month of gestation and remain
consistent throughout the life of an individual barring permanent damage to the
papillary ridges or total decomposition.
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 255

Since scientists first began to closely study friction ridge skin in the late 1600s, these
principles have been found to be unchanging and trustworthy. In the late 1800s, the use of
the individuality of friction skin began its role in personal identification and as evidence
in crimes. Fingerprints establish presence at a scene or contact with an item. This can
be extremely convincing evidence in a court case, which is why fingerprint evidence has
continuously come under such close scrutiny over the years. Each challenge to the science
has only helped to strengthen and prove its foundational principles. Further research in
the science is always welcome, bringing about additional supportive evidence with each
survey and test.
Fingerprint comparison involves the comparison of known prints of an individual
with impressions of fingerprints. These prints may be latent, patent, or plastic.

• Latent prints. Are effectively invisible. They occur as a result of oils and secretions
from the friction ridge surfaces being deposited through contact. Latent prints
generally require some sort of development to visualize, but can occasionally be
visualized with oblique lighting or RUVIS.
• Patent prints. Are visible prints. They result from friction ridge surfaces that
were contaminated in some fashion (e.g., blood, paint) coming into contact with
another surface.
• Plastic prints. Are true dimensional impressions. They result when a friction ridge
surface is impressed into a pliable material such as window putty.

Known fingerprints are compared by their recorded impressions, as opposed to

comparing actual skin. Record prints, controlled ink recordings of an individual’s fin-
gers, are compared to scene prints (latent, patent, or plastic) developed on evidence or
at scenes of crime. Major case impressions involve both standard 10 print as well as all
friction ridge surfaces (palms, sides, and full lengths of each finger). For purposes of this
text, a fingerprint may refer to any friction ridge surface. Latent finger and palm prints
techniques apply equally to friction skin impressions from the toes and soles of the feet.
The standard methodology of fingerprint comparison is the ACE-V method. ACE-V
stands for analyze, compare, evaluate, and verify. R.A. Huber initially introduced this
method of comparison in 1959 as ACE; later the verification step was added. ACE-V is
now widely accepted as the methodology to be used in fingerprint comparison by latent
print examiners worldwide. The ACE-V methodology, which includes both qualitative and
quantitative analysis, produces conclusions that are reproducible. The comparison and
evaluation of friction ridge skin is based on the examination of ridge flow, ridge paths,
location, direction, spatial relationships, ridge structure, edgeoscopy (the microscopic edge
detail of a ridge), and poroscopy (the study of the pores in a print). During contact with a
surface, these details or minutiae can be transferred.
The first concern of the latent print examiner is whether a print is suitable for identifi-
cation. An initial determination of suitability by an examiner indicates that a latent print
contains a sufficient quantity of information such that only one source is capable of having
produced the print. Suitability for identification is a subjective opinion based on objective
criteria involving the clarity and uniqueness of the ridge characteristics occurring in the
latent print, where a competent and trained examiner determines that sufficient clear and
unique ridge characteristics exist to identify it to its source. Suitability is not determined
on scene by the crime scene technician. Any print that an examiner feels contains sufficient
256 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

quality and quantity of friction ridge detail may ultimately be identified to, or eliminated
from, a single source. To establish identification there is no minimum number of friction
ridge details required, as there is no scientific basis for a minimum number of individual
ridge characteristics to effect a positive identification.

Classification vs. Identification

Terminology can be critical especially in topics as specific and specialized as forensic sci-
ence. Forensic expert’s ears stand to attention at the misuse of a forensic term, and in the
science of fingerprints, no two terms have been as misused or misunderstood as finger-
print classification and fingerprint identification. This misuse occurs at crime scenes, in
courtrooms, and certainly in fictional television depictions of the application of forensic
fingerprint science.
In short, fingerprint classification involves the filing and retrieval of fingerprint cards,
and fingerprint identification involves the comparison of known prints (record prints)
with unknown prints found at crime scenes for the express purpose of identification.
Classification is the application applied to fingerprint pattern interpretation, ridge
counting, and ridge tracing. Ten-print classification is the process used to define an alpha-
numeric formula to a set of record fingerprints of an individual for the purpose of filing
and retrieval. There are many classification systems in the world, too many to discuss in
this chapter. The primary system of classification used in the English-speaking world is the
Henry classification system, of which there are many variations. Since its beginnings, the
FBI has used the Henry system to fill its file drawers and maintain the nearly 65 million
sets of recorded fingerprints in the United States.
Three basic fingerprint patterns are used to effect a fingerprint classification. These
are the arch, loop, and whorl (see Figure 9.17). But classification deals with more than just
the basic fingerprint pattern; it also involves ridge counts in the loop pattern, direction
of ridge flow in the whorl pattern, ridge disruption in the arch pattern, whether a ridge
flows in or out of patterns, and whether the ridge flows toward or away from the thumbs.
Classification alone is never to be used to effect an identification.
Identification is the method of analyzing, comparing, and evaluating a latent finger-
print to record or known fingerprints for the purpose of determining if there is a match or
identification. Comparing fingerprints is a more highly developed skill than classification.
Upon close examination of record fingerprints, the details in the friction ridge surfaces

Arch Loop Whorl

Figure 9.17  When classifying fingerprint patterns, the three major patterns considered are the
arch, loop, and whorl.
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 257

Dot
Ending Ridge

Bifurcation
Dot
Ending
Ridge

Bifurcation

Figure 9.18  In pursuing identification of a pattern, the fingerprint examiner considers the
minutiae within the fingerprint. Some of the more important minutiae are ending ridges, bifur-
cations, and dots.

are unique to every finger. These details are comprised on three major types: dots, ending
ridges, and bifurcations (see Figure 9.18). A fingerprint dot is a ridge that is no longer than
it is wide; an ending ridge is where a ridge comes to an abrupt ending; and a bifurcation is
where a fingerprint ridge diverges, or separates, as in a fork in the road.
As opposed to classification, it takes only a small area of latent fingerprint to affect
identification. An approximate 10 mm circle of friction ridge skin typically holds enough
fingerprint detail to make an identification.
Another significant difference between classification and identification is that a finger-
print classification technician can classify without latent fingerprints, but a latent finger-
print examiner cannot identify fingerprints without a record or known fingerprints.

AFIS Fingerprint Systems

The Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) saw its beginnings in the late
1970s as a result of the explosion in computer technology, and as computer technology
has advanced so too has AFIS. AFIS is a computer-driven fingerprint storage, search, and
retrieval system capable of databasing hundreds of millions of record fingerprint cards
nationwide. The AFIS searches latent prints against record fingerprints utilizing an algo-
rithm system combined with a manual encoding process linked to system filing codes; it
then selects the most likely matches or AFIS candidates. Candidate lists are developed and
the candidates are assigned scores in rank order according to matching features. Unlike
television, the top scoring candidates are not always matched. The technology isn’t quite
that good yet. Although computer-matched prints are used in security systems, they are
seldom used in a criminal fingerprint search. The AFIS/latent print examiner conducts the
final analysis (identification) of the fingerprint; thus a human accomplishes and verifies
all identifications. The value of AFIS lies in its filing and retrieval capability. The system
258 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

can manage and search literally millions of records, a feat that cannot be accomplished
manually. Prior to the advent of AFIS, technicians had to physically search classification
files to narrow down the search. Record fingerprints would then have to be analyzed and
compared by hand searching minutiae for matches. This task could take weeks or months
to manually complete. Now, even a large AFIS system requires only minutes to develop a
candidate list.
One issue affecting AFIS is that many different types of AFIS systems developed over
the years resulting in incompatible search and storage systems, and this prevents collab-
orative exchange of AFIS databases. Only in the past decade, through standardization,
have these smaller AFIS systems been able to interface with the larger national systems.
The recent NAS report cited this as a national problem; however, interoperability of AFIS
systems across the country is being addressed.
Despite the interoperability issue, AFIS has solved cases more than a half century old,
and its databases hold the clues to solving crimes not yet committed. A simple misde-
meanor arrest can result in the input of fingerprints that AFIS may correlate to latent fin-
gerprints from unsolved cold cases that have been sitting on file for years.
Palm prints have already entered into the AFIS equation, and soon AFIS systems are
expected that will incorporate various forms of collected biometric samples from arrestees
across the country.
Although the underpinnings of the fingerprint discipline are stable and unchanging,
the technology of fingerprinting is constantly advancing. With each new forensic journal
publication, one can be sure to find a new method or variation of a fingerprinting method.
The majority of these new techniques are directed at chemical enhancement of prints at the
crime lab, resolving issues where the conditions (e.g., background color/contrast or surface
texture) make it nearly impossible to recover usable latent prints with standard techniques.
Because the technology is in constant change, this book cannot serve to illuminate each
and every technique available. What the text will concentrate on are basic on-scene tech-
niques that the crime scene technician should master. Before describing these techniques,
it is important to explain what conditions drive the choice of technique.

Collecting Fingerprint Evidence

Fingerprinting almost always begins as a search. Occasionally, partially visible latent or pat-
ent fingerprints are evident to the naked eye, particularly when using oblique lighting as a
search tool. When a scene fingerprint is presented, the print is photographed like other evi-
dence prior to any further examination or enhancement. In most cases, however, the crime
scene technician must make a conscious decision of where to search for latent fingerprints.
Where in the scene the crime scene technician looks for fingerprints is not an arbitrary
decision. Lawyers have been heard to argue in court, “Isn’t it true that glass surfaces are an
excellent medium for recovering fingerprints, officer? So why didn’t you examine the tele-
vision screen, or the mirror in the back bedroom?” This simpleton mindset that we should
look for fingerprints on the “best surfaces” is so logically flawed that one must question
the intelligence of any lawyer willing to stand up and actually present it. The technician
does not wander aimlessly through the scene looking for smooth nonporous surfaces just
because such surfaces tend to produce better results. The crime scene technician focuses the
search for fingerprints in those areas where the suspect is likely to have interacted. Given
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 259

the context of the scene and the nature of the crime being investigated, the areas of specific
consideration will include points of entry, points of exit, and any appropriate surfaces in
and around the area where the actual crime was committed. Consideration is also given
to the nature of the object and how one would typically touch or manipulate the item. For
example, when adjusting a rearview mirror, one typically places several fingers on the back-
side of the mirror and very often places an opposing thumb on the front mirror surface.
Simple logic and an eye for detail will serve the crime scene technician immensely
in this endeavor. It is rarely appropriate to cover every single wall and surface in a crime
scene with powder. Prior to initiating the search, the technician should consider (just as he
or she did in the initial assessment) what actions must have been taken to accomplish the
crime. Were lights turned on? Were appliances or phones used in the scene? What rooms
were involved in the crime? Is there evidence to suggest a struggle on a floor, in which
the suspect may have touched the floor itself? The answer to any one of these questions
can impact the technician’s decision of where to search for fingerprint evidence. RUVIS
scan-and-find systems, as previously described in the chapter, may assist the technician
in searching the scene for latent print evidence. There is never a simple answer to the
question: What is an appropriate surface? The answer is always scene and context driven.
Because any number of surfaces may be present in a scene, and because any one of these
surfaces may hold critical evidence, the technician must be prepared to deal with a variety
of surface characteristics.

Surface Characteristics

Surface characteristics define the fingerprinting methods employed on scene. The nature
of the surface to be printed and its current condition decide which techniques the techni-
cian can or should employ. The basic types of surfaces encountered are:

• Porous surfaces: Paper, cardboard, untreated wood.

• Nonporous smooth surfaces: Varnished and painted surfaces, plastic surfaces,
glass.
• Nonporous rough surfaces: Vinyl, leather, textured countertops, and other tex-
tured surfaces.
• Special conditions: Anomalies such as human skin, adhesive tapes, and blood
prints.

The next major consideration is whether the surface is wet or dry, which will also
impact on the methods utilized. Finally, a significant concern is whether the item is col-
lectable (e.g., either small enough to be collected or of a nature that it can be cut out for
collection) and whether the agency involved has crime laboratory support. The crime scene
is the worst place to fingerprint, simply because conditions (e.g., lighting, location, humid-
ity) are never ideal. Thus if an object can be collected, the best advice is to seize it and
submit the item for processing at a laboratory, where additional systems such as lasers and
chemical treatment techniques are available. If the technician is dealing with a homicide,
this type of lab support is usually present. In less severe crimes (e.g., burglaries, robberies),
which are important and can be solved through fingerprint evidence, such lab support
may not be available. In these instances, the technician becomes responsible for deciding
260 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

what can be done on scene or at the evidence processing room and for conducting such
processing. Since any surface condition can be found at any crime scene, it is imperative
that the technician be competent in dealing with any condition.

Porous Surfaces

Porous evidence includes any item that can absorb moisture. Examples include paper,
untreated woods, cardboard, currency, checks, and various forms of packaging material.
The best approach for porous material is to simply wrap it in paper, place it in an
envelope or cardboard box, and transport it to the crime laboratory where proper chemi-
cal treatments will produce the best results. Luckily, the majority of porous items encoun-
tered in crime scenes lend themselves to collection and transport. Field processing this
type of evidence routinely results in damage and loss of evidence. Once prints on this type
of evidence are developed they must be captured immediately, as they are very susceptible
to destruction and fading. Never use powders on paper, as it hampers additional process-
ing techniques.
In instances where collection is not possible, chemicals that work in developing prints
on porous evidence include iodine, ninhydrine, 1,8-diazfluoren (DFO), and physical devel-
oper. All of these processes are best accomplished in a laboratory setting where all safety
procedures are in place. Keep in mind that all of the chemical processing techniques can be
unsafe, unhealthy, and unproductive. These chemical techniques should be used on scene
only when no other option exists and the crime scene investigator is properly trained in
their application (see Figure 9.19).
Iodine processing is still an effective method at a crime scene, especially when properly
and safely used. It can be applied with airbrush systems, which allows for large areas such
as walls (paint and paper) to be processed quickly and effectively. Iodine prints are fugitive,
meaning they fade quickly and must be photographed as they are developed. Iodine pro-
duces dark brownish color prints. Iodine, however, is very corrosive and produces harmful

• If possible, seize and submit for crime lab exam.

Porous • On-scene examination:

Dry Paper: 1- DFO
Surface 2- Ninhydrin
3- Silver Nitrate
• Paper
• Cardboard Untreated Wood: 1- Ninhydrin
• Untreated wood 2- Powder/Brush

Wet
• Seize and dry - followed by physical developer.
Surface

Figure 9.19  Fingerprint guide for porous surfaces.

Basic Skills for Scene Processing 261

vapors and requires knowledge and training to use. It works extremely well on very fresh
latent prints.
For years the primary workhorse for the development of prints on porous surfaces has
been ninhydrin (triketohydroginhydrate), which develops the alpha-amino acids in the
latent print. Ninhydrin produces a purple color print. Ninhydrin prints are also fugitive
and the process often depletes all of the alpha-amino acids in the latent, which the ninhy-
drin reacts to. So once again, scene processing will hinder the ability of the crime lab to
develop or redevelop a print; thus it is accomplished only when the item/surface cannot be
collected and sent to a lab. Ninhydrin prints are visualized with a variety of laser and ALS
light-filter combinations. These include a cyan light (490–520 nm) paired with an orange
filter, a green light (520–550 nm) paired with either an orange or red filter, or an amber
light (588–595 nm) paired with a red filter.
1,8-Diazafluoren (DFO) works much like ninhydrin but produces florescent orange
color print. DFO prints are best visualized using a cyan light (490–520 nm) paired with an
orange barrier filter. As in all cases of evidence collection, a photograph of a fingerprint
being of value to the fingerprint examiner requires training and skill on the part of the
crime scene investigator, particularly given the lighting and filtration requirements. To
even consider these techniques on scene, the crime scene investigator must be properly
trained and practiced in both the chemical technique itself and the photography technique.
Indanedion is quickly gaining preference over all of the previous processes as a labora-
tory technique as it produces higher-quality results and more in terms of quantity. It works
much better on hard-to-process surfaces such as currency and produces greater detail in
the florescence print. Indanedion requires a cyan light source (in the 475 nm range) paired
with an orange barrier filter.
Physical developer (PD) is used on a porous surface only after all of the previously
mentioned processes are completed, as it will wash away all constituents of fingerprint resi-
due to which the previous processes react. That is why PD is used on previously immersed
or water-soaked porous evidence. PD reacts primarily with the salts, fats, and waxes in a
latent print. PD requires the mixing of several solutions, silver nitrate, with prewashes, and
rinses, and is not generally recommended for field use.
Significant progress is currently being made with hyperspectral photography (photo-
graphing beyond the normal human spectral range) to visualize prints on porous surfaces.
This effort requires no processing of the evidence itself, but does require expensive camera
and computer setups to produce. Whether such technology can be exported to scene appli-
cation in the future remains to be seen.

Nonporous Smooth Surfaces

Nonporous evidence is any surface that does not absorb moisture. Examples include met-
als, glass, plastics, ceramics, guns, knives, bottles, baggies, or finished wood products.
Stabilization of the latent prints and transport to the lab is the best approach for collection
of this type of evidence. This stabilization is accomplished through cyanoacrylate fuming
(superglue fuming). This can be accomplished on scene with a portable fuming chamber, or
the evidence can be fumed at the first available opportunity at the office or crime laboratory.
As with all latent print evidence, if the crime laboratory supports the department with
actual processing of prints, then stabilize, secure, and submit the items to the lab. In a lab
262 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

• If possible, seize and submit for crime lab exam.

Nonporous • On-scene examination of all:

Smooth 1- Cyanoacrylate fuming.
Dry 2- Powders (consider fluorescent for contrast)
Surface 3- Small particle reagent

• Painted or varnished • Silver Nitrate may work on some plastics.

surfaces
• Glass or plexiglas • Iodine fuming may be effective on fresh prints
• Most plastics other than those located on metal.

Wet • Seize and dry - followed by any of the above.

Surface • Small particle reagent.

Figure 9.20  Fingerprint guide for nonporous smooth surfaces.

setting, the fingerprint examiner has a variety of tools and processing techniques available
to him or her that are not available in the field. If the supporting laboratory requires that
latent prints be lifted and only the lifts submitted, then a variety of basic techniques exist.
Once the latent prints are stabilized on a porous surface, standard brush-and-powder
techniques are more than effective for recovering the latent prints. Fluorescent powders
in use with an ALS are effective when dealing with difficult surfaces that do not provide
sufficient background contrast. Small-particle reagent (SPR) is also an effective technique
under these conditions, even when the surface is not wet. Additional techniques include
silver nitrate, which may be useful when dealing with plastics, or iodine fuming, which can
be effective when dealing with fresh latent prints. If these surfaces are wet, the technician
has two alternatives: (1) seize the item and allow it to dry, followed by use of any of the
described methods, or (2) apply SPR while the surface is still wet (see Figure 9.20).

Nonporous Rough Surfaces

Items such as vinyl, leather, or textured surfaces represent a problem for both developing
and lifting latent fingerprints. Once again the standard seize-and-submit advice should
be followed whenever possible. But in those instances where this is not possible, a variety
of techniques are now available. A basic technique for rough nonporous surfaces is the
same as for smooth nonporous surfaces, which include cyanoacrylate fuming followed by
powder and brush (see Figure 9.21). Latent prints developed on rough or irregular surfaces
present a significant difficulty. Using standard lifters (e.g., hinge and tape lifts), the latent
is often recovered in a fragmented condition or with too much background detail from
the surface, effectively making it impossible to see the detail of the latent. Rough-surface
lifting tapes are available for this condition as well as a variety of silicone compounds.
Both reduce this effect and increase the probability of recovering a functional latent print.
Silicone lifting material is also an effective response when presented with a surface that is
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 263

• If possible, seize and submit for crime lab exam.

Nonporous • On-scene examination:

Rough 1- Cyanoacrylate fuming.
Dry
Surface 2- Powders (consider fluorescent for contrast)

• After powdering, use a silicone based casting

• Vinyl
material, textured surface lifting tape or textured
• Leather
surface lifting material (similar to silicone)
• Textured countertops to remove the print.
• Textured surfaces

Wet • Seize and dry - followed by powder-and-brush

Surface technique.

Figure 9.21  Fingerprint guide for nonporous rough surfaces.

not firm enough to apply pressure to a standard lifter or lifting tape, and in cases where the
shape of the surface is so irregular that even a rubber lifter is unlikely to bend sufficiently
to prevent distortion of the latent (Figure 9.22).
A number of specialized lifting tapes and materials have been developed for deal-
ing with these surfaces. These include applying silicone-based casting material over the
latent, the use of specially manufactured textured-surface fingerprint tapes and casting
gels, which act in a similar fashion to silicone, and creating a rubberized backing to which
the latent adheres. If these surfaces are wet, they should be dried and then developed using
powder-and-brush techniques. Gel lifters are both soft and pliable and can be pressed down
into the surface of a powdered area to help lift a print. Mircosill and similar products can
be poured out over a powdered surface, allowing the mold material to go down into the
textured areas. Once dried or cured, it can be pulled up lifting the entire print from both

Figure 9.22  When confronted with very irregular or curved surfaces, latent prints can be
lifted using a variety of silicone/putty type materials used to recover tool marks. This tech-
nique will often recover a better lift than the use of a rubber lifter. Note, however, the small air
pocket in the middle of the print. The technician always attempts to prevent such bubbles, as
they result in the loss of minutiae.
264 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

the high and low areas. Many types of silicone caulks as well as gasket sealer and gasket
making putties can be used in a similar fashion.
A similar but simpler approach is to use a 50/50 mixture of water and white school
glue. The two are mixed to make a slurry, which will easily spread over a rough powdered
surface and will, once dried, produce excellent results. Some technicians use the glue full
strength, but this increases drying time. The lifts will last forever with little shrinkage.

Special Surfaces or Conditions

Some surfaces and conditions defy general classification due to their peculiarities and
demand special consideration. This includes surfaces such as human skin, the adhesive
sides of tapes, rough polystyrene surfaces, and situations involving bloody prints.
Human skin is a difficult but functional surface for the development of latent prints.
Alive or dead, human skin can be processed with a variety of techniques from the simplest,
such as magnetic powder and brush, to the more involved, such as iodine fuming with
silver plates (see Figure 9.23). Processing human skin is certainly appropriate in close-in
killings (e.g., strangulation) or in any situation in which it is believed the body has been
manipulated in some fashion. In rapes or assaults involving live victims, the technique is
also worthy of effort, presuming that the incident is reported in a timely fashion. When
processing dead bodies, the most effective technique is the adding machine paper process,
described later in the chapter. Damp skin does not negatively affect this particular pro-
cess. Cyanoacrylate fuming is also an effective technique, but moisture (most bodies are
processed after refrigeration) will negatively impact the results. Simple dusting of the skin
using magnetic powder is another effective method, but it too suffers from moisture issues.
Iodine fuming is quite effective on human skin, but lifting of the iodine-enhanced prints
on skin requires the use of a silver plate. On live victims, neither cyanoacrylate nor iodine
fuming is appropriate, in which case the technician should revert to the adding machine
paper technique.
Adhesive tape is routinely encountered in robberies, rapes, and homicides. In these fel-
ony cases, the appropriate response is to seize and submit the tape to the supporting crime

• Dead on-scene examination:

1- Adding machine paper technique
2- Cyanoacrylate fuming
Dry 3- Magnetic powder
Surface 4- Iodine fuming

• Alive on-scene examination:

Human 1- Adding machine paper technique
Skin

Wet • Utilize the adding machine paper technique

Surface which is not negatively impacted by moisture.

Figure 9.23  Fingerprint guide for human skin.

Basic Skills for Scene Processing 265

• If possible, submit to the crime lab.

• On-scene examination: Straighten the tape. If

Dry wadded, consider freezing and then straightening.
Surface Then use:
1- Crystal violet, alcohol/water technique
2- Sticky-side powders
Adhesive
Surfaces • Match any treatment of the backing side of the tape
(e.g. fabric, plastic/cellophane, paper) with the most
appropriate process given its surface.
• Adhesive side
of Tapes

Wet
• Allow to dry and use any of the above
Surface

Figure 9.24  Fingerprint guide for adhesive tape.

laboratory for processing. But tape is encountered in lesser offenses where crime lab support
in terms of actual processing of evidence is not available. In these instances, an effective
technique for dealing with the adhesive side of tape is the crystal violet, alcohol, and water
process. This technique is discussed in detail later in the chapter. Additionally, a number of
manufacturers have developed sticky-side powders that allow dusting of the adhesives (see
Figure 9.24). A problem encountered when dealing with an adhesive tape is that the por-
tions of tape manipulated by the suspect are often turned over, balled up, or otherwise wad-
ded into an unusable mass. One method for freeing the tape from itself without damaging
any latent prints is to freeze the tape and attempt to straighten it once frozen.
Bloody prints in the scene require a level of expertise and practice in the use of a vari-
ety of chemicals. Methods that are effective include development with amido-black, leuco-
crystal violet, and alcohol-based fluorescein. Patent bloody prints can be photographed
and lifted in their natural condition or dusted with powder and lifted (see Figure 9.25). As
this type of evidence is most often encountered in significant person type crimes, labora-
tory support is usually available.
Polystyrene materials such as packing foam or Styrofoam cups present a difficult sur-
face as well. In these instances, cyanoacrylate fuming or the use of small-particle reagent
are the most likely techniques to produce results.

On-Scene Fingerprinting Techniques

Through experience, the crime scene technician will learn many of the techniques
described above. There are, however, three basic techniques that each technician should be
familiar with and have practiced prior to processing any significant scene. These methods
include superglue fuming, basic powder techniques (standard and magnetic), and use of
small-particle reagent (SPR). Additionally, the technician should be experienced in recov-
ering prints from human skin using the adding machine paper technique and in the use of
266 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

• If possible, submit to the crime lab.

• On-scene examination:
Visible Bloody Contaminated Prints
1- Photograph and lift or enhance with powder
Dry 2- Amido-black
Surface 3- Leuco-crystal violet

Latent Bloody Prints

Bloody 1- Amido-black
Prints 2- Leuco-crystal violet
3- Fluorescein (alcohol-based not aqueous)

• Never use luminol or aqueous-based fluorescein

in an attempt to develop latent prints.

Wet • Dry surface, then apply techniques above.

Surface

Figure 9.25  Fingerprint guide for bloody fingerprints.

crystal violet solutions on adhesive tape. Finally, the technician should recognize methods
of recovering latent prints when confronted with fire scenes.

Cyanoacrylate Fuming (Superglue Fuming)

Cyanoacrylate or superglue fuming is a technique developed in the late 1970s by the

Japanese. The fumes of the superglue react with the latent print, polymerizing (plasticiz-
ing) and stabilizing the print. In the lab, the fumed print can be dyed using rhodamine 6G,
Androx, or basic yellow dyes, which allow visualization and photography of significant
detail in the minutiae. Because lab dyes were involved, these techniques were originally
considered a lab process; in fact, the author can recall several dressing-downs received
from lab personnel for using the superglue technique on scene. By the early 1980s, how-
ever, superglue fuming was a standard on-scene process, as it allowed the crime scene
technician to effectively stabilize latent prints and get them to the latent print examiner in
a more pristine condition. Collecting and preserving evidence at the crime scene while it
is fresh and undisturbed is the key to successful analysis of any forensic evidence. Latent
prints that are merely powdered basically sit on the surface of the evidence. They are very
fragile and can be wiped away by the gloved hands of processors or through contact and
force occurring in transportation and handling. This effectively makes them useless before
they even arrive at the evidence locker. Remember, powders only visualize the print; they
do not preserve it. The continued spread of training and an understanding of cyanoacry-
late fuming at the scene of a crime have led to a 400% greater potential for identifying a
suspect than was possible in past decades. Why?
Cyanoacrylate fuming locks the latent prints to the surface of the evidence and pre-
serves them until they can be further processed. Once the polymerization (plasticizing)
occurs in the cyanoacrylate process it takes an effort to remove or even eradicate a latent
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 267

print; in other words, some serious elbow grease, soap, and water are required to remove
the cyanoacrylate from a surface. Setting up a portable chamber at the scene and fum-
ing all collected evidence before processing or bagging and tagging is the best solution to
preserving latent print evidence. Research and years of experience have shown that cyano-
acrylate processing is not intrusive to other laboratory processes with one exception. Thus
DNA, drug identification, and firearms examinations are not hampered by cyanoacrylate
fuming. The single exception is trace evidence examinations, which can be affected by cya-
noacrylate polymers. If trace evidence examinations are considered possible and appropri-
ate, the item should not be fumed.
To fume an article, the technician isolates the item in question. On scene, this can be
done by simply taping a plastic bag around the area to be examined or by using collapsible
fuming tents or chambers (Figure  9.26). Interiors of vehicles can be isolated and effec-
tively fumed by simply closing the windows. The superglue is placed within the isolation
area, and without further effort, the chemical reaction and fuming will begin. Heat and
humidity enhance and speed the fuming process, so a light (e.g., a work light) or coffee cup
warmer are often employed as a heat source to speed the development of the prints. The
actual superglue is applied through a variety of means. Liquid superglue can be placed on
a small piece of foil (e.g., a metallic muffin wrapper or the cut-out top of a soda can), or the
technician can use commercial superglue packs. These packs are opened when needed and
simply placed inside the isolation area. Superglue packs reduce the problems of handling or
spilling liquid glue. When dealing with large areas, fuming guns are also available, which
employ an internal heat source and superglue cartridges.
A critical consideration in superglue fuming is not to overfume the latent print.
Temperature, humidity, the amount of glue used, and the ability to isolate the area in

Figure 9.26  A makeshift superglue fuming chamber created from PVC pipe and plastic. The
superglue is applied to the small metallic container at the bottom of the chamber. The article
to be fumed is suspended in the chamber so the fumes can get to every surface. (Courtesy of
Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)
268 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

question all affect the time it takes to develop a latent print. Given all these variables, the
fuming is controlled by placing a test print in the chamber or area being fumed. This is
effectively accomplished by using a small piece of tin foil on which a test print is applied.
The foil is suspended in the chamber or isolation area and monitored. As the fumes react
with the latent print, a visible white deposit becomes evident. A classic mistake in fuming
is to allow the reaction to continue until the print is clearly visible. At this point, the print is
overfumed, which can mar detail in the minutiae. The reaction should be halted when the
test print first begins to appear. The technician then checks the actual surfaces in question
to determine their condition. If additional fuming is needed, the process is continued. If
not, the process is complete, and collection of the item or prints is effected. A significant
benefit for superglue fuming lies in the number of tries the technician can make in lifting
the print. In standard brush-and-powder development, it may be possible to repowder and
make a second lift of a latent print, but nothing guarantees that a second lift will be pos-
sible. With superglue, a latent can be lifted and repowdered any number of times without
reducing the quality of the third- or fourth-generation lift.

Basic Brush-and-Powder Techniques

Powder and brush remains the mainstay method by which fingerprints are recovered from
large nonporous items (e.g., walls, furniture, floors) in the scene, but powder techniques
are not as simple as they look and demand more than throwing powder about in a sporadic
fashion. The loss of fingerprint evidence at the crime scene can be attributed to two issues
related to brush-and-powder techniques. These include overpowdering a latent print and
applying too much pressure when dusting the print. The principles are simple enough; fin-
gerprint powder is brushed onto the surface and sticks to the fats, waxes, and moisture of a
fingerprint. Brush-and-powder techniques work best on fresh fingerprints but also develop
older prints. Powder developed prints (fumed or not) are always photographed in situ and
collected with some form of lifting medium (e.g., lifters, tape). Powdered prints must be
covered and protected, as they are very fragile.
The improper or unpracticed use of a fingerprint brush is very likely to cause the
most damage and loss of fingerprint evidence more than any other factor. Dusting a print
demands a light touch on the part of the technician, as well as choosing the proper brush
for the appropriate step. Standard fingerprint brushes come in a variety of configurations.
The fiberglass brush is the typical brush used when searching a surface. Additional brushes
include the camel/goat hair brush, feather/maribou brush, and other specialty brushes.
These specialty brushes are used most often to clean up and bring out detail once a latent
print is located. After choosing the search brush, the brush is prepared by spinning it in the
hand, as seen in Figure 9.27. This flairs the bristles in the head, which often become com-
pacted in their storage tubes. Brushes and particularly the brush tips must be kept clean
and in good condition. The brush tips are the part of the brush that does the job, yet many
investigators press the sides of the bristles onto the surface as though they were painting
the surface. This causes the bristle edges to drag across the surface, which can destroy
latent prints. Powder is applied using a swirling technique, rather than a back-and-forth
painting approach. Swirling the brush forces you to bring it into proper contact with the
surface, widening the brush surface area and using only the tips of the bristles.
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 269

Figure 9.27  Preparing a fiberglass fingerprint brush for use. The technician spins the brush in
the hand, which flairs the bristles and expands the brush head. After extended storage, the bris-
tles of a fingerprint brush will often stick together. This technique will correct that condition.

In the current environment of touch DNA, sterility of the fingerprint brush becomes
a major issue. The crime scene investigator is presented with two approaches. If finger-
printing effort is ongoing while DNA evidence is still being collected, then factory-sealed
and certified sterile brushes must be employed. The powder employed must also be new,
and magnetic powder and brushes should never be used under these circumstances. A
failure to follow these guidelines is likely to result in a claim of cross contamination, from
both brushes and powders, either from within the scene being processed or from prior
scenes where the equipment was employed. If, however, a basic methodology is in place
that requires all DNA collection to occur prior to any fingerprinting effort, or if there is no
current or future anticipation of DNA evidence collection, then standard kit brushes and
magnetic brushes can be used so long as they are clean and kept in good working condi-
tion. This latter protocol is the most appropriate response. Crime scene supervisors should
force the issue that all DNA collection occurs prior to any fingerprinting effort.
An interesting aspect of this dilemma exists where both fingerprint and DNA are
explored. Crime scene investigators recognize that the area surrounding a latent print
often holds DNA evidence. Rather than limit recovery to only one form of evidence, some
investigators take both. Once the latent is visualized through powdering, the area directly
surrounding the ridge detail (but holding no detail itself) is swabbed for trace DNA. An
alternative approached developed in South Africa is to collect the DNA from edges of
objects and fingerprints from the flat surfaces. In collecting DNA, the investigator is forced
to follow the more stringent approach of using new, sterile brushes and clean powder.
The crime scene investigator can’t use just any fingerprint powder on any surface.
Some powders are designed to roll across the surface and some are designed to slide across
the surface. The rougher the surface, the more cultures required in the powder. Smoother
surfaces are much easier to distribute powder upon. The investigator should have a variety
of powders available to meet any surface characteristics he or she encounters. Fingerprint
powder is often mishandled and mistreated as much as fingerprint brushes are. Powder
must be kept dry and clean. Dipping a brush directly into a powder jar will contaminate the
270 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.28  In addition to standard fingerprint powders, the technician can use fluorescent
powders, which when viewed or photographed under an ALS will provide good contrast.

powder with dirt and moisture, causing it to be ineffective and destructive. Once removed
from the jar, partially consumed powder is never put back in with the clean powder.
Contrast is a critical issue in selecting a powder color. Bichromatic powders are avail-
able that, in effect, provide contrast under nearly any condition. These types of powders are
dual colored and provide contrast on light or dark surfaces. When examining a number
of different colored surfaces in a single area, this type of powder will reduce the effort of
changing color for each new surface encountered. Another functional method for enhanc-
ing contrast is the use of fluorescent powders. These powders are used in a standard fashion,
but they are viewed and photographed under an ALS (Figure 9.28). Fluorescent powders
are particularly useful on multicolored surfaces, where consistent contrast under normal
lighting is impossible. An important reminder when using a powder-and-brush technique
is not to mix powders on a single brush. Once a brush is used for a light or dark powder, it
should not be used for any other color powder.
No matter which brush or powder is utilized (excluding magnetic powders), the most
classic mistake observed in the fingerprinting technique is to insert the brush directly into
the powder container. As previously noted, this action leads to damaging the bristles, often
leaves contaminants (including moisture) in the powder, and invariably leaves too much
powder on the brush itself. The most effective technique is to place a small amount of pow-
der in a fold of clean paper and powder the brush by lightly stroking it in the powder, as
seen in Figure 9.29. Once powdered, the brush is lightly tapped or spun to remove excess

Figure 9.29  Powder is applied to the brush by dipping the brush in a small amount of pow-
der held in a fold of paper. Dipping the brush directly into the powder container results in the
transfer of contaminants and moisture, which can ultimately affect the quality of the powder.
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 271

powder. Then, using light circular swirling strokes, the technician examines the area in
question. Once a partial latent appears, the technician concentrates on the area in ques-
tion with an even lighter stroke, reducing the circular action. Excess powder should be
removed from the print to enhance detail in both the photograph and the lift. Although
with experience the technician can certainly develop a latent print using only a fiberglass
brush, enhancing the print is best accomplished with a finer bristled brush. The marabou
feather brushes are particularly effective at this stage of the examination, as they reduce the
friction and decrease the probability of damaging ridge detail.
The use of magnetic powder and a magnetic “brush” is not significantly different from
that of the standard brush-and-powder technique. Magnetic powders include small metal-
lic shavings that cling to the magnet in the magnetic brush. In effect, the technician is
moving suspended powder across the surface, rather than brushing the surface with a
powdered brush. As there are no bristles involved, it is less likely that the technician will
damage ridge detail when applying the powder. Damage is still possible, particularly if the
technician uses too much powder. A positive impact of the magnetic brush is its ability to
effectively remove excess powder from a surface.
One of the most recent advances in fingerprint powder is the aerosol spray powders,
which simplify the process of powder application and lessen the possibility of damaging
the latent print.
Once a latent print is developed, it should be photographed in place. Even under the
best of circumstances, it is always possible to damage or destroy detail of a print through a
lifting technique. Photography captures detail and ensures that some record of the print is
available. Choosing which lifter to use for the latent print requires a second consideration
of contrast. The technician must find a lifting medium and color that ensures that the
powdered print will be visible once it is lifted. Lifting tapes and lifters come in a variety of
forms. The typical forms include lifting tape (available on rolls in varying widths), hinge
lifters, rubber or gel lifters, and precut lifting tape. Hinge lifters and rubber lifters come
with their own backing (e.g., white, black, or transparent); lifting tapes require some type
of backing medium. This backing sheet can be as simple as using a 3 × 5 in. card or as for-
mal as commercially printed latent cards that allow the technician to annotate each print
with detailed data on where and by whom it was recovered. Rubber lifters are designed
primarily for use in situations where the surface involved is curved or irregular (e.g., a
doorknob). The rubber lifter is pliable, allowing it to bend on application with the curve of
the surface, which reduces distorting the latent.
To lift the latent print, the technician exposes the adhesive side of the rubber lifter or
hinge lifter, or pulls out an appropriate length of lifting tape, and then carefully applies
one edge to the surface involved, just beyond the latent print. With a smooth and steady
motion, the technician rolls a finger across the remaining tape or lifter, gently forcing it in
place over the latent print. Once attached, additional pressure is applied to the lifter in order
to eliminate air bubbles and ensure a consistent collection of the powder. The next step of
the process is to remove the lifter or tape from the surface in a smooth and steady action.
Hesitation or irregular motion while removing the lifter will result in lines that run across
the adhesive surface. Although these lines will not always harm the print, they can make it
more difficult to see latent detail in areas where the line crosses the recovered print. Once
removed from the surface, a protective cover is applied to the lifter to protect the latent
print. In the case of a rubber lifter or hinge lifter, the adhesive section is smoothly pressed
against the opposite side of the lifter. Lifting tape is applied to an appropriate backing.
272 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

One common problem for lifting latent prints that every crime scene investigator will
encounter is curved surfaces. Curved surfaces such as door knobs and light bulbs are dif-
ficult to lift prints from because the lifting medium, even rubber lifters, won’t bend around
the curved aspect effectively. Some of the products and processes previously described,
such as Microsil, work effectively when used to lift from a curved surface. Simply pour the
liquid or spread the caulk or glue over the surface containing the print, allow it to dry, and
recover it once dried.
Another problem arises when powdering overhead surfaces. The powder tends to fall
back off the brush into the investigator’s face. Consider the use, if possible, of magnetic
brushes and powder. Mirrored surfaces or highly reflective surfaces are another commonly
encountered problem. Although it is easy to lift prints from these surfaces, they can be
difficult to photograph for collection and comparison. The use of frosted tape will correct
the double-image issue and allow you to clearly photograph prints on the surface without
reflection issues.
All in all, brush-and-powder techniques are best used at the scenes on large immove-
able items such as doors, windows, walls, appliances, safes, and the like. Remember, if
crime lab support is available, then whenever possible seize and submit rather than chanc-
ing on-scene processing.

Small-Particle Reagent

Small-particle reagent (SPR) was developed as a method to recover latent prints on wet sur-
faces. SPR consists primarily of molybdenum disulfide suspended in a water solution. The
suspended particles react with and attach to the fats found in the latent print. To develop
the print, SPR is sprayed over the surface a number of times, each time allowing the liquid
to drain off. Once a print begins to develop, the technician continues the spraying until
sufficient contrast is achieved (Figure 9.30). The surface is then allowed to dry. If necessary,
the surface can be gently washed with water to remove excess SPR. Once again, the surface
is allowed to dry, after which the latent print is photographed and lifted using a standard
lifter (Figure 9.31). SPR is now manufactured in light, dark, and a fluorescent spray.
Although originally intended for wet surfaces, SPR is effective on almost any nonpo-
rous surface and is said to be effective in situations involving oily windows, oxidized met-
als, galvanized surfaces, or salt-water-sprayed areas.3
Nonporous evidence found wet or immersed in a body of water is best processed at
the scene. Oxidation, rust, and a general breaking down of properties causes quick and
irreversible damage to evidence once it is removed from the water. Attempts to container-
ize evidence in the exact water it was found are difficult and often not effective. SPR works
well, especially at the scene, but there is a lot of necessary preparation required. The crime
scene investigator must begin the processing immediately and be prepared to photograph
any prints developed. The investigator is fighting against natural elements that dry out and
attack the fingerprints, rendering them weak or useless. Under these circumstances the
SPR must be rinsed immediately and the process must be continuous, with a smooth flow
of SPR reagent and rinse water. Once photographed and dried, the SPR prints can be lifted
and preserved in a normal fashion.
SPR can also be used on extremely rough surfaces such as concrete, cinder blocks,
natural rocks, Styrofoam packaging materials and cups, and stucco finishes. Photography
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 273

Figure 9.30  Small-particle reagent (SPR) was designed for use on wet surfaces. Small particles
suspended in the liquid react with the fats of the print and bind to them. The SPR is sprayed
onto the surface a number of times until the print becomes visible. Here it is applied to the
exterior of a vehicle with condensation. As with any fingerprint method, an appropriate con-
trasting color is required. SPR comes in both black and white, and in this instance black SPR is
used against the white paint. (Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)

Figure 9.31  SPR-developed prints are recovered using standard lifting techniques. The SPR
is allowed to dry completely, photographed, and then lifted with lifting tape or a hinge lifter.
(Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)

must be employed on these surfaces to capture and preserve the details of the developed
latent print.
The Israeli National Crime Lab recently observed an odd but important phenome-
non related to the SPR technique. After directing common SPR in standard practice to a
metal surface, no prints were developed. The area involved was dried and the technician
wiped the surface to remove the residues. After wiping the surface clean of the SPR resi-
due, the technician noted that the background turned a yellowish brown color and light
gray-colored fingerprints appeared on the same surface that had just been checked. These
fingerprints could not be lifted. The technician had to photograph them; however, they
274 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

washed away easily with water. It is believed that this phenomenon is some form of chemi-
cal reaction related to the molybdenum disulfide. No doubt it will be studied further, but
as the Israelis explored this approach, they found it worked on glass and plastic as well. It
has been used positively in several cases in Israel. Thus, if the technician fails to develop
fingerprints after using SPR in a standard fashion, he or she can follow with this second-
ary treatment. Very simply, the normal SPR-treated surface is allowed to dry completely,
is then wiped vigorously with a clean white paper towel, and the surface examined again.15
Using these three methods (powder and brush, superglue fuming, and SPR), the crime
scene technician can functionally deal with the vast majority of scene-specific surfaces
encountered. Two advanced techniques necessary to round out the technician’s skills
include the adding machine paper technique and the crystal violet technique; these two
methods are intended, respectively, for recovering latent prints from human skin and
adhesive tape.

Adding Machine Paper Technique for Human Skin

The origin of this particular technique is unknown, but the method was developed and
fine-tuned by a number of the FBI’s Evidence Response Team units, who now employ it in
the field with outstanding results. The method involves the use of adding machine paper
rolls, along with a variety of powders. The adding machine paper is quite porous, and
when in contact with the oils of a latent fingerprint, it readily absorbs them. A signifi-
cant advantage of the method is that it will still work effectively when the body is slightly
wet with condensation. Rarely will the ME (medical examiner) allow manipulation of the
body prior to his or her initial evaluation, and thus the remains are almost always sent to
the morgue and refrigerated before any attempt at fingerprinting is allowed. This invari-
ably results in condensation on the body. In this process, condensation actually helps the
fingerprinting process rather than hindering it. The necessary components, illustrated in
Figure 9.32, are nothing more than a roll of adding machine paper, a magnetic brush with
a fine powder, and a pencil or pen.
The most effective technique for conducting this method is to roll the paper with gentle
pressure onto the area of the body in question. This is best accomplished by placing the
roll of paper on a pencil or dowel, which the technician uses to manipulate and guide the
roll onto the skin, as seen in Figure 9.33. An assistant holds the loose end of the paper to
ensure that it does not become a hindrance to the technician and to prevent it from being
contaminated. After rolling the area in question and tearing off the length from the roll,
the technician marks the tape identifying specific landmarks (e.g., right outside wrist, right
elbow). Marking eliminates losing the relative orientation on the body of any subsequently
recovered prints.
After completing the roll and removing the length of paper, the technician then tapes
the paper contact side up in a box or container. Using a fine fingerprint powder, the tech-
nician lightly powders the contact side of the paper, as shown in Figures  9.34 and 9.35.
Experimentation using a variety of powders will likely identify a number of functional
powders. Two proven powders for this technique are Moonglo and Midnight Blu, produced
by DOJES.4 The specific type of adding machine paper used, however, has yet to be identi-
fied as a factor in obtaining results.
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 275

Figure 9.32  The adding machine paper technique for recovering latent prints from human
skin requires minimal equipment. Any standard roll of adding machine paper can be utilized;
additionally, the technician requires tape, a pen, magnetic powder, and a brush. The magnetic
powder used should be very fine.

Figure 9.33  The adding machine paper is slowly rolled out along the area of the skin the
technician wishes to check. Only a small amount of pressure is required in this effort. It is
often helpful to have an assistant hold the end of the paper, so that the end does not roll up and
interfere with the forward edge.

Prior to releasing the body at the scene, it is important to ask attendants (e.g., ME
investigators or EMS personnel) to try not to handle areas such as the forearms, wrists,
or ankles, particularly if there is some belief that the subject manipulated the body at the
scene. These areas often hold recoverable prints. In considering how to apply this narrow
width of paper, the technician must also consider where one expects to locate latent prints.
For example, if dealing with a manual strangulation, it is wiser to apply the paper to the
neck in a vertical orientation to the body rather than along the horizontal or lengthwise
276 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.34  Once the rolling is complete, the paper is taped into place on a flat surface with
the contact side facing up. Magnetic powder is applied in a normal fashion, but using very light
strokes.

Figure 9.35  Examples of fingerprints recovered using the adding machine paper technique.
Using this technique, prints have been recovered from both live and dead victims. (Courtesy of
Laura Nielson, FBI ERT, Oakland, California.)

plane. In a vertical orientation, the technician is more likely to recover multiple digits in
their proper orientation on a single sheet, where a lengthwise orientation would more than
likely result in recovery of a single digit, or portions of multiple digits. This latter situation
would require realignment of the various recovered paper lengths in order to capture the
full context of the latent prints and their overall orientation.5

Crystal Violet Solution for Adhesive Tape

A long-standing method of recovering latent fingerprints from the adhesive side of tape is
the use of a solution of alcohol and crystal violet dye. This technique is easy to accomplish
and produces outstanding results. To use this method, the technician creates a stock solu-
tion by mixing approximately 1.5 g of crystal violet powder in 100 ml of ethyl alcohol. From
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 277

Figure 9.36  A fingerprint developed on the adhesive side of transparent tape using the crystal
violet method.

this solution, the technician adds 2 ml per 100 ml of water to create a working solution.
Depending upon the size of the tape involved, the quantity of working solution may have
to be adjusted in order to fully immerse the tape. The tape is dipped or immersed in the
working solution for a period of 30 s to a minute, after which it is immediately held under
cold running tap water. The crystal violet dye will react with any latent prints present,
producing a blue or violet coloration that usually provides good contrast (Figure 9.36). If
sufficient contrast is not achieved after the first washing, the entire process can be repeated.

Fingerprints in Fire Scenes

Suspicious fire scenes represent a rather significant anomaly to the crime scene techni-
cian, at least in terms of the search and recovery of fingerprint evidence. In confined-space
fires (e.g., interior room fires), a hot gas layer will develop at the ceiling level. The depth
of this hot gas layer grows with time and can extend into the lower regions of the room.
Temperatures in the hot gas layer often reach between 900 and 1,100°F before the room
achieves flashover (a combustion event involving the gases in the hot gas layer). At the same
time, heavy black smoke envelops the room, descending in advance of the hot gas layer. As
a result of these events, in the aftermath of the fire, nearly every surface in the room has
been exposed to significant heat and soot. The well-meaning crime scene technician arrives
at the fire scene and, seeing the physical destruction of typical fingerprint surfaces of inter-
est (e.g., walls and doors) as well as the presence of heavy soot on those items remaining,
simply throws his or her hands in the air and gives up. Believing that fingerprints will not
be present, he or she puts forth little if any effort in seeking fingerprints. This belief, how-
ever, is unsupported by fact, as fire scenes often hold outstanding fingerprint evidence that
is nearly indestructible.
As early as 1957, U.S. Army Crime Laboratory fingerprint examiners were working with
a technique of fingerprint development involving fire and soot. The camphor technique
involved exposing hard-to-print surfaces to a gentle flame created by burning camphor,
after which the soot was dusted off with a feather duster, thus exposing the print. If neces-
sary, the item was gently washed to better remove the soot. It was evident to the fingerprint
examiners that heat seemed to bake the print in place as well as react with the soot to cre-
ate a pigmentation that made the latent print visible.6 Whatever the actual mechanism,
278 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

the end result was stable visible prints. Based on the camphor development process, John
Thorton and Buster Emmons of the Houston Arson Bureau subsequently began examining
fire scenes with a more critical eye to fingerprint recovery, and they developed a methodol-
ogy for recovering latent prints in the fire scene. The technique requires good lighting and
involves examining metal and glass surfaces found in the scene. After initial evaluation
of such surfaces, if no latent prints are noted, excess soot is removed from the item by
gently washing it in tap water. The item is then reexamined, since latent prints stabilized
by heat often become visible only after washing. Whether located before or after washing,
these latent prints may still contain a significant level of attached soot. This soot can be
further cleaned by the use of fingerprint lifters. In effect, excess soot is removed from the
latent with lifting tape, enhancing the visible ridge detail.7 Remember that the print itself is
baked in place and quite stable, so washing and lifting have a negligible impact in harming
any ridge detail. Once cleaned, the print is photographed for subsequent examination. In
some instances, items may have been exposed to heat but not significant soot. Under these
circumstances, the heat still stabilizes the latent print, but enhancement using the powder-
and-brush technique may be necessary to bring out ridge detail. Items of specific interest
in the fire scene include suspected accelerant cans and the surviving entry or exit surfaces,
which may be present in the form of pane glass (broken or unbroken). This method is effec-
tive on almost any smooth nonporous surfaces found in the fire scene, particularly glass
and metal surfaces.
Current R&D suggests that these fingerprints stabilized by the heat of the fire are actu-
ally corroding the metal itself. The combination of salts and moisture from the fingerprint,
when acted on by the heat, physically damages the metal where the fingerprint initially
was. Known as differential oxidation, once corroded, the latent is effectively indelible.14
This research has led to several new techniques that are still under development, but which
have proven effective for recovering prints off metal surfaces exposed to heat. Outside of
the obvious aspects of arson evidence, this includes metal bullet casings that, using stan-
dard fingerprint recovery techniques, prove to be very problematic.

Casting Impression Evidence

Impression evidence presents itself in the crime scene in a number of forms. Tool marks,
footwear or barefoot impressions, tire marks, and even bite marks routinely appear as
evidence and require collection. Beyond documentation by close-up photography, cast-
ing is the primary mechanism of recovering impression evidence. The term impression,
however, at least in forensics, can be deceiving. Impression evidence includes both three-
dimensional depressions, such as those found when a shoe leaves a mark in soft dirt, and
two-dimensional marks, such as those found where a dirty shoe leaves a mark on a solid
substrate. Although these two-dimensional marks are not true impressions, casting tech-
niques are an effective means of recovery. The primary methods of recovering impression
evidence that the technician should master are the use of rubberized casting compounds
(e.g., silicone and rubber compounds for tool marks), an electrostatic dust lifter (ESDL),
plaster and dental stone casting of both two- and three-dimensional impressions, and the
use of gelatin and other adhesive lifters.
As was the case in latent print recovery, the crime scene technician considers a number
of factors when deciding which method to use to recover an impression. What is the nature
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 279

of the surface? Impressions can occur on dirt, hard floors, metals, paper, carpets, skin, or
even food. The condition of that surface may force an issue in collection. Is the surface wet,
dry, or does it hold contaminants? Also, was the impression deposited by a wet or dry out-
sole or object? There are no absolute rules in deciding what method to employ, but different
methods have specific limitations that may force one method over another.
Before any attempt to recover impression evidence, the impression should be photo-
graphed in place. Impression evidence is difficult to photograph properly and can be very
challenging when dealing specifically with dust prints. The first step of impression photog-
raphy is to ensure that the camera is squared to the impression. This means matching the
film plane to the plane on which the impression is located. This basic technique of squar-
ing the lens to the subject is always important in evidence photography, but it is crucial in
impression evidence photography. When shooting the evidence close-up photographs, the
camera should be tripod mounted, and a scale of reference should be inserted alongside
the impression. The camera is then lowered to include as much detail as possible from the
impression while keeping the entire impression of concern in the viewfinder. The technician
should take multiple photographs using the fill-flash technique. At least four photographs
are taken with the flash held at a minimum of a 45° angle to the impression. At times, to
create sufficient contrast, the technician may have to hold the flash at a sharper angle. The
technician can use an ALS or flashlight in an effort to decide what the best angle of inci-
dence for the flash is in that particular situation, and given a digital camera, can always take
multiple exposures at different angles of incidence. The flash is moved for each photograph,
from the right side of the impression to the left side, to the top and to the bottom. In terms
of the distance, the technician should place the flash at least 3 ft from the impression. If the
flash is held close (e.g., 1 ft from the impression), due to the inverse square law, there is often
a two f-stop difference between the right and left side of the typical impression photograph.
That portion closest to the flash ends up quite hot in the photograph, while the opposite side
tends to be dimmer. By backing the flash away from the impression an additional distance
(1–2 ft will suffice), this difference in exposure from heel to toe is reduced. This combina-
tion of oblique lighting, as well as directing the light from different angles, often enhances
detail of interest to the shoe or tool mark examiner. Dust prints are extremely difficult to
photograph, often requiring the technician to lower the ambient light and forcing the use
of a high-intensity white light with a focused beam. Both the ALS and RUVIS, if available,
should be considered an effective tool in this instance.

Rubber Casting Compounds

A number of commercial rubber casting compounds are available from various forensic
suppliers. It is important to understand that these commercial products offer a capability
far and above the casting capability of any over-the-counter silicone products available in
a hardware store. Forensic casting compounds have been designed to capture microscopic
details of tool mark impressions for the tool mark examiner. These products are expen-
sive, but when recovering tool mark evidence, there is no substitute. These products are
effective for tool marks, plastic prints (e.g., a fingerprint in wax or putty), and although
not the most economical solution, they can also be used to recover dusted latent prints
on curved surfaces. Rubberized casting compounds are most effective when used on hard
280 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.37  Specialized rubber casting material for tool marks. The material comes with both
a base (the pink putty) and a catalyst (the extruded blue line). The two must be mixed thor-
oughly if the material is to set properly. The material is worked together vigorously in the
hands until an even color is achieved with no streaks.

substrates such as metals, wood, bone, or plastic. They are not effective in situations such
as recovering bite marks from human skin or for casting dirt impressions.
The casting compounds typically come in two containers, one with the base material
and the other with a curing compound. Other commercially available products, such as
Forensic Sil®, provide a mixing “gun” with a special mixing tip that allow more effective
mixing and application. Following the specific instructions for mixing, the crime scene
technician blends together a sufficient quantity of material to fully cover the impression
in question (see Figure  9.37). A critical aspect of preparation is thoroughly mixing the
base and the curing catalyst. The mixing guns resolve this issue very effectively. Ensure a
complete mixture of the compound before applying it to the impression. A failure to cre-
ate an even mix will result in portions of the base material failing to set, or will cause the
compound to set too fast. Never rush the mixing.
The mixed compound is then pressed or exuded into the impression, ensuring that air
pockets are filled (Figure 9.38). The compound is left to stand for a sufficient drying period

Figure 9.38  Once mixed, the rubber casting material is pressed into the tool mark. The tech-
nician must ensure that the casting material is forced into the entire mark and that no air
bubbles are formed. Although not always necessary, in this instance a small dam of modeling
clay was placed beneath the tool mark to keep the casting compound in place while it sets.
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 281

Figure 9.39  The resulting cast from Figure 9.38. General features of the impression tool mark
(two prongs) are evident.

(typically 12 to 15 min) and then removed (Figure 9.39). Just because the technician finds
the exterior of the compound dry to the touch does not guarantee that the material in the
impression (obviously the area of interest to the technician) is dry. Do not rush removal. It
is far better to let the cast sit awhile than to remove it too soon. A good practice is to cast
the impressions, continue on with some other aspect of scene processing, and then return
to recover them later.

Electrostatic Dust Lifting Devices

Once known as the electrostatic lifting device (ESLD), electrostatic dust lifters (ESDLs)
were developed in Japan in the 1970s. They found their way to England and Europe in the
early 1980s and then began appearing in the United States. Today, the ESDL is a common
tool of the crime scene technician. The ESDL works on a very simple concept: opposite
charges attract. In the scene, the various surfaces hold a positive charge, while the particles
of dust deposited are negatively charged. The ESLD is used to create a more concentrated
charge, delivering up to 15,000 V to a lifting medium. The medium is usually a Mylar-like
film that is silver on one side, resembling a space blanket, and black on the opposite side,
similar to window tint. This greater charge in the film attracts the dust and dirt particles,
transferring them from the weakly charged scene surface onto the lifting film. Once trans-
ferred, the residual charges (positive and negative) keep the dust print in place.
The ESDL can be used on almost any surface, including floors, walls, doors, and other
hard surfaces, as well as clothing, carpets, or even paper. It can be used effectively to
recover impressions from either vertical or horizontal surfaces. Typical applications in the
crime scene are floors, doors, and walls. The ESDL is not effective on impressions that are
wet. For example, the ESDL would not be used on a wet impression left behind by a bur-
glar who entered a building while it was raining. Nor is the ESDL effective on impressions
made up of a heavy deposit of dirt (a three-dimensional aspect). Other casting techniques,
discussed later in the book, are more effective under this circumstance. Use of the ESDL
requires certain safety precautions. First and foremost, the ESDL is used on dry surfaces
only. Second, it is important to understand that the charging wand or charging device will
create a significant charge in volts, but not in amps. It can produce a nasty shock, but it
will not hurt you. The ESDL charge dissipates quickly, but contact with the lifting material,
282 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.40  Oblique lighting is the most effective method of visualizing possible dust prints.
The light source (e.g., an ALS or flashlight) is held at a very sharp low angle to the surface being
checked. (Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)

the grounding plates, or the charging wand while the ESDL is in use may result in an
unwanted surprise.
The use of the ESDL on hard surfaces begins with a search of the scene. The technician
looks for dust impressions using oblique lighting. Both the observer and the light source
need to be low to the surface in question, as seen in Figure 9.40. The technician searches
an area or entire floor (depending upon the size), marks or identifies in some fashion any
areas in question (e.g., chalking the perimeter of a disturbance), and then attempts a lift of
that area. During the visual search, dust prints may appear as a disturbed area on the floor,
so the technician should not overlook an area simply because he or she cannot see specific
tread or pattern designs. On carpet, a specific pattern may or may not be evident during
the visual search. Carpet situations usually involve a systematic lifting attempt of all areas
in primary walk paths or other areas of interest based on the scene context. In the case
of paper or clothing, there may be no impression evident during the visual examination,
although in these cases it is common to see some form of residual dust or dirt.
Once an area is identified for examination, the technician prepares the Mylar film. This
includes inspecting the film lifter to ensure it is new and unwrinkled. The lifting material
comes in rolls that can be cut to any size and in precut sheets. A practical method of han-
dling the material is to cut shoe-sized pieces in advance and mount them to a cardboard
border (2 to 3 in. in width, encircling the entire Mylar sheet). The cardboard is superglued
to the top (shiny) side of the Mylar sheet and keeps it from wrinkling in transit. The border
also helps in laying the sheet flat at the scene. Long lifts are possible as well. In situations
where an extended 5 to 10 ft area needs to be checked, the Mylar is rolled out and charged
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 283

Figure 9.41  An electrostatic dust lifter (ESDL) in use in a training exercise. The wand is used
to apply a charge to the lifting film. The technician uses the roller to roll out air pockets. The
silver rod adjacent to the film is a grounding device.

as a single sheet. Whether using precut pieces or pulling a sheet directly from the roll, the
technician chooses a lifter that will cover the entire area in question. The lifting film is laid
with its dark side down on the surface as flat as possible. The film is then charged. In some
systems, this means touching a charging wand to the film as seen in Figure 9.41; in others,
the device is placed on the film, where electrical leads make direct contact.
Most systems employ a grounding plate or wand that is laid adjacent to the area being
examined. Particularly in situations involving vertical surfaces, the technician may have
to tape the plate or wand in place or otherwise be creative when positioning the grounding
plate as the manufacturer describes. In circumstances involving metal surfaces (e.g., a car
door or hood) a rubber lifter can be put in place on the surface and the ground plate set on
top of the rubber lifter to isolate it from the metal itself. Once the ground device is in place,
the charge is applied and the film is rolled flat to remove excess air bubbles. The most effec-
tive rolling instrument is a clean fingerprint ink pad roller. The Mylar sheet should be rolled
gently using the weight of the roller, working from the center of the sheet outward in order
to remove any air bubbles. If a roller is not available, air bubbles can be smoothed out of the
film using a plastic spatula, a piece of cardboard, or any other nonmetallic object with a flat
surface. As the charge is applied, the technician will note a crackling sound, accompanied
by the film being drawn into the surface. This is an indication that the device is working
correctly. The film is charged for a period of seconds. Then the device is turned off and the
charge is allowed to dissipate. If for some reason the film fails to be drawn to the surface
in question, the technician should continue the charge and increase its intensity. Once the
examination is complete and the device turned off, the charge will dissipate in 5 to 10 s. The
technician then lifts the film and examines it under oblique lighting (Figure 9.42). If any
impressions of evidentiary value are noted, the film is secured, marked, and retained like
any other item of evidence. Containerize the sheet as soon as possible; the sheet retains a
charge and can attract ambient dust in the atmosphere.
284 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.42  The resulting lift using an electrostatic dust lifter. The white ring around the lift
is chalk, used by the technician to outline the nearly invisible print when it was discovered
using oblique lighting.

After recovery, the lifting film is best stored flat in a box. A single lifting film is taped
shiny side down inside the box; this leaves the surface containing the impression facing up.
Additional mechanisms include using static-free bags (check with the computer forensic
section for sources) or placement in a file folder between clean sheets of paper. In cases
involving long lifts, where a long section of Mylar is rolled out and charged in a single
effort, the Mylar can be rolled and stored in a poster tube. Do not, however, attempt to roll
the lifter tightly.

Dental Stone Casting Techniques

When presented with three-dimensional impression evidence such as tire and shoe
marks in soil, an effective method of recovery is to cast the impression using dental stone
(Figure 9.43). Given an option, dental stone is the preferred medium, because it sets harder,
is more forgiving of error during mixing, and tends to recover more detail than stan-
dard plaster. Additionally, when casting three-dimensional impressions, dental stone may
not require a form mold to contain the casting material. Dental stone casting is also an
effective technique for recovering two-dimensional impressions such as water- or liquid-
tracked shoe marks on cement or other surfaces.
The text will continue to refer to dental stone as the lifting medium, since this is the
preferred method. The methods employed for plaster of paris are the same as dental stone,
with the exceptions that greater care in recovery is necessary when using plaster, and a
form is almost always required in order to obtain a sufficient depth of plaster material. This
depth is needed to add strength to the finished plaster cast.
The first step in casting a three-dimensional impression is to prepare the impression.
Obvious large loose debris that accumulated in the impression subsequent to its creation
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 285

Figure 9.43  A cast of a shoe mark made with dental stone.

can be removed with tweezers. Debris that is an integral part of the impression (e.g.,
matted-down leaves) or debris extending out of the impression (e.g., a twig or small root)
should always be left in place. Any attempt to remove such debris can easily damage or
destroy the impression. This is particularly true of small twigs or items sticking out of the
impression. Because these items are buried, the technician has no way of knowing how far
they extend or how large they are. Don’t worry about trying to have a “clean” cast, since
these items of debris rarely alter the quality of the cast.
Impressions made in extremely loose soil, powders, or sand may benefit from treat-
ment by a fixative. Commercial fixatives are available from various forensic suppliers, but
any aerosol shellac spray (e.g., a clear shellac paint or hairspray) is effective. These fixatives
should be applied with great care, as direct spraying will destroy the impression. The intent
of the spray is to harden the impression just enough to help it survive the pouring of the
dental stone. The spray should be directed above the impression, allowing it to settle onto
the material. Overspraying is likely to result in damaging the impression as well, since this
can fill in the minutiae of interest to the lab examiner. Beyond hardening impressions in
powders or extremely soft soil, fixatives serve no specific function. They were once used as
a release agent to prevent soil from clinging to the cast, but with the current use of dental
stone, this function is unnecessary. Dental stone sets hard enough that subsequent clean-
ing of the cast by the shoe mark examiner does not damage detail.
Forms are used in casting to contain the casting medium. They can be made of expand-
able metal sleeves or fashioned from wide tape, heavy-gauge paper, or cardboard. Although
the use of a form is not a necessary evil when using dental stone, the form is still functional
for making the cast symmetrical. The technician will encounter occasions when the form
is required. Two prime examples are where the impression is on a slope or when casting
submerged impressions. In these cases, the form contains the dental stone and prevents
it from flowing down the slope or from dispersing into the standing water. If a form is
used, it is extended around the impression, ensuring that an ample buffer exists from the
sides of the form to the edges of the impression. If the technician finds the impression on
a relatively flat area, then no form is necessary. The dental stone is simply poured into and
around the impression, creating a pancake-like mass.
286 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

After preparing the impression, the technician prepares the dental stone. Dental stone
can be mixed in containers of almost any nature. The most effective method for transport-
ing, mixing, and pouring the stone is the use of large resealable Ziploc®-style plastic bags. It
is best to premeasure the dental stone to a specific weight to ease mixing at the scene. Authors
such as Bodziak suggest preparing 2-pound bags (approximately 4 cups of material), which is
mixed with approximately 12 ounces of water.8 When presented with larger casting surfaces
(e.g., large tire impressions) this ratio can be used to mix material in larger containers such
as buckets, sufficient to pour the cast in a single effort. Measuring the prescribed amount
of water is simple, as there are rarely circumstances when a soda can or similar 12-ounce
drink can is not available. Initially, the water is added in bulk, approximately ½ to 2/3 of
the required volume. The bag is then sealed and manipulated by hand until the dental stone
is thoroughly mixed and all lumps are removed. As needed, the remaining water is added
until the consistency is that of heavy cream or pancake batter. Remember that the material
must flow; if it must be squeezed from the bag, the mixture is too thick and will result in a
poor cast. On the other hand, if the mixture is too thin, although it will flow easily into the
impression, it will either take hours to cure or perhaps never cure. Thin-mixture casts, even
in dental stone, tend to be structurally weak and prone to breakage.
Once mixed, the Ziploc bag is lowered to the level of the casting surface and slowly
poured into an area adjacent to the impression that does not contain detail. The techni-
cian allows the material to flow out from this point and slowly cover the remaining area of
the impression. One does not pour from a height or pour the material across the impres-
sion like syrup on pancakes. The impact of casting material falling from a height can ruin
impression detail. Pouring the material over the exposed impression also tends to cause
damage to detail. Whether a form is used or not, the technician ensures that a sufficient
volume of casting material is poured into the impression so that the entire impression is
covered to a depth of at least ½ in. Baffling the flow of the casting material into the form
or slowly spreading the material with a spatula are acceptable methods as well. The latter
may be necessary if it becomes evident that the casting material has already begun to set
after the technician begins pouring. At this point, it is too late to remove the material, at
least not without destroying the evidence. If the set is not too advanced, the technician can
carefully manipulate the material into position. In this circumstance, Bodziak also sug-
gests using a stick or a finger to manipulate the material, “vibrating it back and forth on the
surface,” which helps the material settle into place in the impression.9
After pouring, the material is allowed to set. The time required is variable, depend-
ing upon how thick the mixture was and the ambient temperature. Thicker mixtures and
warmer temperatures will reduce the set time, while thin mixtures and cooler tempera-
tures will increase the set time. A good rule of thumb for most situations is to let the cast
sit a minimum of 20 to 30 min. During the set, the cast can be marked in a number of ways.
One method is to insert a paper clip halfway into one end of the cast, allowing it to set
with the material. Afterward, the exposed clip provides a method of attaching a standard
evidence tag. Another solution is to use tags with strings (either evidence tags or blank
paper tags). The strings of the tag are submerged into the material before it sets, and the tag
can then be annotated after recovery. Of course, the cast itself can be marked, either with
a permanent marker (after the cast is recovered) or by etching the material before it sets
completely. As discussed with rubber casting material, the technician should never rush
recovery. The exterior of the cast may appear set, but the interior may not be. There are a
number of additional aspects of evidence recovery that go along with casting that can be
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 287

attended to during the curing period. This includes recovering soil samples from the vicin-
ity for subsequent trace evidence examination. These soil samples should come from the
immediate area of the cast and include soil to a similar depth as the impression. Prior to
the introduction of digital cameras, clean plastic film canisters were common at the scene
and were a ready container for soil samples. In a digital age, the technician should ensure
they have some form of clean plastic container available for soil sample collection.
Although dental stone sets very hard and is not easily damaged, the technician should still
use care in recovering the cast. Oftentimes, the cast must be levered out of the ground, and too
much pressure applied too quickly can result in the cast breaking. The cast should air-dry for
an extended period prior to any attempt to ship or examine it. Storing the cast before it dries
completely or shipping the cast while still wet can result in mold formation and weaken the
cast itself. Cleaning the cast is not recommended. Submit the cast as it is, and allow the lab
examiners to determine what process they will use to clean excess dirt from the cast.
There are occasions when the technician may encounter submerged impressions. These
may consist of impressions in shallow standing water, impressions that have been filled up
with water, or impressions made in mud at the bottom of a body of water. Dental stone
casting is possible in any one of these three situations. When confronted with an impres-
sion under a significant body of water, the most effective method to follow is to utilize a
form and place it around the impression. If possible, build a channeling form around the
impression that reaches above the waterline. Slowly direct the mixed dental stone into the
form by allowing it to sink to the bottom through the water. The technician should be pre-
pared to mix a large quantity of dental stone in order to achieve any result. In situations
where the impression is filled with water, the technician can sift dental stone slowly into the
standing water, as seen in Figure 9.44. When the water becomes viscous, a form is added
around the impression and the process is continued until a thorough mixture is achieved.
The form will prevent additional water from seeping in and allow the mixture to set, as
seen in Figure 9.45.

Figure 9.44  Casting a footwear mark containing standing water. When presented with a
mark that has standing water in it, the technician slowly sifts dental stone into the water
rather than using wet-mixed dental stone. (Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden.
With permission.)
288 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.45  Casting a footwear mark containing standing water. Once the majority of the
standing water is absorbed and the mixture becomes viscous, a form is added, and additional
dental stone is added. (Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)

Dental stone techniques are useful not only for casting three-dimensional impressions,
but also when trying to recover two-dimensional impression evidence. This technique is
very successful when casting wet prints on hard surfaces, including concrete. These can be
marks caused by moisture on the shoes or some other contaminant (Figure 9.46). Obviously,
such marks are extremely fragile and depending upon the environment (such marks are

Figure 9.46  Wet footwear marks on a hard surface. Wet footwear marks can occur on hard
surfaces such as concrete, but they are readily lost due to evaporation. If present, these marks
can also be lifted with dental stone. (Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With
permission.)
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 289

Figure 9.47  Wet footwear marks on a hard surface. After evaluating the wet prints, the tech-
nician lightly dusts the most detailed wet prints with magnetic powder. (Courtesy of Special
Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)

unlikely to be observed in hot and humid conditions), may not survive long enough to be
visualized or collected by the crime scene technician. But when the temperature and con-
ditions allow, to capture such prints the technician uses magnetic powder to cover the wet
print (Figure 9.47). Once powdered, a form is taped in place around the impression, as seen
in Figure 9.48. Taping the outside edges of the form in place is an important step. Since
the form cannot be depressed into the hard floor, taping effectively contains the mixture
and prevents leakage. Oftentimes, a seal breaker is necessary to remove the casts from the
surface. The dental stone will adhere to the floor, making it difficult to remove. An effective
seal breaker is to place a piece of doubled-over tape on the floor, beneath the top edge of the

Figure 9.48  Wet footwear marks on a hard surface. Using tape or paper, a form is created and
taped into place around the dusted wet print. Dental stone is added to the form in a normal
fashion and allowed to set. (Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)
290 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.49  A wet print recovered using dental stone. (Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don
Hayden. With permission.)

form. The tape should extend to either side, allowing the technician to grasp the tape easily.
Be sure to place the tape in such a fashion that it does not overlay any part of the impres-
sion. After the cast cures, the technician grabs the tape and leverages up on it as a means of
removing the cast from the surface. Figure 9.49 is an example of a two-dimensional print
recovered with dental stone. These types of prints, if present, should always be considered
fragile evidence and collected as soon as possible.

Snow Prints

Casting in snow can be very challenging. That is because snow comes in a variety of
densities and textures. Previous authors have described the varieties of snowpack that
may be encountered and which casting methods work best with the different types of
snow.10 For example, snow with a high water content (slush) is processed differently
than a dry powdery snow (noncompactable). Understanding the general properties of
the snowpack containing the impression evidence will be of great advantage to the
investigator.
A primary method for casting snow print impressions is the use of dental stone.
Normally this technique involves the use of a commercial aerosol wax product that is
sprayed into the snow print prior to casting. The wax provides structure to the snow impres-
sion and prevents damage from heat. Casting materials, including dental stone, produce a
significant level of heat when curing, enough to melt the details present in the snow print.
Having employed the aerosol wax in Alaska for several years, the author found it useful,
but also troublesome. If left in a crime scene vehicle for extended periods or exposed to the
elements at the crime scene for too long, the spray cans often fail. Either the can will lose
the ability to spray at all or the product will clog the spray head and produce a sputtering
wax. This leads to uneven coverage and can actually damage the snow impression from the
globules of wax. The cans should not be left in vehicles overnight and should be kept in a
warm area (the interior of the passenger compartment with the heater on) until just before
use in the scene. Bill Gifford, now retired from the Anchorage Police Department, suggests
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 291

Figure 9.50  In the dry casting method, casting material is sifted onto the snow print in light
layers. Moisture from the snow will mix the material, or water can be misted onto the mate-
rial. This process is repeated numerous times, layer by layer. (Courtesy of Tom Adair, Denver,
Colorado.)

using standard dental stone techniques for snow prints with an added step. The dental
stone is cooled in the snow before it is poured. Setting the mix to the side and allowing it
to cool in the snow and ambient air will reduce the melting effect caused by the curing of
the dental stone.11 Another approach to counteracting the heat produced by the casting
material is to use snow to supplement the mixing water, which of course will require using
less water.12
Another method that is highly effective for casting snow impressions is “dry cast-
ing.” Using a common pastry sifter, the technician lightly coats the impression with a
thin layer of dry dental stone powder (see Figure 9.50). The powder will draw in mois-
ture from the surrounding snow, but additional water can be misted onto the impres-
sion using a spray bottle held at least 12 in. from the impression. Like the aerosol wax
products, the water is sprayed above the impression and allowed to drift down onto it.
The technician should look for a color change in the stone material indicating that an
adequate amount of water had been absorbed or applied. If water begins to bead on the
surface, you have added too much. This layer is allowed to dry for at least 5 min and the
process is repeated, layer by layer, until the sifted dental stone covers the outsole ele-
ments. After the final layer is applied, allow the mixture to set for at least 15 min. Once
this base layer has set, the technician mixes a 2-pound mixture of wet dental stone (as in
standard casting) and the mixture is poured into the impression area and allowed to set
(see Figure 9.51). This process can be accomplished following photographic highlighting
without any adverse effects.
One of the earliest methods developed for casting snow prints was the sulfur cast-
ing technique. It remains an effective method for casting snow impressions. While it is
a bit more involved than the dental stone casting method, it produces excellent results.
Processed sulfur can be purchased in either a powdered or prill form. The sulfur is heated
in a glass or metal pot over a flame until liquefied. A small propane camp stove works
well as the heating device. This heating process requires constant monitoring and stir-
ring. If the sulfur gets too hot, it will turn into a dark brown syrupy mixture that will
292 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.51  Once sufficient layers have been cast using the dry cast method, normal casting
material is applied to create a complete cast. (Courtesy of Tom Adair, Denver, Colorado.)

not cast. Additionally, the sulfur is flammable and must be monitored while melting to
ensure no direct contact with the flame. Once the sulfur is liquefied, it is removed from
the heat source and allowed to cool while stirring occasionally. As the liquid cools, the
surface will begin to crystallize (see Figure  9.52). Once this crystallization forms, the
hot liquid is quickly poured directly into the snow impression. It may on initial thought
seem illogical to pour a hot liquid into snow, but the process works exceedingly well (see
Figure 9.53). The sulfur hardens the instant it contacts the snow, forming an excellent
cast. No backing is added to the sulfur cast, but the cast will be fragile and care must
exercised when handling (see Figure  9.54). Nause and Forsythe-Erman found that the
application of an aerosol plastic after the sulfur sets strengthens the cast without damag-
ing the outsole detail.13

Figure 9.52  Using the sulfur technique, the sulfur must be monitored when heated. Once liq-
uefied, the sulfur is removed from the heat and monitored. When crystals form on the surface
of the liquid, the sulfur is ready to pour. (Courtesy of Tom Adair, Denver, Colorado.)
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 293

Figure 9.53  The hot sulfur is poured into the snow impression. Although it can be baffled, as
shown here, the liquid will immediately crystallize in contact with the snow and does not melt
the impression itself. (Courtesy of Tom Adair, Denver, Colorado.)

Figure 9.54  A sulfur cast of a snow impression. (Courtesy of Tom Adair, Denver, Colorado.)

Photography of snow prints is another area of concern. Snow is a highly reflective sur-
face, which often complicates traditional flash photography. One effective method that
minimizes washout from the flash is known as highlighting. In highlighting, a dark-col-
ored spray paint is applied to the impression from a height of at least 8 in. (see Figure 9.55).
This height minimizes any damage that may occur by spraying pressurized paint directly
into the impression. Multiple layers of spray directed into the impression will generally
increase contrast of the outsole elements, making oblique lighting photography more effec-
tive. If highlighting during the day, the snow impressions must be covered with cardboard
prior to any casting. The dark-colored paint absorbs solar radiation, heating the impres-
sion. Even on a mild sunny day a highlighted impression may be completely melted within
10 min if not covered.
Casting snow impressions, as with any forensic technique, requires familiarity and
practice with the specific technique. Crime scene technicians should familiarize them-
selves with the most common snow pack types they encounter and then develop through
practice several methods that work best under those particular conditions.
294 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.55  A dark spray paint can be applied to the impression to better bring out details. The
figure on the left is the impression before highlighting and the figure on the right after high-
lighting. The difference in photography detail is apparent. (Courtesy of Tom Adair, Denver,
Colorado.)

Gelatin and Other Adhesive Lifters

Gelatin and adhesive lifters are the most effective tools for collecting two-dimensional
impression evidence from a variety of surfaces. Gelatin lifters—a gelatinous substance
on a pliable substrate—can be used on almost any surface, including textured surfaces
and porous surfaces like paper. Adhesive and rubber lifters are limited to recoveries from
nonporous smooth surfaces like floors. Adhesive lifters are akin to a large fingerprint-
lifting tape, with a little more rigidity. Rubber lifters are nothing more than large, rubber,
fingerprint lifters. Two-dimensional prints, such as wet prints on smooth surfaces, can
be dusted with magnetic powder, as described in the section on dental stone, and lifted
with these lifters. Latent shoe marks caused by the rubber of the shoe sole can also be
dusted to enhance detail and then lifted with lifters. Visible dust prints respond effec-
tively to gelatin lifters and can be used after any ESDL attempt. When the technician is
presented with dirt, oil, or grease prints, gelatin lifters may be the only functional recov-
ery method possible.
Of the three lifters, gelatin lifters are more functional than their predecessors (the
adhesive and rubber lifters), but that function comes with a price. Gelatin lifters cost quite
a bit more and are also prone to damage due to extremes in temperature. Based on cost
alone, gelatin lifters should be maintained exactly as the manufacturer suggests until
actual use. In terms of functionality, gelatin lifters are the best lifting method, followed by
rubber lifters. Adhesive lifters should be used only as a last resort, as they often capture air
bubbles and produce a lower-quality lift.
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 295

Figure 9.56  Two-dimensional prints on hard surfaces can be collected using gelatin and rub-
ber lifters. Here, the technician lowers the lifter in place, bowing both ends. Contact is made
in the center, and the lifter is slowly smoothed into place from this point. (Courtesy of Special
Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)

Whether using a gelatin, rubber, or adhesive lifter, the technician removes the clear
cover from the adhesive backing of the lifter and—bending the adhesive section of the lifter
in the middle—places the lifter into position on the impression. The lifter is slowly lowered
into place from the middle, using caution to prevent unwanted air bubbles or creases of any
sort (Figure 9.56). After laying the lifter in place, the technician rolls it with a fingerprint
ink pad roller, as seen in Figure 9.57. An alternative method for use with the gelatin lifter is
to place one end in contact with the surface and slowly roll the remaining lifter into place.
After application, the lifter is raised with a steady motion from one end (Figure 9.58). The
technician should not attempt to lift the adhesive from both ends. Equally important, the

Figure 9.57  Once the lifter is in place, the technician rolls out any air bubbles using a finger-
print roller. (Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden. With permission.)
296 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 9.58  When removing the lifter, the technician starts at one end and, using a single
and steady motion, removes the lifter off the surface. A protective transparent cover is then
placed on top to protect the recovered mark. (Courtesy of Special Agent (Ret.) Don Hayden.
With permission.)

technician should not stop or hesitate halfway through the lift. As with fingerprint lifters,
either action can damage the lifter or the detail captured on the lift. Once removed, the
technician places the lifter on a solid substrate and replaces the clear plastic cover, smooth-
ing out any air bubbles.

Summary

Three basic techniques the crime scene technician should understand and be prepared
to employ in processing a crime scene include the use of an ALS system, fingerprinting a
variety of different surfaces, and casting impression evidence.
The ALS is useful in a wide variety of functions at the crime scene. Critical aspects of
the ALS include its use as a search tool for biological fluids, fibers, and hairs. A broadband
filter (390 to 520 nm) is the typical filter employed in a standard blue light. This filter, in
combination with a longwave UV light (365 to 415 nm), can be helpful when looking for
biological evidence such as sperm, spittle, and urine. The dyes used in various fibers are
all quite different, so the crime scene technician must employ a wide range of narrowband
wavelengths to search for fiber evidence. When searching for hairs, red and blond hairs
may fluoresce, but dark hairs generally will not. Dark hairs are best found using clean
white light directed at an oblique angle to the surface being searched. Near-UV wave-
lengths (415 to 485 nm) as well as orange-red wavelengths of 570 to 700 nm can be effective
for visualizing bruises and bite marks on human skin.
On-scene fingerprinting techniques include basic powder-and-brush methods, the use
of superglue fuming to stabilize latent prints, the use of small-particle reagent to recover
prints from wet surfaces, and a host of other techniques. The decision of which technique
to use in recovering latent fingerprints is very much a matter of what kind of surface the
latent print is located on. The various techniques are based on surface characteristics, which
include porous, nonporous smooth, and nonporous rough. It is important for the techni-
cian to realize that the on-scene techniques represent only a small portion of the methods
Basic Skills for Scene Processing 297

available for fingerprint recovery. The crime lab can recover fingerprint evidence in situa-
tions where no on-scene technique would work. This demands that the technician assess
the importance of the surface and the likelihood that on-scene techniques will work. It is far
better to seize and send items to the lab for analysis than risk losing the fingerprint on scene.
Fingerprints can also be recovered from a number of difficult surfaces, including the adhe-
sive side of tape, from human skin, and from surfaces exposed to heat and soot. The most
effective method for recovering prints from adhesive tape is the use of crystal violet. The most
effective method for recovering latent prints from human skin is the adding machine paper
technique. Neither technique requires significant supplies, and both are easily mastered for
on-scene efforts. Fire scene evidence might appear on first glance to be a poor medium for
fingerprints. Despite appearances, fire scene evidence can be examined visually for latent
prints. If none are located, the soot is carefully washed off the object with running water.
Very often, latent prints on these objects stabilize and are made visible by the effects of both
heat and soot during the fire.
Impression evidence occurs in the crime scene as tool marks, bite marks, footwear
marks, and tire marks. It is collected using three basic methods at the crime scene. It can be
cast using rubber or plaster-based materials, it can be recovered using an electrostatic lift-
ing device, or it can be recovered using large rubber or gelatin lifters. No matter what tech-
nique is chosen, quality crime scene photographs of the impression evidence are required
as well. Minutiae of interest to the impression evidence examiner are not always captured
by the various recovery techniques, and photographs may provide better evidence on
which to conduct an examination.
Casting of tool marks is accomplished using silicone-based casting material. When
presented with tool mark evidence, it is best to collect the tool mark as well as the cast
and submit both to the crime lab. Three-dimensional impression evidence such as tire
and footwear marks in soft surfaces (e.g., dirt) is collected using casting material. Dental
stone is the most effective plaster material to use based on its strength. Two-dimensional
marks such as wet prints on concrete can be cast with dental stone as well. The mark is first
dusted with magnetic powder, and then dental stone is poured over the top. Other two-
dimensional prints such as marks on floors and other hard surfaces can be recovered using
large rubber or gelatin lifting sheets. Dust prints on floors, paper, carpets, and clothing can
be recovered using an electrostatic lifting device.

Suggested Reading
Bodziak, W.J., Footwear Impression Evidence, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1995.
Police Scientific Development Branch, Fingerprint Development Handbook, Home Office Policing
and Crime Reduction Group, Heanor Gate Printing Ltd., Derbyshire, UK, 2000.
Ramirez, C., and Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL, 2011.

Chapter Questions
1. Explain how the conversion of light is utilized as a search tool in the crime scene.
2. The fingerprinting technique is based on the surface being examined. Identify and
provide an example of the four basic surface types.
298 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

3. Identify the purpose of fluorescent fingerprint powder and provide an example of

when it is used.
4. What is the primary reason for using the superglue fuming technique?
5. What are the steps used to locate fingerprint evidence in fire scene evidence?
6. What are the steps used to photograph an impression prior to casting it?
7. Under what conditions is the electrostatic dust lifting device used?
8. Under what conditions and for what purpose would a fixative spray be used when
casting impression evidence?
9. What are the steps used to cast an impression with dental stone when the impres-
sion contains standing water?
10. What is the primary distinction between conditions where a gelatin lifter can be
used compared with adhesive or rubber lifters?

Notes
1. Housman, D.G., and Maloney, M.S., Forensic Light Sources, a paper and presentation to the
Association of Crime Scene Reconstruction, Kansas City, MO, 1999.
2. Ibid., p. 6.
3. Sirchie Fingerprint Laboratories Criminal Investigative Tools Catalog, Sirchie Fingerprint
Laboratories, Youngsville, NC, 2000, p. 80.
4. Moonglo and Midnight Blu are trademark names of DOJES, Inc., Ocoee, FL.
5. Nielson, L., SA FBI ERT, verbal conversation, Oakland, CA, January 2003.
6. Corr, J.J., The Use of Flame in the Development of Latent Prints, unpublished paper, January 1957.
7. Thorton, J.E., and Emmons, B.W., Development of Latent Prints in Arson Cases, n.d., pp. 1–7,
unpublished.
8. Bodziak, W.J., Footwear Impression Evidence, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1995, p. 83.
9. Ibid., p. 84.
10. Adair, T.W., Tewes, R., Bellinger, T., and Nichols, T., Characteristics of Snow and Their Influence
on Casting Methods for Impression Evidence, Journal of Forensic Identification, 57(6), 2007,
807–22.
11. Gifford, W., Verbal communication, October 2002.
12. Gifford, W., Casting Footwear and Tire Tracks, The Scene (Assoc. Crime Scene Reconstruction),
10, 2003, 8.
13. Nause, L., and Forsythe-Erman, J.C., Casting Footwear Impressions in Snow: Snowprint Wax
vs. Prill Sulphur, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Gazette, 54(12), 1992.
14. Bond, J., and Low, T., Digital Mapping of Differential Oxidation Arising from Fingerprint
Sweat Deposits, presentation to the Association of Crime Scene Reconstruction, Jacksonville,
FL, February 8, 2011.
15. Cohen, D., and Cohen, E., A Significant Improvement to the SPR Process: More Latent Prints
Were Revealed after Thorough Wiping of Small Particle Reagent-Treated Surface, Journal of
Forensic Identification, 60(2), 2010,152–62.
Shooting Scene Documentation
and Reconstruction
ROSS M. GARDNER
MICHAEL MALONEY
10
Given our society’s infatuation with firearms, it is not surprising that a significant number
of violent crime scenes involve guns. As a result, understanding ballistic evidence becomes
significant not only for the purpose of properly processing the scene, but also in analyzing
and understanding the scene. At every shooting scene, the technician seeks a variety of
different types of ballistic evidence that may help to define where, in what order, and under
what circumstances a given firearm was utilized. Whether responsible for the ultimate
analysis or not, the crime scene technician must document all of the various aspects of a
shooting scene in a fashion that allows for such analysis.
Before proceeding with this chapter, it would be wise to revisit the discussion of ballis-
tic evidence offered in Chapter 2. Basic concepts regarding the types of artifacts produced
by firearms are necessary to the discussion of a shooting scene reconstruction. At a mini-
mum, the following nomenclature/definitions should be understood:

• Cartridge: A complete unit of unfired ammunition. Typically the cartridge is

made up of a bullet and casing, with primers and propellant contained within.
• Cartridge case: The subunit of the cartridge that holds the primer and propel-
lant. This casing is typically made of metal and will be either expelled from
automatic and semiautomatic weapons or retained in single shot or revolver
type weapons.
• Projectile/bullet: The subunit of a cartridge that is expelled from the firearm
under the pressure created by the burning propellant. Bullets are typically a single
mass of metal, with varying constructions (e.g., solid lead, semi-jacketed lead core,
fully jacketed lead core). The projectile can be in some instances “shot” consisting
of various sized small lead or steel balls, expelled in mass from long-bore weapons
(e.g., the typical shotgun) or in some instances from handguns and other weapons
(e.g., snake-shot cartridges).
• Chamber: The location of the firearm that holds the cartridge when it is fired.
• Barrel: The tubular aspect of the firearm that directs the path of the projectile
when fired from the firearm.
• Ejection port: Associated with semiautomatic and automatic weapons, the ejec-
tion port is where the expended casing is ejected from the chamber.

To understand all that ballistic evidence can define in context, the technician must
consider three separate areas of study, and the resulting information from each must be
incorporated into the shooting scene reconstruction. Ballistics is broken down into three
areas of study:

• Internal or interior ballistics

299
300 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

• Terminal ballistics
• External or exterior ballistics

By combining information from each area of ballistics, it may be possible to limit the
position(s) of victims or perpetrators at the moment that a given firearm was discharged.
Each area of study is accomplished by a different group of individuals, but ultimately all of
the information must be consolidated in order to make sense of it. These groups include:

• Forensic firearms examiners are the people who deal with internal ballistics. As
explained in Chapter 2, this is the study and examination of the firearm itself,
which also includes ejection patterns, gunshot residue deposition, and other related
aspects. Although most firearms examiners are trained and capable of performing
external ballistics, few in practice have the opportunity to visit crime scenes as a
result of workload.
• Forensic pathologists deal with terminal ballistics. This is the consideration of the
effect of the bullet on a human target and includes defining the path of the bullet
through the victim.
• Crime scene technicians are the group responsible for conducting external bal-
listics. This area of ballistics considers the path and trajectory of the bullet after
leaving the barrel of the weapon to its final impact. External ballistics is based
primarily on evaluation of bullet defects in the scene.

Internal Ballistics

Forensic firearm examinations entail significant issues. When presented with a weapon,
the examiner first considers the condition and functionality of the weapon in question.
Questions the firearms examiner attempts to resolve are:

• Does the weapon operate as intended?

• Can it operate at all?
• Are there any aspects of the weapon capable of creating some form of acciden-
tal discharge?

Accidental discharge of a firearm is quite different from unintentional discharge of a fire-

arm. Accidental discharge occurs when a weapon malfunctions and without direct effort of
pulling the trigger the weapon causes a cartridge to be fired. Unintentional discharge occurs
when the operator pulls the trigger without the specific intent of doing so at that moment. In
shooting reconstruction situations, routine arguments are presented of accidental discharge
caused by some malfunction of the weapon. The firearms examiner typically rules these out
when no apparent alteration, damage, or malfunction can be identified.
Next, as described in Chapter 2, the examiner looks at a variety of class and individ-
ual characteristic marks that allow association and identification of bullets, casings, and
weapons to one another. Beyond identifying weapons and comparing bullets and casings
to weapons, there are several additional areas of ballistics the forensic firearm examiner
considers that may assist in reconstructing the shooting incident.
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 301

The first is the evaluation of ejection patterns. For the most part, common semiau-
tomatic and automatic weapons encountered in criminal investigations eject expended
casings through an ejection port right and slightly backward. But the specific pattern of
ejection created by a given weapon may be of interest, particularly when considering the
location of a cluster of casings in the scene and where it might intersect an established tra-
jectory. Ejection pattern studies call for repetitive firing of the weapon from a known posi-
tion and consideration of where the casings fall. Individual casing position in the crime
scene, however, is a matter of a number of variables. A single casing’s position may do little
to define the position of a weapon when fired. At best, it may support or refute a particular
position and nothing more. Casing ejection studies must always be considered in context.
What surfaces were the casings ejected to? Could they roll? Were they disturbed? Often,
the answer to these questions will make ejection studies moot, but on occasion an ejection
pattern study will be of interest to the investigator.
The second area of study by the firearms examiner is the evaluation of both gunshot res-
idue patterns and shotgun shot patterns. By considering the location and size of either type
of pattern, whether it is on skin, cloth, or some other target surface in the scene, the exam-
iner can often make a range-to-target determination. These conclusions usually require the
specific weapon and ammunition used in the event, from which the examiner will conduct
a number of test firings at known distances. The examiner then compares the known dis-
tance patterns to the questioned pattern from the scene or victim. Even lacking a specific
pattern, provided data concerning the type of weapon and ammunition in play, the firearms
examiner can generally set outside limits of where stippling and tattooing effects should be
expected. This distance can vary widely based on variations in propellants and weapons.
A third area of consideration is the examination of bullets and bullet fragments for
trace evidence and damage. This visual examination may provide specific information
regarding what items a bullet or bullet fragment came in contact with along its trajectory.
The firearms examiner looks for evidence of three types of characteristics on the bullet or
bullet fragment:

• Layering of trace evidence, indicative of sequence of targets struck

• Damage to the projectile, indicative of the type of target the bullet struck
• Deformation of the projectile, indicative of a deflection along its flight path and
the angle of the deflection1

This aspect of bullet deformation is often quite apparent. The firearms examiner will
note deformations of bullets that deflected off a surface and based on that deformation may
be able to offer information regarding the general angle at which the bullet struck the sur-
face. This information can be quite helpful in trying to place the general area of the shooter,
as in the following case example.

Case Example: Defining Impossible Aspects of a Shooting

Two individuals ambushed a rival in an apartment complex as he walked to his vehicle.
All three were armed and fired weapons in the scene, although no weapons were recov-
ered. Unfortunately, as is often the case, an innocent bystander was struck by a bullet
and killed. As it happened, a surveillance video of the parking lot allowed investigators
to know where the various parties had or had not been during the incident. In pursuing
302 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 10.1  The front and side view of a bullet recovered from a shooting victim. The flat-
tened side view and the striations across that surface seen in the front view show this bullet
struck an unyielding surface before impacting the victim.

those responsible for the killing, several specific hypotheses were developed, including:
the ambushed man shot the bystander directly (a straight-on shot) thinking he was an
attacker.
The bullet recovered at autopsy from the victim was determined to be a .38-caliber
bullet. It was determined that additional .38-caliber bullets found in the scene were
fired by the same .38-caliber weapon. The trajectories from these additional .38 bul-
lets were oriented S-N and struck a vehicle on the far side (south side) of the parking
lot some 20 m from where the ambushed man was standing and shooting. The victim,
however, was positioned north of this third man.
The victim received a single penetrating bullet wound with a bullet recovered from
his chest. The bullet recovered was noted to have a significant deformation to one
side, indicating it struck some unyielding surface at a distinct angle (see Figure 10.1).
The additional .38 bullets and trajectories positioned on the south side of the parking
lot, associated to a position where of one of the two ambushers was observed, and cor-
relation of the bullet from the victim to this weapon, demanded that unless the third
party had moved to the south side, he could not be the shooter. The video effectively
eliminated this movement. The presence of the deformation to the bullet recovered
from the victim indicated that the bullet had not struck the victim directly, but rather
had hit some intermediate object. Together these data items eliminated the hypothesis
presented and forced consideration of another hypothesis (e.g., one of the two ambush-
ers was the shooter of the .38-caliber weapon).

Terminal Ballistics

The forensic pathologist considers the effect of projectiles on the body and will provide
valuable information that may assist in limiting the position of the victim at the time of
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 303

wounding. The pathologist describes all injuries, including bullet wounds, in the “Evidence
of Injury” section of the autopsy report.
An important aspect that the pathologist will address when describing bullet wounds
is the range of the wound. This description defines the distance from the muzzle to an
entry wound at the time of firing. The pathologist determines this based on the charac-
teristics present in the wound, including burning in or around the wound, soot deposits,
and the presence of stippling. Stippling or tattooing is the embedding of unburned and
partially burned gunpowder residues in the skin. Based upon the examination, the typical
categories of muzzle ranges the pathologist will describe are:

• Close contact or hard contact: The muzzle is in direct contact with the skin or
pressed into the skin.
• Loose contact: The muzzle is in extremely close proximity to the skin, but at the
moment of firing, a small gap is created between the two.
• Near contact: The muzzle is generally said to be not more than 5 in. from the skin.
• Intermediate range: The muzzle is typically between 5 and 40 in. (a general maxi-
mum of 40 in. is usually identified, but the internal ballistics information from the
firearms examiner may alter this maximum distance). Intermediate-range gunshot
wounds are deduced singularly from the presence of stippling around the wound.
• Indeterminate range: This determination means that no conclusion can be drawn
on muzzle distance. This determination is found in situations where there are no
markings except for the bullet defect. In the past, many pathologists would define
this wound as “distant,” suggesting a distance in excess of the maximum distance
stippling is expected. Most pathologists now use indeterminate to describe dis-
tant wounds, simply because there is always a possibility that a secondary target,
unknown to the pathologist or investigator, may have taken the flash, soot, and
stippling effects.

The distances described above are always approximate; in fact, it is rare to see them
listed specifically in current forensic pathology references. Therefore it is a good idea to
discuss any findings with the medical examiner offering the opinion. Any given medical
examiner may have his or her own general interpretation of the ranges associated with near
contact or intermediate that may extend or shorten the distances offered here in the text.
Another critical consideration the pathologist will address is whether a defect is an
entrance or exit wound. A projectile may enter the body and not exit, enter the body and exit,
graze the body leaving only a minor wound, travel parallel to its surface producing multiple
wounds, or enter and exit the body any number of times. As a result, there may be any num-
ber of bullet defects with widely different morphology. Based on the characteristics of each
defect, the pathologist can define a generalized description of the path of fire (e.g., front to
back, left to right). In the instance of multiple wounds from a single bullet, such information
will often define a very specific position of the victim’s body at the moment of that wounding.
When describing a wound path, the pathologist typically defines what organs or struc-
tures the projectile passed through and then states its generalized course through the body
(e.g., left to right, front to back, and slightly downward). In the latter description, what the
pathologist describes is the path in terms of a standard anatomical position. Such descrip-
tions do not, in and of themselves, define the orientation of the shooter to the victim in
the scene, since either shooter or victim can bend, twist, or rotate on various anatomical
304 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

axes at the time of the shot. This concern is addressed in some detail in Chapter 12, when
discussing gunshot wounds.
Bullet injuries are typically described as:

• Penetrating injuries, where the bullet enters but does not exit
• Perforating injuries, where the bullet enters and exits
• Tangential injuries, where the bullet skims the surface producing several shal-
low wounds
• Grazing injuries, where the projectile leaves only a minor abrasion as it passes
adjacent to the body

External Ballistics

External ballistics considers the trajectory of the bullet after leaving the barrel of the
weapon. The information derived is dependent upon the scene and the targets involved.
If a bullet strikes various targets within a scene, the evidence left by those strikes can be
informative. The location of these items, the shape of the resulting defect, and the inter-
relationships of this evidence may allow for some level of understanding as to where the
weapon was fired from and where the victim was at the time of the firing.
In the shooting scene, the technician may be presented with any number of defects.
Bullet defects in the scene are described in a somewhat similar fashion as bullet wounds:

• Penetrating defect, where the bullet enters but does not exit a surface
• Perforating defects, where the bullet enters a surface and exits
• Ricochet or deflection, where the bullet strikes a surface and deflects off it at some
angle without penetrating the surface completely
• Tangential defects, where the bullet skims a surface creating a series of defects

In addition to actual bullet defects, there may be defects that mimic or appear to be
related to bullet impacts. In circumstances involving penetrating or perforating impacts,
visible bullet fragments or complete bullets will often verify that the defect is a bullet
impact. When dealing with defects associated with ricochets or tangential impacts, how-
ever, visible fragments may not be present to aid in this verification. In either circumstance,
chemical tests can aid in verifying the defect as a bullet impact.
The text will discuss trajectory analysis documentation last, but the reader should not
construe that bullet defects are documented differently than any other evidence. Prior to
any invasive action (e.g., insertion of a trajectory rod, chemical evaluation) each defect
must be documented in situ with overall, evidence-establishing, and close-up/forensic
quality photographs. The technique of road mapping described in Chapter 6 works quite
well for documenting bullet defects.

Bullet Defect Verification through Chemical Evaluation

Over time, most technicians will observe and evaluate a number of bullet defects, includ-
ing glancing impacts. This visual evaluation will leave the technician with some level of
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 305

Figure 10.2  Several bullet defects. Typical defects have regular margins that are circular to
elliptical in shape. Often, a small abrasion ring is evident on the margin of the defect. With
experience, many bullet defects are evident based on visual reference alone.

confidence that a defect is associated with a bullet and not some other action. Figure 10.2
shows several typical bullet defects. To increase this confidence and to deal with defects
for which the technician has no confidence, chemical tests are available to help verify the
presence of copper and lead, the two primary components of bullets. Lead is deposited
onto scene surfaces from two distinct actions. The first is from friction of the bullet with a
target surface, resulting in the deposit of metallic lead. A second source of lead is ionized
lead, associated with the gaseous discharge of the muzzle effluent. This deposit may occur
as a result of a muzzle in close proximity to a scene surface.3 Primer residues also occur as a
result of the firearm discharging. Primer residues consist of fused particles of barium, anti-
mony, and lead. Primer residues are examined at a crime lab using the scanning electron
microscope (SEM). The presence of metallic lead in a suspected defect is evaluated on scene
using the sodium rhodizonate test.
To conduct the test, the technician requires three working solutions. The first is a 15%
solution of glacial acetic acid. Using a piece of filter paper at least twice the size of the
evident defect, the technician moistens the paper with the acetic acid. The paper is then
pressed against the suspect defect. If metallic lead is present in the defect, the solution will
cause a transfer of lead acetate onto the filter paper, with no evident visual change. The
filter paper is then sprayed with a working solution of sodium rhodizonate. The working
solution is prepared by adding approximately 4 to 100 ml of water. The ratio of water to
sodium rhodizonate is not critical; while on scene, the technician can simply add a small
amount of sodium rhodizonate to the water until the solution is similar in appearance to
a strong tea.4 This solution is then sprayed onto the filter paper. In the presence of metallic
lead, the filter paper treated with sodium rhodizonate will immediately turn a bright scar-
let color. If available, a final confirmatory test can be accomplished by spraying the filter
paper with a 5% solution of hydrochloric acid (HCl). This will result in the previous scarlet
color turning blue-violet.
306 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Copper is also deposited on scene defects as a result of friction from the impact of a
jacketed or semi-jacketed bullet. A chemical test using dithio oximide (DTO) will verify
the presence of metallic copper. The metallic copper test uses a base solution of 2:5 dilution
of ammonia. This solution is created using 20 ml of NH4OH diluted in 50 ml of diH2O 2
nitroso-1-napthhol.1 The test paper is moistened with the 2:5 solution and pressed to the
defect. This results in a transfer of copper to the paper. The paper is then treated by spray-
ing a solution of 0.2% DTO in ethanol onto the suspect area. A positive test results in a
green color reaction.
Simple and effective tests for either copper or lead are available commercially as well.
These commercially available tests are named Plumbtesmo® (the lead test) and Cuperotesmo®
(the copper test).5 Both tests come as small pretreated filter papers that are moistened with
distilled water and then pressed against the defect. Each gives a color positive reaction
(reddish violet) in the presence of its respective metal. The only limiting factor of the com-
mercially prepared tests is the size of the filter paper. The precut papers are usually too
small to capture all of the lead or copper wipe/splash surrounding the defect.
An additional chemical test for consideration on scene is the nitrite compound test,
also known as the modified Griess test. This test is not directed specifically at bullet defects,
but rather at surfaces believed to be in close proximity to a muzzle when the firearm was
discharged. The muzzle effluent consists of nitrite compounds, smoke, soot, and particles
of burnt and partially burnt gunpowder. These products do not travel far, but are deposited
on surfaces near the muzzle. The commercial tests consist of an acetic acid solution that is
sprayed onto a large test paper. This solution absorbs the nitrites of the effluent and forms
nitrous acid. Sulfanilic acid in the second solution is sprayed onto the paper and combines
with the nitrous acid to create a diazonium compound of sulfanilic acid. The diazonium
compound couples with alpha-naphthol, which is also in the second solution, resulting in
an orange color on the test paper.6 Such a test may assist in validating the general location
(e.g., proximity of the muzzle) of a weapon when discharged.

Defining the Bullet Impact Angle Based on Defect Shape

Having examined a defect by visual means and validated a defect through the presence of
either a bullet or bullet fragments, or by means of a copper or lead test, the technician is
left to consider in what direction and at what angle the bullet struck the target. There is an
empirical relationship between the shape of the bullet defect and the angle of the bullet’s
impact into the target. This relationship was first observed and validated in terms of blood
droplets impacting targets,7 but the relationship is based on the nature of the defect caused
when an object with a circular cross section (an object that is either cylindrical or spheri-
cal) strikes a target. Bullets, unless tumbling or deformed by prior impacts, present this
cylindrical cross section. Thus even when it is impossible to insert and then document or
measure the angle with a trajectory rod, it is possible to establish a general angle of impact
into the surface.
Bullet defects resulting from nontumbling impacts will tend to be circular to ellipti-
cal in shape. Just as in the case of bloodstain shapes (see discussion of impact angles in
Chapter 11), a defect that presents a circular shape indicates an impact at close to 90° to
the target plane. As the angle of impact becomes more tangential, this shape changes to an
ellipse. The technician, by examining the ellipse and measuring the long and short axes of
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 307

the defect, can apply the same trigonometric formula that is used to define a bloodstain’s
angle of impact:

Minor axis divided by the major axis = N

The inverse SIN of N is equal to the approximate impact angle.

Bullet defects do not always present clean, precise margins. When striking metal or other
substrates, the leading edge of the defect will often present a clean margin, while the far
edge will present a rough appearance. Lacking a complete ellipse to measure, the techni-
cian can use a method of ellipse matching to increase the accuracy of defining the impact
angle. Ellipse matching was first applied to bloodstain pattern analysis. Charlie Green of the
Colorado Springs Police Department suggested the technique as early as 1989, and it was later
utilized by Dr. Alfred Carter as the underlying method employed in his bloodstain pattern
software, Backtrack Images®.8 This technique was subsequently directed to evaluating bullet
impacts by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police with success. Studies to date indicate that it
increases the accuracy of the bullet defect evaluation.9 Simply put, the technician completes
the ellipse indicated by the leading edge of the impact and then uses this visualized ellipse in
determining the length of the major and minor axes.
To aid in understanding these relationships, the reader can refer to Figures  10.3
through 10.5. A relationship is evident between the defect and a right triangle created by
A
The diameter of any part of the bullet’s
cross section is equal to any other. Thus
C D the line AB is equal to the line CD.

Cross Section of the Bullet

Resulting
bullet defect

Figure 10.3  The vector a bullet is following combined with the surface it impacts creates a
right triangle. By drawing certain relationships between the defect and this right triangle, the
technician can identify the angle of impact (angle i).
308 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Analogy of the Defect to a Right Triangle

a
Side
Adjacent
Side
The angle at i is the angle
Opposite
of impact.
i

b c
Hypotenuse
Where: Line ab = minor axis
and Line bc = major axis

Major axis

Minor axis

Figure 10.4  The major axis of the defect is analogous to the hypotenuse (line bc). The minor
axis of the stain is analogous to the “side opposite” portion of the triangle (line ab). A measure-
ment of the defect’s width and length provides two known values that allow the technician to
solve for the unknown angle i.

Side Opposite Side Adjacent

Line ab Line ac

b c
Hypotenuse
Line bc
Side Opposite or ab or the Minor Axis
Inverse SINE of i =
Hypotenuse or bc or the Major Axis

Figure 10.5  The formula used to define the impact angle is based on the trigonometric func-
tion of SINE. The inverse SINE of the angle at i is equal to the minor axis (the side opposite)
divided by the major axis (the hypotenuse).

the bullet path and the target. By analogy, the major axis of the defect is the same as the
hypotenuse of the right triangle, and the minor axis is the same as the side opposite. Using
the trigonometric relationships evident in all right triangles, the side opposite divided by
the hypotenuse is equal to the inverse sine of the internal angle (the angle of impact into the
target). As with bloodstains, all that is required of the technician is the ability to measure
the length and width of the defect and employ a scientific calculator. With practice, this
technique is quickly applied at the scene. This technique is demonstrated in Figure 10.6.
Using this method, the computed angles are sufficiently accurate to provide impor-
tant information regarding the event, but they do not provide a precise angle of impact.
In some instances, they may be of limited value, depending upon the surface on which
they are found or the characteristics of the defect’s margins. This is particularly true when
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 309

110 120 130

105 140
115 125 135 145 Minor Axis/Width = 9.5 mm
Major Axis/Length = 16 mm
9.5/16 = 0.59375
Inverse SINE of 0.593 = 36.4
Approximate Impact Angle = 36 degrees

Major axis

Minor axis

Figure 10.6  These relationships allow the analyst to identify the impact angle of the bul-
let in many cases. Bullet defects, however, do not always produce an easily measured defect.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police developed a technique of overlaying a perfect ellipse
and matching it to the well-formed sections of the defect (the initial point of contact). Once
matched, the technician measures the ellipse rather than the defect.

considering defects in human skin. Maloney et al. found that computed impact angles of
defects in a substrate similar to the human body had deviations as high as ±20°.10
This simple mathematical approach to defining the angle of impact into a surface is
valuable and useful, but it is used only when it is impossible to insert a trajectory rod into
the defect. It fails to capture all aspects of the defect for a complete shooting scene recon-
struction. When defects are present that trajectory rods can be inserted into, the crime
scene technician must document two specific angles:

• Horizontal angle or angle of departure: This is the angle of the muzzle in relation
to the target using a horizontal reference line. It shows movement right or left and
is measured using a protractor aligned with a horizontal plane (see Figure 10.7).
• Vertical angle or angle of elevation: This is the angle of the muzzle in relation to
the target using a vertical reference line. It shows movement up or down and is
measured using a protractor aligned with a vertical plane or the standard angle
finder (see Figure 10.8).

These angles can be measured as acute angles (e.g., 90° or less) or as a complete angle
between 0 and 180°. Exactly how this is accomplished is a matter of training and custom.
In the end, the specific manner in which these angles are measured and recorded doesn’t
really matter, so long as it is consistent and clear in the documentation.
To measure the horizontal angle, a trajectory rod is inserted properly in the defect.
Facing the surface that holds the bullet defect and rod, a protractor is aligned with the sur-
face, so it is horizontal to the ground plane. A small plumb is then hung from the rod so it
intersects the protractor. The plumb is particularly important when there is any significant
upward or downward orientation (the vertical angle) present. Assume for a moment the
310 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Angle of Departure/Horizontal Angle

Figure 10.7  To visualize the angle of departure/horizontal angle, imagine being above the
shooter and looking down at the orientation of the muzzle in relation to the surface where the
bullet struck.

Angle of Elevation/Vertical Angle

Figure 10.8  To visualize the angle of elevation/vertical angle, imagine altering the overhead
position to a side view and viewing the muzzle’s orientation to the surface.

rod-plumb intersect occurs at the 120° mark, with zero° on the left and 180° on the right
(see Figure 10.9). The angle can be described in one of two ways:

• The acute angle: 60°, right to left. In this instance, the right-to-left annotation refers
to the path of the bullet: it was moving from the right to the left. A 90° impact is
a perpendicular impact, so reading the protractor from the right to the left, the
angle is 60°. The author prefers this particular approach.
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 311

Horizontal angle as an acute angle = 60 degrees R-L

Horizontal angle as a whole angle, read from left to right

= 120 degrees

Figure 10.9  There are various ways to report horizontal angle. The yellow arrow is the trajec-
tory, which struck the target moving right to left. The red arrow shows this angle, reported
as an acute angle (an angle of 90° or less). Reading from the left, the trajectory intersects the
protractor at 60. As a complete angle (the blue arrow) read left to right (the normal English con-
vention), this same angle is reported as 120°.

• The whole angle: 120°, reading from left to right. Normal English orientation
would have the 0° to the left and 180° to the right.

To measure the vertical angle, a trajectory rod must be present in the defect. Facing the
surface that holds the bullet defect and rod, a protractor is aligned with the surface, so it
is vertically oriented to the ground plane. Looking from the side, the point where the rod
intersects the protractor is the vertical angle. Vertical angle can be reported in a variety
of ways as well. The simplest way is to describe the intersect of the rod and protractor as
an acute angle. Thus a bullet traveling straight into a wall with no upward or downward
movement is a 90° impact, while a bullet traveling downward at a sharp angle might be
30° (see Figure 10.10). The opposite approach is to consider that no upward or downward
movement is 0°, and then measure intuitively any upward or downward angular deviation.
Once again, the specific approach to measurement is not important so long as the crime
scene technician is consistent in all measurements and is clear in his or her documenta-
tion. One way to maintain a level of clarity and consistency is to utilize a defect log (see
Figure 10.11). It helps that if in addition to the annotations for the actual defects, the log has
a simple reminder of how the technician intends to document the angles. In this fashion
the technician remains consistent from scene to scene as well.

Direction of Fire
A significant concern for the technician is to recognize in which direction the bullet was
traveling. The technician starts with morphology of the bullet hole. What is the shape of the
defect? What characteristics are evident? As with entry and exit wounds in humans, bullet
defects in other substrates share certain basic characteristics. Entry defects tend to pres-
ent an appearance of a cleanly punched hole. Additionally, they often demonstrate bullet
312 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Vertical angle as an acute angle

= 30 degrees downward

Vertical angle as an acute angle

= 90 degrees

Vertical angle as an angular

deviation from a flat trajectory
= 25 degrees down to up

Figure 10.10  Vertical angle can be reported in various ways as well. These three different
arrows demonstrate three different angles. The red arrow is reported as an acute angle of
30° downward. The blue arrow shows an acute angle of 90° or perpendicular. An alternative
approach is to report angular deviation from a flat trajectory as shown by the green arrow (e.g.,
25° down to up).

Figure 10.11  Due to the variations of reporting defects, trajectories, and associated evidence,
a valuable tool is a trajectory analysis log. In addition to capturing appropriate details, it also
offers a simple reminder to evidence technicians of “how” they measure defects.
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 313

Figure 10.12  An entry defect in soft pine. The margins are regular and demonstrate a small
circumferential abrasion ring as well as a light gray wipe mark. Depending on the substrate
involved, the size of the defect may or may not match the diameter of the bullet.

Figure 10.13  The corresponding exit bullet defect from Figure 10.12. The margin is irregular,
and there is evidence of material that was pushed out of the defect.

wipe, as well as an inward beveled circumferential ring around the defect. Figure 10.12 is
an entry defect in soft pine. The defect presents a regularly shaped margin with a slightly
noticeable beveled edge all around the lip of the defect. Exit defects, on the other hand, tend
to be more irregular. They may demonstrate a coning effect on the exit side or demonstrate
material that is pushed away from the defect. Figure  10.13 is the associated exit for the
entry hole shown in Figure 10.12. Note the more irregular shape of the defect, the cone of
wood that was punched out, and the slight evidence of wood material pushed away from
the fence.
Metal impacts leave additional indicators of direction of travel. These include pinch
points and the “wake” effect on the exposed surface of the metal. On a painted metal sur-
face the pinch point is the point where the bullet and metal first meet and a small island of
paint survives (see Figure 10.14). The wake effect involves small fracture lines in the paint
314 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

le
vel of the projecti
Direction of tra

“Pinch Point” in a painted metal surface.

Figure 10.14  When a bullet strikes painted metal, it often produces a “pinch point” at the
initial point of contact. The pinch point is a small tag of paint that survives the impact. The
pinch point effectively demonstrates the direction of travel of the bullet.

and, on occasion, in the metal itself, arcing out and away from the defect. Like a wake of
a boat, the fracture lines extend out and opposite the direction of travel (see Figure 10.15).
The wake effect is not always evident on visual inspection, as it may involve micro fractures
in the metal itself. It can usually be brought out by lightly powdering the metal surface
with a contrasting fingerprint powder.
Metal splash that occurs from the friction of the bullet in contact with the surface
will also aid in understanding the direction of travel of the bullet. Using the rhodizonate
or DTO test, if the filter paper is cut to extend out from the defect at least an inch or two
in either direction, this typically will be sufficient to capture any lead/copper splash. If
present, these small splashes of molten lead or copper will be visualized by the chemical
process. The splashes will show evident directionality, radiating away from the defect in
the direction the bullet was traveling.

rojectile
of travel of the p
Direction

“Wake Effect” lines present in the paint.

Figure 10.15  A similar phenomenon to pinch point is known as the wake effect. This can
occur on either painted or bare metal surfaces. As the bullet interacts with the surface of the
metal, small micro fractures are produced that arc out and in a direction opposite the bullet’s
path.
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 315

Bullet impacts into windshields with safety glass present more difficulty. Modern
windshields are typically two individual pieces of glass fused together with a plastic lami-
nate between them. Entry and exit defects will present a similar appearance. Figure 10.16
is the exterior surface of a windshield with three entry bullet defects. Figure 10.17 shows
the interior surface and the exit defects of impacts 2 and 3. On first examination, both
sides of the defect demonstrate what appears to be a coning effect. By touch and visual
examination, the entry side of windshield glass will demonstrate an abrupt edge, while

Figure 10.16  Bullet defects in windshield glass present a more distinct problem for locating
the entry and exit. Both sides will produce a coning effect. These exterior-side defects in a
windshield are quite similar to the interior side defects shown in Figure 10.17. Note here the
abrupt edge of the cone around the inner white section of the defect.

Figure 10.17  The interior surface of the bullet defects observed in Figure 10.16. The cone
surrounding the white inner section is more distinct, and if felt, a slope will be evident. This
indicates the exit surface, which is different from the abrupt edge observed in the entry side
surface shown in Figure 10.16.
316 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 10.18  A close-up photograph of the interior (exit side) of the bullet defects in Figures
10.16 and 10.17. Note he upward beveling of the plastic laminate between the two layers of
glass. Small but observable characteristics such as this may assist the crime scene technician
in verifying entry side from exit.

Glass

Coning
effect

Bullet direction

Figure 10.19  The coning effect on the exit side of plate glass is always quite evident. It results
from the bullet and its associated energy wave disrupting and forcing the particles out the far
side of the glass.

the exit side will have a sloping edge (a cone). Additionally, the displacement of glass and
the projectile through the plastic laminate will leave distinct evidence of the direction of
travel. Figure 10.18 is a close-up view of the windshield and shows the laminate displaced
upward in the photo (inward), verifying the direction of travel as from outside the car to
the interior. In plate glass windows, the coning effect in the exit side of the defect will be far
more distinct. The exit side of the defect will have an evident sloping edge that is difficult
to mistake (see Figure 10.19).

Use of Trajectory Rods and Lasers to Demonstrate Bullet Flight Paths

Given a penetrating or perforating bullet defect in the scene, one effective method of docu-
menting the trajectory of the bullet is through the use of trajectory rods. These rods can
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 317

Figure 10.20  A trajectory rod kit. Components include the trajectory rods, an angle finder,
white plastic centering guides, base plates for mounting trajectory rods on tripods, and trajec-
tory lasers. The technician can evaluate and demonstrate trajectories over a short distance with
the rods. The laser allows evaluation of trajectories extended out to distant points.

be self-manufactured or purchased in kits. Commercial kits are available from a variety

of forensic suppliers and tend to be the best method, as they include hole-centering guides
and use nonwarping metal rods. Self-manufactured trajectory kits often involve the use of
wooden dowels. Although wooden dowels will certainly function in a pinch, the dowels often
have minor warps that will throw off any trajectory determination. Long-term storage of
these dowels will almost certainly lead to warping. Additionally, the failure to employ a cen-
tering guide, as will be described, will reduce the accuracy of the trajectory determination.
Typical contents of the trajectory kit include metal trajectory rods, hole-centering guides,
a metal mounting plate used to attach the rods to a tripod, an angle finder, and a trajectory
laser, as seen in Figure 10.20. Trajectory rods are available in two sizes, a standard size that
is adequate for defects caused by calibers greater than .32 and a smaller-diameter rod for
defects caused by smaller projectiles such as a .22-caliber bullet. These smaller rods require
more caution in use, as their small diameter makes them prone to accidental warping. A rigid
rod holder is important for protecting the rods both in storage and during transit.
When presented with a perforating or deeply penetrating defect in walls, doors, fur-
niture, and other objects, the technician carefully inserts a rod into the defect, being sure
not to force the rod in any way. Note that in Figure 10.21, without a centering guide, the
trajectory rod slips to the bottom of the defect. On the opposite side of the wall, the rod will
tend to lie against the upper edge of the defect as it balances itself on its center of gravity.
This raw positioning can affect the angle of the rod by as much as 5 to 8°. Centering guides
eliminate this error. The guide is placed on the rod, with the narrow end facing the defect.
It is then guided into the defect without forcing it. The technician feeds a small rubber
grommet onto the rod to hold the centering guide in place, eliminating any subsequent
slipping of the guide on the rod. If the hole perforates the surface (e.g., in the case of walls
or doors), a second centering guide is fed onto the rod as it extends out of the far side of the
wall, as seen in Figure 10.22. The two centering guides ensure that the rod lies parallel with
the defect. Once in place, the angles are measured as previously described.
In many instances, the rod will provide good visualization of the basic angles and
direction of the trajectory, but the use of a laser will more effectively extend the trajec-
tory in relationship to the overall scene. This is particularly true if the bullet traveled a
318 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 10.21  Insertion of a trajectory rod in a bullet defect before the addition of a centering
guide. The rod is inserted in or through the defect. Rods without a guide will not center prop-
erly in the hole. This can throw off the resulting trajectory by several degrees.

Figure 10.22  A trajectory rod inserted properly in a perforating defect with centering guides.
The guides should be used in cases involving both penetrating and perforating defects.

significant distance before impacting the surface. The trajectory laser is attached to the
trajectory rod as shown in Figure 10.23. The laser beam itself is not evident unless it strikes
a surface. In daylight, the use of a small white or black placard is helpful in tracking the
path of the laser from the defect through the scene and for photographing that path (see
Figure 10.24). At night or in darkness, photographic fog is also available, but the fog can be
difficult to work with, as any air current will diffuse the fog cloud. Even with barriers or in
a calm exterior scene, it can be difficult to create a fog of sufficient density to photograph
the entire path. The most effective technique is to place the camera on the bulb setting
(a 1 min bulb duration is usually sufficient) and fog the laser beam as the camera shutter
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 319

Figure 10.23  A trajectory laser attached to a trajectory rod. This allows the trajectory to be
extended out to distant surfaces or to show relationships between corresponding defects.

Figure 10.24  A small white or black placard is helpful when following the laser line in a
scene. Unless the laser strikes a surface, it cannot be seen. The technician centers the laser dot
on the placard and then, by slowly moving the placard, follows the laser along the flight path.
This is particularly effective in bright outdoor scenes.

remains open (see Figure 10.25). In a darkened or even slightly darkened interior scene, fog
is easier to work with. By setting the camera on bulb (using a shutter exposure between 8
s and 1 min), both the laser beam and sufficient scene detail can be captured. Originally,
only red lasers were available for these examinations. Green lasers are now available as
well. The green laser is preferred over the red laser, simply because green laser light is more
easily visualized than red laser light (see Figure 10.26).
Given a penetrating defect, but no deep channel to feed a trajectory rod into (e.g., often
seen in foam-core doors), the rod and centering guide are placed in the entry defect as
deeply as possible. This is accomplished only after excavating the bullet from the surface,
while keeping the entry defect intact. A tripod is used to support the trajectory rod, as
illustrated in Figure 10.27. The trajectory rod is then positioned with the tip at the defect.
Keeping the tip in place, the tripod is adjusted accordingly by the technician so that the
angles indicated by the defect match the rod’s position.
There are several concerns when using trajectory kits and evaluating trajectories. These
include considering the distance between the weapon and the impact, ensuring that the
bullet is not tumbling, and objectively demonstrating the evident trajectory. In terms of
distance traveled, a bullet fired from a weapon will follow a straight-line path for some
320 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 10.25  Commercially available laser fog is an excellent way to demonstrate a laser
trajectory. When sprayed into the scene, the particles remain airborne and the laser reflects off
them. Laser fog is difficult to work with when there are active air currents, such as in exterior
scenes. This photograph was taken on the bulb setting (1 min), during which the technician
stepped into the frame and sprayed both ends of the laser line. In an interior scene, the fog will
usually remain long enough to photograph without the need for respraying.

Figure 10.26  The green laser is perhaps more effective in terms of photography. Green lasers
reflect off particles in the air much better. Here the green laser is used to demonstrate an
approximate shooter position in relation to the victim as he sat in the car.

distance before any evident parabolic arc occurs as a result of air resistance and gravity.
If evaluating bullet paths less than 30 m, the assumption that the bullet is traveling in a
straight-line path is acceptable. Beyond that distance, it is best to contact a forensic firearms
examiner for advice as to the nature of any given weapon and bullet combination. In shots
involving greater distance, all is not lost. Software programs such as External Ballistics 4.0
may provide a mechanism for evaluating the possible trajectories presented by such shots
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 321

Figure 10.27  The trajectory kit can be used even when there is no deep defect present to insert
the rod into. The rods are attached to a tripod using the mounting plate, and the tripod and rod
are brought into alignment at the defect.

EB Graph - Angle as a Function of Range

Departure angle: 46

Impact angle : 70

Figure 10.28  In circumstances involving extended trajectories where the bullet is clearly fol-
lowing a parabolic flight path, software programs can to some extent assist in defining the
variables of the trajectory. In this screen capture, the software shows the departure angle and
maximum range of a specific round, based on a number of variables and its impact angle.

(see Figure 10.28). The limitation of these software programs is that they require significant
data up front, information that may not be available based on the scene or investigation.
The technician should always give consideration to the possibility of intermediate
impacts of the bullet on targets prior to their terminating impact. If a bullet strikes an
intermediate target, it may destabilize and begin to tumble, and straight-line flight paths
may not be a valid assumption. Destabilized and tumbling bullets create irregular defects
that are easily recognized in the scene (see Figure 10.29).
322 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 10.29  A concern regarding trajectory analysis is whether the bullet struck an inter-
mediate target and became destabilized. As demonstrated in these two defects, destabilized
bullets generally create immediate characteristics that are difficult to miss. If a defect fails to
demonstrate a clean circular or elliptical entry point, some form of destabilization of the bullet
must be considered.

When using methods other than a rod or laser to demonstrate a flight path, the
technician should use caution. For example, stretching string along the flight path can
demonstrate the path to some extent. The problem with this method is that it is always
difficult to align the string to the angles indicated by the defect. Minor errors in align-
ment over any distance will lead to significant variation from the actual flight path. If
a significant distance is involved in the flight path, it is difficult, if not impossible, to
stretch the string tightly enough to eliminate sag across its entire length. Both of these
errors and their resulting variation, if present, are enough to make the demonstration of
little or no use to the jury. In a worst case, this variation may even invalidate the conclu-
sion indicated by the demonstration.
How accurately does trajectory analysis (in and of itself) define or eliminate possible
orientations between a shooter and the target? The answer is highly dependent upon the
case circumstances and is also affected by the many limitations discussed in the text. The
most likely scenarios include:

• A single penetrating bullet defect in a victim. In this instance, terminal ballistics

will define or at least suggest the general path of the bullet. The shape of the defect
may suggest the general impact angle at the point it struck the body. However,
lacking any way to functionally place the weapon in the scene—and given the fact
that the body can bend, twist, and move to almost any position imaginable—there
is no objective method of eliminating the majority of possible orientations between
the shooter and victim.
• Multiple bullet wound defects in the body or clothing caused by a single projec-
tile. In this circumstance, the alignment of the corresponding defects will at least
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 323

Combined orientation of defects

and trajectory.

Defect 1

Defect 2

Defect 3

Trajectory indicated by autopsy

Figure 10.30  When available, information from all three areas of ballistic study must be con-
sidered together in order to narrow the possibilities of a given trajectory. Here three correspond-
ing defects in a T-shirt, combined with a known trajectory of the bullet through the body, allow
for a specific orientation of the upper arm and body at the moment of the shot. Combined with
the lack of stippling and soot on exposed skin and clothing, this greatly limits the position of
the shooter.

define the orientation of the associated body parts at the moment of wounding
(Figure 10.30). So long as the required orientation is retained, the remainder of the
body can still be moved, rolled, and oriented in any number of ways. A circum-
stance of this nature will help eliminate possibilities, but it may not narrow the
field sufficiently to assist the investigator significantly.
• A single bullet defect on a solid substrate without sufficient penetration for
inserting a trajectory rod, or cases where there is a deflecting shot that leaves an
elliptical defect but no penetration. In this instance, calculating the impact angle
using the mathematical method will provide a parameter of possible flight paths.
Using the ellipse-matching method, the calculated impact angle is likely to be
within +/–5°.13 This circumstance will certainly limit the possible flight path of
the bullet.
• A single bullet defect that penetrates or perforates a solid substrate, allowing deep
insertion of the trajectory rod. In this instance, the indicated flight path is very
accurate, particularly if there is a perforating defect and two centering guides can
be employed on the trajectory rod. This circumstance will clearly limit the possible
position of the shooter.
• Single or multiple bullet defects (corresponding defects) in solid substrates and an
associated perforating or penetrating wound defect to the victim. In this instance,
it may be possible to place both the shooter and the victim in a distinct orientation
at the moment of wounding.
324 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Describing Zones of Possibility

In seeking to understand the shooting scene, the crime scene technician realizes that all
of the associated evidence and artifacts can lead to establishing possible and impossible
areas where shooting events occurred. This includes the positioning of the shooter. Even
presented with the best of circumstances, a trajectory does not absolutely define such a
position to an exact point. But remember that in science, it is the ability to refute cer-
tain hypotheses that has the greatest value. So eliminating areas where something could
not have happened and identifying areas where it could have happened has value, even
when the technician cannot isolate the event to an exact position. In seeking this approach,
Moran offered the idea of establishing zones of possibility in shooting reconstructions.11
These zones are intended as limits to what is likely, what is possible, and what is impossible.
Assuming the ability to extrapolate a trajectory based on a defect in the scene and the use
of a laser or similar method to extend that trajectory to its limits, these zones of possibility
are evaluated and typically identified as:

Zone 1: An area considered most probable. This is generally some point along the
trajectory at or lower than the shooter’s shoulder height, and considered to be eas-
ily achieved given the specific context presented in the scene. Zone 1 must also
incorporate any know data. Examples of these data may include items such as
muzzle-to-target information defined through the internal or terminal ballistics
or situations in which muzzle blast fails to displace previously broken glass (see
Figure 10.31).
Zone 2: An area considered possible but awkward. A classic example for a zone 2
position is any position along the trajectory path that is higher than the shoot-
er’s shoulders. While it is certainly possible a shooter could raise his or her arm
high and bend his or her wrist, this is an awkward shooting position even for
the typical “gangster” approach to shooting observed in many robbery videos (see
Figure 10.32).
Zone 1 - Most Probable

Zone 1

Figure 10.31  Zone 1 is considered to be an area that contains the most probable position of the
shooter. It is generally an area beneath the shoulder level, forward toward the defect.
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 325

Zone 2 - Awkward but Possible

Zone 2

Figure 10.32  Zone 2 is considered to be the area where the shot is awkward but still possible
for the shooter. For example, the shooter can raise his hand, bend his wrist, and step back out
of zone 1 yet keep the muzzle and evident trajectory aligned. Not the most fluid action, but
still possible.

Zone 3: An area impossible given the data. In these positions the shooter is physically
unable to align the barrel and produce the trajectory. This may be due to the height
of the trajectory, some intervening obstacle, or be based on some other contextual
data (see Figure 10.33).

The zones are reported as distances along the path of the indicated trajectory. For
example, if a trajectory angled steeply down into a wall, zone 1 might be described as

Zone 3 - Impossible

Zone 3

Figure 10.33  Zone 3 is considered that area where alignment of the muzzle and evident trajec-
tory are impossible. This may be a simple matter of the trajectory extending beyond the reach
of the shooter or be based on some contextual aspect of the scene such as the presence of an
intermediate object (e.g., a wall) that gets in the path.
326 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

extending 4 ft out from the impact point. Zone 2 would include the area beyond zone 1, so
it might be described as between 4 and 10 ft. Zone 3 would be described as any area beyond
that distance (10 ft). The value of describing the zones is that it sets parameters of possible
and impossible, without forcing the technician to subjectively isolate a specific position. Of
course not all trajectories will have a zone 2. A level trajectory fired at shoulder height and
passing across the room to impact a far wall may effectively be considered completely zone
1, and only when the extension of the trajectory encounters an obstacle (the opposite wall)
would a zone 3 be defined.

Trajectory Analysis Documentation

As with bloodstain pattern analysis, the shooting scene requires extra documentation
effort on the part of the crime scene technician. The initial overall, evidence-establishing,
and close-up photographs taken as a part of normal crime scene procedure are not enough.
Just as bloodstains appear quite similar, photographs of bullet defects in similar substrates
will be almost indistinguishable from one another. Additionally, the context of associ-
ated defects such as a single bullet’s entry and exit or a series of defects caused by a single
projectile passing through multiple surfaces must be captured fully in the documentation
effort. Close-up photography of bullet defects without supporting evidence-establishing
shots will result in an inability to reorient the defect to the scene. If trajectory rods are
utilized, additional photographs of the trajectories and the trajectory’s terminating point,
as well as any extrapolation of the trajectory using lasers, must be captured as well. These
scenes demand in-depth photography, as well as detailed crime scene sketches (overhead
and elevation views).
When taking photographs of bullet defects, it is imperative that each defect be dis-
tinguishable from any other. Alphanumeric numbering of the defects, employing the
road mapping technique described in Chapter 6, is the most effective way to do this, with
accompanying evidence-establishing shots that clearly demonstrate where in the scene the
defect is (see Figure 10.34). Corresponding defects that perforate doors and other objects
should be given an alphanumeric designation (e.g., defect 3A for the entry and defect 3B
for the exit). Evidence close-up photographs should include a scale of reference and an
annotation as to magnetic north or which direction is up. Such annotation is essential for
anyone trying to verify or establish the various angles of the defect. The methods previ-
ously described for photographing all evidence are essential here as well. The technician
must take care to square the film plane of the camera to the surface of the defect and avoid
interjecting odd angles. In addition, the technician will find that oblique lighting is often
necessary to bring out the three-dimensional detail of these defects. Additionally, when
photographing tangential defects or deflections on a surface, the technician can include a
scale of reference (at least 6 in. of adhesive ruled tape) that is oriented to the long axis of the
defect. This will aid the viewer in recognizing the directional angle of the impact.12
In terms of sketches and notes, the specific location of a defect on any given surface
must be recorded. This location should be reported as a complete three-dimensional X, Y,
and Z position. Without this information, it is impossible to conduct a subsequent evalu-
ation of the shooting scene, should this be needed. Sketches should clearly distinguish
perforating defects from deflections or penetrations. Terminal defects that hold bullets or
fragments should be marked, and the nature of the recovered bullet (complete, fragment,
jacket, etc.) should be detailed in the notes. Refer back to Figure 10.11, the defect log. After
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 327

Figure 10.34  Each bullet defect should be given a unique identifier, that distinguishes it from
any other bullet defect in the scene. Corresponding defects (e.g., entry and exit) can be anno-
tated with a secondary identifier (e.g., 3a or 3B).

recovery by the technician, all casings, bullets, and bullet fragments must be uniquely iden-
tified and containerized, specifically documenting where each was recovered. The techni-
cian cannot simply throw these items into a single bag. By doing so, the technician will
lose valuable scene context regarding which weapon was being fired from which position.

Summary

Trajectory and shooting scene analysis is based on three different areas of study: internal
ballistics (conducted by the forensic firearms examiner), terminal ballistics (conducted
by the forensic pathologist), and external ballistics (typically conducted by the crime
scene technician). The information provided by all three areas of study must be com-
bined to gain an objective understanding of how and where a weapon may have been
fired in the scene.
External ballistics—typically the responsibility of the crime scene technician—is pri-
marily a function of documenting and evaluating bullet defects at the scene. The first con-
sideration is to recognize a bullet defect. Defects can penetrate, perforate, or deflect off
an object. The resulting defects can appear quite similar or distinctly dissimilar. When
presented with a suspected bullet defect, the technician uses chemical tests to identify the
presence of lead or copper, the two primary constituents of a projectile.
After verifying the presence of a bullet defect, the technician must examine it for
directionality and impact angle. Both indications will suggest or define the probable path
of the bullet prior to striking the target. The shape of a bullet defect, much like the shape
of a bloodstain, indicates the angle of impact. Trajectory rod kits allow the technician to
demonstrate these flight paths and to identify corresponding defects (defects created in
multiple objects by a single bullet).
The information derived from a trajectory analysis is very much dependent upon the
number and type of bullet defects available. In instances where there is nothing more than
328 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

a defect in the victim, the resulting analysis will not significantly limit the possible flight
paths or orientations of the shooter and victim. On the other hand, when there are multiple
corresponding defects that perforate and penetrate a number of surfaces, the analysis will
likely establish and significantly limit the orientation and position of the shooter and victim.
Trajectory analysis requires significant documentation effort for court purposes and
for any outside experts who might be called in to assist. Proficiency in these advanced
scenes requires study and practice on the part of the crime scene technician.

Suggested Reading
Gardner, R., and Bevel, T., Practical Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction, chap. 7, contributing
author Matthew Noedel, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2009.
Garrison, D., Practical Shooting Scene Investigation, Universal Publishers/uPublish.com, 2003.
Haag, L., Shooting Incident Reconstruction, Academic Press/Elsevier, Burlington, MA, 2006.
Hueske, E.E., Practical Analysis and Reconstruction of Shooting Incidents, CRC Press, Boca Raton,
FL, 2006.
Ramirez, C., and Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL, 2011.

Chapter Questions
1. What are the three areas of study that make up ballistics?
2. What are three ways the crime scene technician might verify that a defect is asso-
ciated to a bullet impact?
3. How effective are angle of impact determinations for bullet holes in solid sub-
strates? How effective are they for bullet defects in human skin?
4. Why is effective documentation of bullet defects so important?
5. What term applies to the projectile fired from a handgun?
6. True or false. Identification of a firearm to a bullet is accomplished by evaluating
the lands and grooves found in the bullet.
7. True or false. The deformation of a bullet as it strikes a target at an acute angle may
allow the firearms analyst to determine the angle of deflection.
8. True or false. The range determinations offered by the medical examiner are all
based on the absence or presence of soot, stippling, and burning in or around the
wound.
9. True or false. The wake effect observed in metal and “metal splash” are observations
that help the crime scene analyst determine in what sequence bullets were fired.
10. True or false. Where each and every bullet defect is located is not of significant
interest and bullet holes do not have to be located in the sketch and crime scene
mapping data.

Notes
1. Moran, B., Shooting Incident Reconstruction, presentation to the Association of Crime Scene
Reconstruction, Las Vegas, NV, October 2001.
2. Gardner, R.M. et.al., Practical Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL, 2009, p. 156.
Shooting Scene Documentation and Reconstruction 329

3. Bartsch, M.R., et al., An update on the use of the sodium rhodizonate test for the detection of
lead originating from firearms discharges, Journal of Forensic Science, 46, 1049, 1996.
4. Jason, A., Was This Caused by a Bullet? Detecting the Presence of Lead, presentation to the
Association of Crime Scene Reconstruction, Oklahoma City, OK, October 1997.
5. Cuprotesmo and Plumbtesmo are registered trademark names of the Macherey-Nagel Co.,
Duren, Germany.
6. http://www.nij.gov/training/firearms-training/module12/fir_m12_t05_03_b.htm, April 18, 2011.
7. Balthazard, V., et al., Etude ges Gouttes de Sang Projecte, paper presented at XXII Congress de
Medicine Legale, Paris, June 1939.
8. Backtrack Images is a registered trademark name of Forensic Computing of Ottawa,
Ottawa, Canada.
9. Barr, D., Impact Angle Determinations, presentation to the Association of Crime Scene
Reconstruction, Atlanta, GA, October 2000.
10. Maloney, M., et al., unpublished research, 1999.
11. Turvey, B., et al., Crime Reconstruction, Academic Press/Elsevier, Burlington, MA, 2007, pp.
266–269.
12. Garrison, D.H., Practical Shooting Scene Investigation, Universal Press, Parkland, FL, p. 25.
13. Barr, Impact Angle Determinations.
Applying Bloodstain Pattern
Analysis in the Crime Scene
11
Beyond the basic techniques described in Chapter 9, there are a number of advanced tech-
niques and disciplines that are equally important to the crime scene technician. This chapter
considers one such discipline: bloodstain pattern analysis. Complete analysis of bloodstain
patterns requires specific training and experience. When presented with situations involv-
ing such evidence, specialists will typically be brought in to assist. A specialist, however, is
not always available to come to the crime scene while processing is ongoing. Therefore, at
a minimum, the technician must understand and properly document this type of evidence
so that a subsequent analysis can be conducted. Though somewhat advanced, these evalu-
ations are common in many violent crime scenes, and it is in the best interest of the crime
scene technician to develop skills in bloodstain pattern analysis.

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis

The consideration of the bloodstains at the crime scene can provide important information
to the crime scene technician. The discipline of bloodstain pattern analysis considers the
location, shape, size, distribution, and other physical characteristics of bloodstains in the
scene, and from this derives information regarding the nature of the event that created the
pattern. Thus bloodstain patterns tell us “what” happened. This information, when com-
bined with the information derived from any deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) analysis, may
allow an investigator to corroborate or refute specific investigative theories as well as sub-
sequent statements offered by suspects, victims, and witnesses. Although the crime scene
technician may not be trained in depth in bloodstain pattern analysis, it is imperative that
he or she be able to recognize critical classifications of stains and know how to properly
document bloodstained scenes.

Theory and Underlying Principles of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis

The theory of bloodstain pattern analysis is relatively simple. Blood as a fluid (a complex
fluid, but a fluid nonetheless) responds to variations of internal and external forces in a
predictable fashion. The bloodstain pattern analyst evaluates various mechanisms and col-
lapse mechanics of blood masses with respect to the patterns produced under controlled
conditions (known patterns). This knowledge is compared against the stains found in
bloody scenes (unknown patterns). The predictability of how blood behaves under basic
known conditions allows the unknown patterns to be compared via class characteristics.
This predictability also allows the analyst to recognize other aspects, such as directional
and impact angle and the alterations brought about by environmental conditions.
There are three underlying principles that guide the behavior of the bloodstain pat-
tern analyst:

331
332 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

• The pattern diversity principle

• The principle of stain shape and vector correlation
• The physically altered bloodstain (PAB) principle

The Pattern Diversity Principle

Pattern diversity is the core concept behind bloodstain pattern analysis and was recognized
more than 150 years ago. One way of articulating this principle is to say: the variations
in combinations of blood volumes and forces acting on those volumes lead to recognizable
classes of patterns.
When a blood mass comes under external force, recurring patterns are produced.
Different mechanisms produce different patterns with different class characteristics. These
basic mechanisms are not specifically crime-oriented; for example, a beating mechanism
does not produce a beating-specific pattern. The pattern produced by beating is the same
as a pattern produced when static blood is impacted by any external force. The basic pat-
tern types are driven by principles based in physics and relate to the way the fluid mass is
affected. These event mechanisms can be distilled into six primary categories. These six
mechanisms are:

1. Static blood dispersed from a point source. When a volume of blood is present at a
point source and the blood mass is exposed to an external impulse or force, it pro-
duces a radiating pattern of small circular and elliptical-shaped stains. The blood
is incompressible and under the impulse/force it must displace. The blood shears
into small droplets at the source, and these small spatters radiate outward from
the source. The resulting spatter stains and their radiating nature are the primary
characteristics of the pattern. These patterns are referred to as impact patterns, but
they also include blood dispersed by air such as expectorate.
2. Blood dispersed in a jet (streaming ejection). When a volume of blood is released
in a stream (referred to as a jet in fluid dynamics), it produces patterns consisting
of large stains that are often deposited either in linear patterns or in accumula-
tions with associated spines and secondary spatter. It is important to understand
that the underlying force behind the ejection may be nothing more than gravity,
such as when a large volume of blood is flowing heavily from a source, or it can
include pressure such as that produced by the circulatory system. The blood vol-
ume escapes a point source (e.g., the wound) flowing as a jet. In the short time it
is in free flight, the mass of the jet often breaks up as a function of air resistance
and gravity. The breakup of the jet leads to both stable droplets and large undu-
lating masses of blood, resulting in large spatter stains. If the stains land across a
surface, the result is a linear pattern of relatively large volume spatter. When the
jet is directed into the same area, the result is a large accumulation. The interaction
of the blood landing into this accumulation also produces spines and secondary
spatter that radiate out from the primary pattern. Spatter stains deposited in lin-
ear form are referred to as spurts; large accumulations with irregular margins are
called gushes.
3. Blood dispersed as a function of accelerated motion. When a volume of blood
adheres to an object and the object is put into accelerated motion (e.g., swung), the
result is a linear pattern of spatter. The inertial force imparted by movement of the
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 333

object overcomes the adhesive force holding the blood to the object. This results
in the release of either a small jet of blood flowing off of the object or individual
droplets that shear directly from the object’s surface. In the case of the small jet,
this structure shears into small droplets as well. As the small droplets are released
from the object over time and space, they land across surrounding surfaces and
are deposited in linear orientations. These patterns are referred to as cast-offs.
4. Blood that accumulates or flows on a surface. When a volume of blood collects or
flows across a surface, it produces patterns consisting of accumulations with gen-
erally regular margins. These are the simplest mechanisms to understand, as all
humans are aware through common experience of the pooling and flow behavior
of fluid. These patterns are known as flows, pools, and saturations.
5. Blood dispersed as a function of secondary contact with a surface. When blood
is deposited or displaced on a surface through some form of secondary contact, it
produces patterns of blood that demonstrate the interaction of the two surfaces.
The blood may adhere to a nonabsorbent surface or be wicked into an absorbent
surface. As this surface interacts with another surface, the fluid is displaced on the
original surface, transferred to a second surface, or any combination of the two.
These patterns are commonly referred to as smears, wipes, or swipes. An addi-
tional pattern produced by this mechanism is the pattern transfer.
6. Blood dispersed as a function of gravity. When blood drips from an object it
produces patterns consisting of a relatively consistent spatter. The source may
be replenishing (e.g., a bleeding individual) or nonreplenishing (e.g., a bloodied
object); in either case gravity draws the fluid downward where it collects on some
aspect of the object’s surface. As the volume of the collecting fluid increases, its
weight forces it away from that surface, resulting in a small column of fluid that
connects the forming drop and the surface. When the weight of this mass at the
end of the connecting column overcomes the surface tension of the fluid, it shears,
producing a large primary droplet and satellite droplets. If the dripping source is
moving, the result is a series of similar stains deposited on a surface either ran-
domly or in linear patterns. If the dripping source is static, the result is an accu-
mulation. These patterns are commonly referred to as drips, drip trails, and blood
into blood.

By recognizing these basic pattern types, the bloodstain pattern analyst recognizes
the underlying source event of the pattern. This recognition allows the elimination of the
other events. For example, having found a cast-off pattern, all other basic mechanisms
(impacts, streaming ejection, drip, contact, and accumulations) are eliminated as having
produced the pattern. This extensively limits the possible scene-specific source events
that must be considered. As distinct as these pattern types are, not everything encoun-
tered in a scene fits neatly into a single type. Complex patterns are often encountered,
patterns that exhibit characteristics of more than one of the six mechanisms. Even in the
instance of a complex pattern, when the basic pattern types are discernable within the
complex pattern, the bloodstain pattern analyst can still eliminate certain actions as a
source for the pattern. Once a stain classification is identified, the stain is then consid-
ered in a scene-specific context. These basic patterns are described in detail further in
the chapter.
334 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

The Principle of Stain Shape and Vector Correlation

The principle of stain shape and vector correlation is a significant consideration in the
examination of a variety of stains found in crime scenes. It involves two primary subprin-
ciples: directionality and impact angle. The general principle can be articulated as: the
shape of certain bloodstains provides indicators as to the direction of deposition as well as to
the spatial origin of the blood.
The first subprinciple is directional angle. This principle is articulated as: the collapse
of a free flight droplet on a surface produces a stain with a circular or elliptical shape. These
stains may have spines, scallops, or satellite stains. These characteristics, if present, may
define direction of travel for the droplet at the moment of impact.
An examination of the individual spatter stains within any pattern will likely estab-
lish the direction the droplets were traveling at the moment they struck a surface. This is
referred to as directionality, the directional angle or the gamma angle of the stain. This
determination is based on the collapse of the fluid droplet, the resulting long axis of the
stain, and the creation of scallops, tails, and satellite stains that appear on or around the
stain. In elliptically shaped stains, these scallops and satellites will appear on the side
opposite the initial contact point of the stain. In the more spherically shaped stains, the
scallops and tails will appear in a heavier concentration on the side opposite the initial
contact point (see Figure 11.1). By considering the directionality of a number of stains in a
pattern, the technician can visualize the general area from which the droplets originated.
The reverse vectors defined by the individual stains’ directionality may (if the stains are
related) converge in the scene. This convergence is a two-dimensional area referred to as
the pattern’s convergence point, as seen in Figure 11.2.

Scallops
Directionality

Satellite
stains
Parent stain

Directional angle

Parent stain

Directionality defines the direction a droplet Tail Satellite

was moving at the time it struck a surface. stain

Figure 11.1   Directionality of a bloodstain is defined by both the long axis of the stain and the
presence of scallops, tails, and satellite spatter. These small characteristics appear in a greater
concentration on the side opposite where the droplet first struck the surface. The directional-
ity of the stain in the inset photo is upward and to the left. The origin of the stain then must
be somewhere along a line aligned with this directional angle, but extended in an opposite
direction.
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 335

Area of Convergence

The area where the reverse vectors

of several related spatter stains converge
on a surface.
Floor

Figure 11.2   By visualizing a line aligned with the directional angle and extended back into
the scene for a number of related spatter stains, a point of convergence will form where the
lines cross each other on a surface (e.g., a floor). The area of origin for the pattern would be
located in three-dimensional space above the convergence point.

The second subprinciple is impact angle. This principle is articulated as: the collapse of
a free flight droplet on a surface produces a stain with a circular or elliptical shape. The ratio
between the length of the long and short axes of the resulting stain has an empirical relation-
ship to the angle at which the droplet struck the target.
When a stable droplet strikes a surface creating a well-formed bloodstain, the resulting
stain has both a major and a minor axis. Victor Balthazard demonstrated in 1939 that there
was an empirical relationship between the ratio of the length and width of a stain and its
impact angle, establishing the basis of the principle. In 1982, MacDonell expanded on the
principle, offering a mathematical model for determining this relationship.
In practice, given a suitable stain and surface, the crime scene technician can estab-
lish the approximate angle at which a droplet struck a surface. A droplet of liquid in
flight is spheroid. As a result, any measurement of the diameter of the droplet will be
equal. Refer to Figure 11.3. As the droplet collides with a target, a right triangle can be
visualized. This triangle is visualized by considering the diameter of the droplet, the
path of the droplet, and the area on the target where the droplet first touches and then
terminates movement. See triangle abc in Figure  11.3. The internal angle of lines acb
in this triangle is the angle of impact (the same as angle i in Figure 11.3). If we trans-
pose the triangle and compare it to the bloodstain, there is an analogy and relationship
between the two, as seen in Figure 11.4. The major axis of the bloodstain is analogous to
the hypotenuse of the triangle (line bc), and the minor axis of the bloodstain is analo-
gous to the side opposite (line ab). Using the trigonometric relationship sine and the two
known measurements from the bloodstain, the technician can solve for the unknown
angle (angle i), as seen in Figure 11.5. As confusing as all of this might sound, the act
of determining the angle of impact is quite simple in practice. The technician simply
measures the long and short axes of the stain. This measurement does not include any
portion of the tail, scallops, or satellite spatter. The technician then divides the short
axis by the long axis, which will always result in a number of 1 or less. Using a scientific
calculator, the technician then determines the inverse sine of this number, which is the
angle of impact (see Figure 11.6). This same relationship is true of defects created by bul-
lets, which was discussed in Chapter 10. The impact angle for any given stain can also be
approximated by simple examination of the shape of the stain. The more circular-shaped
336 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

A
The diameter of any part of the droplet’s
cross section is equal to any other.
C D Thus the line AB is equal to the line CD.
The same is true of the cross section of a
bullet.
B
Cross Section of the Droplet

Droplet’s
vector
a

i
Resulting stain c
b

Figure 11.3   The vector a droplet is following combined with the surface it impacts creates a
right triangle (abc). By drawing certain relationships between the stain and this right triangle,
the technician can identify the angle of impact (angle i).

Analogy of the Stain/Defect to a Right

Triangle
a
Side
Side Adjacent
Opposite The angle at i is the
angle of impact.
i

b c
Hypotenuse

Where: ab = minor axis

and bc = major axis

Major axis

Minor axis

Figure 11.4   The major axis of the stain is analogous to the hypotenuse (line bc). The minor
axis of the stain is analogous to the “side opposite” portion of the triangle (line ab). A measure-
ment of the stain’s width and length provides two known values that allow the technician to
solve for the unknown angle

stains indicate impact angles between 70 and 90°. Bear claw-shaped stains usually indi-
cate an impact angle between 40 and 60°. Long, elliptically shaped stains indicate acute
angle impacts of 30° or less (see Figure 11.7).
When we combine the information offered by the two subprinciples of directional
angle and impact angle, they set the basis of a corollary called area of origin. This corollary
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 337

Side Opposite Side Adjacent

Line ab Line ac

b c
Hypotenuse Line bc

Side Opposite or ab or the Minor Axis

Inverse SINE of i =
Hypotenuse or bc or the Major Axis

Figure 11.5   The formula used to define the impact angle is based on the trigonometric func-
tion of SINE. The inverse SINE of the angle at i is equal to the minor axis divided by the major
axis.

The impact angle is estimated using a simple math formula.

Formula

Width divided by Length = N

(N is always equal to or less than 1)

Length Inverse Sine of N = Impact Angle

Example : Width = 5 mm
Length = 7 mm
5/7 = 0.71
Inverse SINE of 0.71= 45
Impact Angle = 45 degrees
Width

Figure 11.6   A verbal explanation of the impact angle formula may seem complicated. In prac-
tice, however, it requires a simple division of two numbers and the conversion of that number
using a scientific calculator. The width of the stain divided by the length will result in a num-
ber equal to 1 or less. The inverse SINE of this number is the impact angle.

can be stated as: considered together, the impact and directional angles for a number of
stains associated with an impact event (a point source dispersion of blood) may define the
origin of the stains in three dimensions.
If the analyst can establish both the directional angle and the impact angle for a
well-formed stain and do so for a number of such stains associated to the same impact
event, the vectors defined by these angles will usually converge in three-dimensional
space. The area where the stain vectors converge provides indications of where the cor-
responding droplets originated their flight (see Figure 11.8). Information derived from
directionality, point of convergence, and an area of origin analysis can assist the crime
scene technician in understanding the direction and origin of the event that created the
impact pattern and can effectively place individuals in the scene at discrete moments in
time during the crime.
338 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

10 Degrees 50 Degrees 70 Degrees 90 Degrees

10 Degrees 90 Degrees Circular

Elliptical
Stain Shape and Angle of Impact

Figure 11.7  There is an empirical relationship between the shape of a stain and the associated
impact angle. The more elliptical the shape, the more acute this angle is. The more circular the
shape, the more likely it is that the droplet struck to a 90-degree angle.

Area of origin

Point of convergence

De
fin
ed
by
im
pa
ct
an
gle

Stain
Defined by directionality

Figure 11.8   By considering the directionality and impact angles of several related spatter
stains, the technician can establish an area of origin for the pattern.
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 339

The Physically Altered Bloodstain Principle

The final principle used in bloodstain pattern analysis is the physically altered bloodstain
(PAB) principle. This principle can be articulated as: once exposed, blood will react to envi-
ronmental conditions (e.g., airflow, temperature, humidity, variations of surface) in a pre-
dictable manner.
This principle is a simple recognition that blood dries, wicks, permeates, and coagu-
lates in and on surfaces in a somewhat predictable fashion. That information may be pro-
bative to the investigation. For example, it may allow an estimation of the volume of blood
in a scene or allow estimation of the minimum time since the blood was first exposed.
These three principles are the basis of all action and analysis accomplished by the
bloodstain pattern analyst. Any conclusion offered with regard to bloodstain pattern anal-
ysis must be consistent and within the limitations imposed by these principles. The analyst
practically applies these three principles using a functional methodology.

Methodology of BPA

The methodology employed by the bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA) is relatively simple.
The technician:
• Becomes familiar with the entire scene
• Identifies the discrete patterns among the various bloodstained surfaces
• Classifies these patterns based on their physical characteristics using some form of
established taxonomy
• Evaluates aspects of directionality and motion in the stain or pattern
• Evaluates angles of impact, points of convergence, and areas of origin (if necessary)
• Evaluates interrelationships among stains, patterns, and other evidence
• Evaluates viable source events to explain the pattern (based on all of the above)
• Validates the analysis through some form of peer review
A primary aspect of bloodstain pattern analysis is to classify the various bloodstain
patterns. As described, this determination alone effectively limits the possible source events
that may have created the pattern. For example, by defining a pattern on a suspect’s clothes
as spatter, the pattern cannot be explained by mere contact with a bloody body. Before
discussing these classifications, it is important to realize that beyond defining this underly-
ing event, an in-depth analysis of each pattern may provide the investigator with specific
information relating to where the associated event occurred, what items were involved in
the event, and the relative position of people and objects at the time of the event. It would
be preferable that every crime scene technician was properly trained in bloodstain pattern
analysis; if they are not, at a very minimum they should be able to identify basic pattern
types, recognize and apply the directional and impact angle principle, as well as under-
stand what information may be evident through a more complete analysis.

Classifying Bloodstain Patterns

A significant part of bloodstain pattern analysis is evaluating the physical characteristics
of a pattern and, based on those characteristics, making a classification of the stain or pat-
tern. Classification, however, is problematic in the discipline today, and the reason is simple:
340 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

there are numerous classification systems currently being utilized. Antagonists use this issue
to deride bloodstain pattern analysis as unscientific, but this issue is easily understood and
explained. The varying classification systems have different initial perspectives; for example,
one is concerned with mechanism, another with the size of spatter. All, however, arrive back
at the same basic pattern types. They may describe them with slightly different verbiage, but
they are describing the same thing. This multiclassification issue is not specific to bloodstain
pattern analysis alone and is found in varying sciences and scientific disciplines.
This second edition describes the stains based on the taxonomic system described in
Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene Reconstruction, 3rd edi-
tion. No matter what system of classification is used, by defining a pattern as belonging to a
certain classification, the analyst defines and limits the possible ways in which the pattern
came to be. It is important to remember, however, that no matter how specific the classifi-
cation is, bloodstain pattern evidence is always class characteristic evidence. It is possible
to identify the general class of event that created a stain (e.g., an impact to a blood mass),
but based solely on the bloodstain it is impossible in most instances to identify a specific
event to the exclusion of all others (e.g., this pattern was created by a blow from a 5-pound
hammer and not by a blow from a rock). Although the latter conclusion may be forthcom-
ing after a complete BPA analysis, such a conclusion is based on the full context in which
the stain is located. Thus the classification of a stain using its physical characteristics is a
deductive conclusion, but recognition of its scene source is an inductive conclusion. This
nuance in the application of bloodstain pattern analysis is not always understood by nov-
ices and frequently leads to inappropriate statements and conclusions.
The taxonomy classification system demands that defined criteria, in the form of
observable physical characteristics, exist for any given classification. These criteria are the
class characteristics that differentiate the patterns using the pattern diversity principle. The
value of the taxonomy system over any other classification system is these defined, written
criteria. These criteria are what must be evaluated in the unknown stains at the scene. The
additional value lies in the parent-child relationship of a taxonomy. If specific criteria are
not present, then some higher parent classification will exist where the criteria are met.
In a taxonomic mindset, bloodstain patterns are grouped into two basic categories:
spatter stains and nonspatter stains (see Figures  11.9 and 11.10). Spatter occurs when a
blood mass is broken up into small droplets and put into free flight by some mechanism.
When these droplets strike a surface, they produce circular or elliptical-shaped stains. In
spatter patterns the primary stains are made up of circular/elliptical-shaped stains. The
spatter patterns include impact spatter, cast-off patterns, spurts, drip trails, and drips:
Spatter Stains

Linear Spatter Non-linear Spatter

Spurt Cast-off Drip Trail Impact Spatter Drip

Expectorate

Figure 11.9   The Spatter category include patterns in which the primary stains are circular or
elliptical. This includes some of the more probative patterns such as impact spatter, cast-off,
and spurts.
 Non-Spatter Stains

Irregular Margin Regular Margin

Blood into Blood Gush Smear Pattern Transfer Flow Pool Saturation

Wipe Pattern Swipe Pattern

Figure 11.10   The Non-spatter category include all patterns where the primary stains are not circular or elliptical. They include patterns pro-
duced by contact, accumulations as well as some dynamic events such as blood into blood and gushes.
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene
341
342 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 11.11   A spurt pattern. These patterns can appear in varying orientations. They often
involve large elliptical stains or a large volume of smaller stains, as are evident on the doorway.
The stains will present a linear or curvilinear orientation that may appear as a wave that rises
and falls on the surface. Spurt patterns most often result when an artery or the heart is breached
by injury. (Photograph courtesy of Special Agent [Ret.] Steve Chancellor. With permission.)

Spurt (see Figure 11.11)

Definition: Stains created when blood is ejected in a stream under pressure or with
velocity, most often encountered when an artery or the heart is breached.
Criteria:
• A series of related spatter stains
• A large volume evident in the individual stains, demonstrated by flows from
individual stains or a large volume in the overall pattern
• Any of the following:
−− Lines of stains or overlapping stains deposited in V’s, arcs, or a serpentine
pattern.
−− Large elliptical stains
Spurts often help the technician in understanding the movement or orientation
of a victim subsequent to significant injuries (e.g., breaching of an artery or the
heart).

Cast-off (see Figure 11.12)

Definition: Stains created when blood is flung from an object that is either in
motion or which suddenly stops some motion.
Criteria:
• A series of related spatter stains
• Deposited in a linear or curvilinear orientation
• With consistent parallel directional angles in the stains to the overall pattern
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 343

Figure 11.12   A cast-off pattern. Cast-off patterns are created when a bloodied object is swung
in some fashion. Droplets of blood detach from the object at varying points along the swing.
The resulting pattern consists of a series of stains oriented in a linear or curvilinear forma-
tion. Directionality of the individual stains in the pattern identifies the direction of the swing.
Pattern F is a very linear cast-off pattern initiating in the upper center of the picture and extend-
ing down to a point near the No. 9.

• A consistent change in impact angle in the pattern

Cast-off patterns occur when an object is bloodied and then moved or swung in
some fashion. Blood is flung from the object by inertia at various points along the
arc of the swing, resulting in a series of individual stains in a linear orientation on
a surrounding surface. Cast-off patterns occur most often as a result of the swing-
ing of weapons and other bloodied objects during an altercation, but may also
result from offensive or defensive actions of victims or suspects whose appendage,
occassionally, are bloodied. Cast-off patterns assist the technician in understand-
ing the orientation of the item being swung and occasionally in determining the
minimum number of swings of the bloodied item.

Drip trail (Figure 11.13)

Definition: A pattern of individual spatter deposited on a surface, demonstrating
movement of the dripping item from one point to another.
Criteria:
• In-line distribution of spatter stains
• Consistent stain size range in the pattern, relative to any change in surface
characteristics or decreasing volume available to produce the drip
• The stains lead from one point to another
• Stains will typically range in size between 3 and 25 mm
By considering the directionality of a blood trail, the investigator may recognize
the movement of individuals or objects in the scene.
344 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 11.13  A drip trail is a series of related in-line drops falling from an individual or object.
Directionality of the individual stains may define the direction the individual or item was
moving at the time.

Impact pattern (see Figure 11.14)

Definition: A radiating pattern of small circular or elliptical-shaped stains created
when blood is broken up at a source by some force.
Criteria:
• A series of related small spatter stains
• Deposited in a pattern that has a radiating distribution in some fashion
• With a progressive change in individual stain shape the further out in the
pattern
• Various size range of parent stains, but generally consistent throughout the
pattern
Impact spatter are patterns where the spatter radiates out from a central loca-
tion. The individual size of the spatter stains may range greatly from small submil-
limeter stains up to larger 4 to 5 mm stains. The number of stains present in the
pattern may be a few to literally thousands, as seen in Figure 11.14. Impact spatter
occurs primarily where a blood source is compressed by an impact of some nature
(e.g., gunshot or blunt trauma). Impact spatter can also occur as a result of the
breathing of a victim. If blood is present in an airway, exhalation by the victim
will break the blood into small droplets, which are forced out of the airway. This
type of pattern is referred to as expiratory spatter. Detailed analysis of an impact
spatter pattern may result in defining an area of origin for the event, which if suc-
cessful, will limit the possible positions in the scene from which the event could
have occurred.
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 345

Figure 11.14   An impact spatter pattern on an appliance. Spatter patterns consist of a number
of small stains that radiate out from a central point. They result from forceful impacts to a
static blood source. The directional angles of the individual spatter stains will lead back to a
point of convergence on the surface. In this instance, the event occurred at the front left corner
of the appliance.

Drip(s) (see Figure 11.15)

Definition: Spatter resulting from blood dripping from an individual or otherwise
bloodied object.
Criteria:
• One or more spatter stains
• Parent stains have a generally large diameter (typically 3–25 mm)
• Randomly oriented on a surface
Where the drip trail was a linear series of spatter stains, the drip may be a single
stain or a series of stains randomly deposited across the surface. Drips are far less
distinct than drip trails, but they still provide some probative information in the
scene.

The nonspatter category is made up of stains in which the primary stain is not a circu-
lar or elliptical shape. This does not mean there are no spatters associated with these pat-
terns. In fact, in the case of gushes and blood into blood, significant numbers of secondary
satellite spatter will be present. The primary stain, however, will not be a spatter. These
patterns include pattern transfers, flows, pools, saturations, smears, gush patterns, and
blood into blood:

Gush/splash (see Figure 11.16)

Definition: An irregular pattern created when blood is ejected in volume.
346 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 11.15   A drip is a random arrangement of one or more spatter falling from a bloodied
object.

Criteria:
• A large volume accumulation evident in the overall pattern
• Large irregular stain exhibiting spines and satellite spatter radiating from it
• There may be large elliptical spatter stains around the pattern
Gush and or splash patterns, although forming from the same process as a
spurt, are classified as nonspatter because their primary stains are large-volume
accumulations with irregular margins. They occur when a volume of blood is pro-
jected into the scene with minimal force or when a jet of blood is directed into the
same area. They most often appear as large-volume patterns with large elliptical
stains surrounded by many secondary satellite stains. As the pressure behind the
ejection increases, the number of secondary satellite stains and spines emanating
from the primary stain tends to increase.

Blood into blood (see Figure 11.17)

Definition: A pattern of spatter deposited into one another or into another liq-
uid, resulting in an accumulation with secondary spatter randomly oriented
around the margin.
Criteria:
• A pooling of blood or some combination of blood and some other liquid that
may exhibit evidence of overlapping drips
• Surrounded by a random distribution of small satellite spatter
• These surrounding satellite spatters will show random variation in their direc-
tional angles and shapes
Blood into blood, sometimes referred to as a drip pattern, occurs when an
object dripping blood is stationary for a period of time. Blood-into-blood patterns
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 347

Figure 11.16   A gush pattern is produced by the same mechanism as a spurt, a streaming
ejection. It produces a distinctly different pattern consisting of an irregular margin stain with
many spines and secondary satellite stains. This difference in appearance can be attributed to
either the volume ejected in the gush or the stream being directed into the same area.

Figure 11.17   A blood-into-blood pattern consists of an accumulation surrounded by a num-

ber of random satellite stains. The number of secondary satellites is a function of how long the
blood dripped into the accumulation.
348 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

indicate a blood source was relatively stationary at that point, which may be proba-
tive to the investigation.

A variety of secondary contact stains are included in the nonspatter category. These
occur when blood is transferred from one object to another as the surfaces interact in some
fashion. The variations of contact stains include smears, wipes, swipes, and pattern transfers.

Smear
Definition: Any stain or pattern created by the transfer of blood from one object
onto another, through some form of contact.
Criteria:
• An irregular shaped stain
• Demonstrating any of the following:
−− A contiguous boundary
−− A feathered boundary
−− Striations in the body of the stain
−− Diminished volume of blood across the body of the stain
−− Evident displacement of blood
The general category of smear encompasses two distinct patterns: wipes and
swipes. A wipe is a smear through a preexisting stain or pattern (see Figure 11.18).
Through analysis of a wipe pattern, the analyst can establish the sequence of the
two events and, usually, the direction of motion of the disturbance. On occasion,
the relative time between the deposition of the original stain and its subsequent

Figure 11.18   Numerous wipe patterns in a pool of blood. A wipe is a disturbance of a preex-
isting bloodstain. Sequence of action and direction of the wipe are all characteristics that may
be evident.
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 349

Figure 11.19   A swipe mark on a tub. Swipes are produced when a bloodied object comes in
contact with another surface with associated lateral motion. A significantly bloodied object
was in contact with the upper surface of the bathtub and was moved into the tub.

disturbance can be estimated. This latter information can be significant when con-
sidering the presence of a suspect’s shoe marks or handprints in a scene, particu-
larly if there is a claim that the suspect merely discovered the crime some time
afterward. A swipe is a smear where the blood is deposited onto the surface (see
Figure 11.19). This simple distinction in the various forms of smears, although not
always evident, can be probative to the technician.

Pattern transfer (see Figure 11.20)

Definition: Any stain or pattern created by the transfer of blood from one object to
another in which a recognizable characteristic or image is present in the pattern.

Figure 11.20   A pattern transfer. A bloody shoe in contact with a floor left a repetitive pattern
transfer. In most instances, bloodstain patterns provide only class characteristics, but in some
instances, the resulting bloodstain offers the forensic footwear examiner the opportunity to
individualize this evidence to a specific shoe. (Photograph courtesy of Kim Duddy, Seattle, WA)
350 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Criteria:
• A contact pattern
• Demonstrating angular demarcations, curves, or other recognizable charac-
teristics or an image of the source object
• It may be deposited in a series
A pattern transfer occurs when an object wet with blood contacts another sur-
face such as cloth or clothing articles, leaving a recognizable pattern. Typical pat-
tern transfers include hand- or footprints and patterns of bloodied knife blades or
blunt-force weapons. Rarely will a pattern transfer be examined and “identified”
to a single specific object, but such patterns will assist the investigator in recogniz-
ing the nature and characteristics of weapons used in an assault and, more impor-
tantly, define where these objects were during the incident.

Although very simple patterns, blood pools and blood flows help the technician in
establishing the movement and position of individuals bleeding in the scene. Blood flows
will always obey gravity; therefore the presence of abnormal blood flows may indicate
movement by the victim before death and/or disturbance of the scene by the subject or
parties who arrived afterward. The volume or condition of a blood pool may provide pro-
bative information to the technician as well.
Saturation stains occur when blood is drawn into clothing, cloth, or permeable sur-
faces. Saturation stains rarely provide the technician specific investigative information and
often mar or destroy other blood patterns of interest.
Fly spot patterns are an interesting artifact found in bloodied scenes (Figure 11.21).
They occur as a result of fly activity in a scene. The movement of flies can track blood from
a body or blood source and deposit it on surrounding walls and surfaces. Flies also regur-
gitate blood onto these surfaces. The resulting patterns can mimic to some degree impact
spatter, appearing as a number of small circular stains. In some instances, they may also
mimic directional spatter. Careful evaluation will identify these artifacts as contact stains
and distinguish them from other patterns of interest.
Voids are not true patterns, but rather a lack of staining in an otherwise continu-
ous pattern (see Figure 11.22). They occur when a secondary object is present between a

Figure 11.21   Fly spots on tile. Fly spots occur when flies feed on a blood source and either
track the blood or regurgitate blood back in the scene. The patterns often mimic spatter pat-
terns. (Photograph courtesy of Detective Mike McGuffey, Covington Police Department. With
permission.)
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 351

Figure 11.22   A void is an absence of stains in an otherwise continuous pattern. It helps the
technician realize that some object was moved after the bloodshed event. Photo courtesy of
Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene Reconstruction, 3rd Ed.

bloodstain event and a nearby surface. Voids appear most often in spatter events, where
hundreds of small droplets are forced into the scene and onto the surrounding surfaces.
The secondary object may prevent many of the small spatter stains from reaching a nearby
wall or surface, resulting in an area devoid of any blood but surrounded by spatter. Voids
assist the technician in understanding the relative position of items at the time of the event.
The technician must always be cautious and not presume that the natural end of a pattern
is associated with a void.
The major effort of bloodstain pattern analysis is to identify the discrete patterns pres-
ent in the scene and to categorize each. Once categorized, theories regarding the creation
or presence of a stain pattern within the scene can be considered in light of this informa-
tion. A proper classification allows the analyst to eliminate many possible source events.
As with most forensic disciplines, the proper application of bloodstain pattern analysis
will certainly negate possible theories based on these eliminations, but it may not limit the
theories to a single source event.

Documenting Bloodstain Patterns

If the technician is not trained in bloodstain pattern analysis and a trained analyst is
unavailable to visit the scene, it is imperative that the crime scene technicians obtain com-
plete documentation of the stains and stain patterns. For this reason, recognizing discrete
patterns within the overall scene is a critical skill for every crime scene technician. After
recognizing the discrete patterns, each pattern must be documented with overall photo-
graphs of that pattern alone as well as detailed close-up photographs of pattern or selected
individual stains within the pattern. Close-up detail is a critical factor in bloodstain pat-
tern photography. Photographs taken of millimeter-sized stains from several feet away are
unlikely to allow for any type of analysis and are, for the most part, a waste of effort.
Investigators must ensure that good close-up photographs are included in any bloodstain
352 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

photography. The technique of road mapping, which was explained in Chapter 6, is the
most effective way to document bloodstained scenes.
Obtaining serology and DNA samples from each pattern is important as well, even if
there is only one victim associated with the scene. Sampling of each pattern ensures that
the pattern can be identified back to a specific source. In violent confrontations, nothing
precludes an assailant from being the source of a bloodstain pattern, so the technician
should never assume that all bloodstain patterns are the victim’s. This is particularly true
in situations involving edged weapons, where it is quite common to see self-wounding of
the assailant. Although not common, nothing precludes the presence of stains from prior
unassociated events.

Case Example: DNA Always Helps Tell the Tale

At a shooting scene involving three male police officers and a male suspect, numer-
ous gunshots were exchanged through a wall in a trailer. One officer was killed in the
exchange and the subject was wounded. No other parties were in the scene or injured.
Of some interest to the district attorney was the location of the subject as he fired on
the officers. The subject was known to be inside a bedroom in the trailer, but there
were some contradicting ideas as to specifically where he was. On a wall just inside
the bedroom door adjacent to multiple incoming and outgoing bullet defects was an
impact spatter pattern (see Figure 11.23). This pattern of radiating circular and ellipti-
cal-shaped stains can be produced by a gunshot event, even though no misting stains
were observed within the pattern. If the wounding of the subject produced the pattern,
this would place him very near the point where the dead officer was shot, whereas he
claimed to have been in a defensive position throughout the exchange. The position
seemed extremely exposed given the bullet defects; nevertheless, the blood appeared

Figure 11.23   A spatter pattern (outlined in red) on a wall inside an officer-involved shooting.
This pattern was originally thought to be associated to the subject; however, subsequent DNA
analysis determined it was not his and was from a female. No females were present or wounded
at the time of the shooting. Although an uncommon event, some scenes may contain patterns
of blood unrelated to the incident being investigated.
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 353

quite fresh. The pattern was sampled and sent off for analysis. The DNA analysis deter-
mined that the blood was not the subject’s and was from a female. As no females were
present or wounded, the pattern was clearly a pre-incident artifact and had nothing to
do with the shooting incident.

A final consideration in bloodstain pattern documentation is to accurately place the

pattern in the scene. Although the crime scene photographs will assist in this process,
detailed measurements of the location and size, as well as descriptions of the overall orien-
tation of the patterns, are necessary. The creation of additional sketches that detail location
and orientation of stain patterns will be helpful.

Presumptive Tests for Bloodstains

The technician may occasionally find small reddish brown stains that are not easily iden-
tifiable as blood; this could be due to the age of the stain or the visual reference. Rather
than arbitrarily proceeding with processing and collection, the technician may wish to
increase his or her confidence level in the nature of the stain. Presumptive field tests for
blood provide a simple mechanism of accomplishing this, but it is imperative to under-
stand that they are merely presumptive for the presence of blood and, with one exception,
are certainly not specific for human blood. Nevertheless, these presumptive tests provide a
convenient first indication.
Two of the primary field tests for the presumptive presence of blood are phenolphtha-
lein and leuco-malachite green. Either test can be purchased in kit form from a variety of
forensic suppliers or mixed in bulk by an organization’s lab. Kits are the more effective tool
for crime scene application, as they can be stored without refrigeration in standard crime
scene equipment.
These tests are based on an oxidation-reduction reaction of the chemicals that occurs
in the presence of heme, a component of hemoglobin, which is the primary oxygen carrier
found in red blood cells. A primary concern of these chemicals is that they also react with
other substances, so a positive reaction is not conclusive evidence for the presence of blood.
However, combining the visual characteristics of a stain with a positive presumptive test
should lead to increased confidence on scene, which will ultimately be backed up by more
conclusive testing at the crime lab.
Phenolphthalein consists of three basic solutions: the phenolphthalein solution itself,
ethanol, and hydrogen peroxide as an oxidizer. The first step is to sample the suspect stain
by taking the corner of a folded filter paper or a clean cotton swab and lightly rubbing the
surface of the stain, as seen in Figure 11.24. If the stain is particularly old, the technician
can moisten the filter paper or swab first with a drop of the ethanol. The area of the filter
paper placed in contact with the stain is moistened with one drop of ethanol and then one
drop of phenolphthalein reagent. No color reaction should occur. Any pink color reaction
that occurs within the several seconds of the second step and prior to applying the oxi-
dizer (hydrogen peroxide) would indicate a false positive test. After ensuring there is no
false positive, a drop of hydrogen peroxide is applied. An immediate pink color reaction
should occur in the presence of blood (Figure 11.25). A control swab or filter paper that is
placed in contact with an area that is clearly unstained is treated in the same manner. No
color reaction should be evident on the control. The control serves to ensure that there are
no contaminants present that might create a false positive. The same basic procedures are
354 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 11.24   Odd pigmented stains or old stains may not appear to be blood. The presump-
tive blood test gives the crime scene technician a greater level of confidence that the stain is
indeed blood. To conduct a presumptive test, the technician samples the stain with the corner
of a clean filter paper or a clean swab. The solutions of the presumptive test are then applied in
sequence to the paper or the swab.

Figure 11.25   Phenolphthalein results in a pink color response in the presence of blood. This
photograph demonstrates a positive presumptive test. It must be followed by a verification of
DNA or human blood at the crime lab.

utilized with the leuco-malachite green test, which yields a green color reaction rather than
pink for a positive test.
Forensic suppliers provide both the phenolphthalein and leuco-malachite tests as dis-
posable single-test individual kits. These kits are just as effective as the solution stocks and
require the technician to sample the stain and then break a series of self-contained glass
vials in the order indicated. A positive test results in the appropriate color reaction. The
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 355

decision to use either the self-contained tests or stock solutions is generally a matter of con-
venience and whether a supporting lab is available to order and resupply the stock solutions.
As well as trying to verify the presence of blood, the technician may need to enhance
both latent and patent bloodstains present in the scene. Patent bloodstains, those visible
to the eye, may be difficult to discern as a result of a lack of contrast in the background
substrate. Latent blood may exist in the scene for any number of reasons, including light
smearing of bloody objects or clean-up attempts by suspects. The primary methods for
enhancing latent or slightly visible bloodstains are based on the use of luminol, fluorescein,
amido-black, and leuco-crystal violet (LCV).
These reagents are available from forensic suppliers in kit form, eliminating the dif-
ficulty in locating and mixing the solutions in bulk. Similar to the presumptive tests, when
applied to a surface, luminol reacts in the presence of heme by producing a chemilumines-
cence that has a blue-green coloration. As an oxidation reaction, luminol reacts to a num-
ber of items and products found in any household. These include certain metals, vegetable
peroxidase, and cleaning chemicals such as bleach. Amido-black is a protein stain, reacting
to proteins present in the blood.

Luminol Enhancement of Latent Bloodstains

The luminol solution is a combination of distilled water, luminol (3-aminophthalhydra-
zide), sodium perborate, and sodium carbonate. When prepared from bulk, the respec-
tive ratio for the mixture is 100 ml of distilled water, 0.1 g of luminol, 0.7 g of sodium
perborate, and 0.5 g of sodium carbonate. Using commercially prepared kits is the sim-
plest and most effective method for the crime scene technician, eliminating the need
to procure, mix, and store the chemicals. In kit form, two dry chemical mixtures are
added to approximately 8 ounces of water. The solution is mixed thoroughly and then,
if indicated, strained through filter paper to create the final working solution. Filtering
is necessary in some formulas in order to remove undissolved particles that can clog
the spray head. Once sprayed onto the suspected area, a blue-green chemiluminescence
reaction occurs (Figure 11.26). This color reaction can only be observed by darkening the
area and reducing any ambient light.
Luminol reacts to any number of substances with a false positive reaction. Bathrooms
routinely present a possibility for a false positive result. This includes both sinks and toi-
lets. Figure 11.27 is a photograph of a sink, cleaned with a typical bathroom product prior
to the introduction of luminol. There is a distinct color response. Toilets often respond as
well, particularly if they contain a bowl deodorizer, such as those that are deposited in the
water reservoir. False positive color reactions present distinct differences from a positive
color reaction. These differences are manifest in three areas: color, duration, and intensity.
A positive color reaction for blood is typically a blue-green color. In terms of intensity and
duration, a positive response to blood will initiate in a matter of several seconds after appli-
cation and remain active for several minutes. A typical false positive response to cleaning
solutions (e.g., bleach) is an immediate and intense reaction (almost a flash of light) that
dies out quickly. The initial color response in these circumstances is often a light green to
white, rather than a blue-green. Toilets, on the other hand, often present a long-duration
blue-violet color response.
Luminol reactions are somewhat difficult to photograph, because they require a dark-
ened area. As with many of the techniques discussed in this book, photographing luminol
356 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 11.26   A positive response of luminol in the presence of latent blood. The color reac-
tion is a blue to blue–green, develops gradually, and will remain active for several minutes. In
this instance, the insert shows the same area prior to application of the luminol. (Photograph
courtesy of Sietze Albertse, South African Police Service, Crime Reporting Section, Pretoria,
South Africa)

Figure 11.27   A luminol response in a sink. This is not a positive response to blood, but a reac-
tion to a bleach-based cleaning product. The color is lime green to white; it developed instantly,
and such reactions often lead to the observation of a number of small flashes (which cannot be
photographed). These responses are often misrepresented as a positive response.

reactions should be practiced prior to attempting it in an actual crime scene. When using
a standard film camera (SLR or large-format camera), the technician should begin with an
extended shutter duration of up to 3 to 5 min. To eliminate camera motion, the camera
must be mounted on a tripod and the shutter held open with a lock-down shutter release
cable. Toward the end of the exposure and prior to closing the shutter, the technician can
direct a small flashlight onto surrounding surfaces in both a bounce-lighting and paint-
with-light effect. This effort should be brief and not directed at the area where the primary
color reaction was noted. This allows both the color reaction and the surrounding scene
details to be captured on film. With the advent of digital cameras, exposure issues became
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 357

much easier to contend with when photographing luminol reactions. Durations of 20 s to

1 min are usually adequate. Digital cameras do not require absolute darkness while taking
the picture and significantly reduce the necessity of using paint-with-light techniques.

Fluorescein Enhancement of Latent Bloodstains

Fluorescein also reacts to the heme in blood, but the response is observed only under an
alternative light source (ALS). In the presence of blood, the solution will fluoresce green
when viewed with an ALS set between 455 and 485 nm. The most effective barrier filter is
the yellow filter, although an orange filter will work as well.
The fluorescein solution is a combination of distilled water, sodium hydroxide, fluores-
cein, and zinc. It too is available in commercial kits or can be bought in bulk and mixed
as needed. To prepare the solution, the technician combines and vigorously mixes 25 ml
of distilled water with 0.25 g of fluorescein and 0.5 g of zinc. The mixture will produce a
gray solution. This solution is allowed to settle for 15 min, ultimately leaving a light-green-
colored to slightly clear solution at the top. The technician draws this clear solution off with
a pipette for dilution in distilled water. This diluted solution is the working stock. The mix-
ing ratio of the working stock varies, but a 1:100 ratio is a good starting point.
The working solution is sprayed onto the suspect area, which is followed by a light
misting of 3% hydrogen peroxide over the same area. The area is then viewed with illumi-
nation from an ALS at a wavelength between 455 and 485 nm using a yellow barrier filter.
The reaction can be photographed using a barrier filter as well (Figure 11.28).
The spraying mechanisms used for either luminol or fluorescein include clean house-
hold bottle sprayers, commercial chemical sprayers, and air-brush sprayers. In choosing a

Figure 11.28   A pattern transfer in latent blood on a carpet as viewed with fluorescein
enhancement. The crime scene technician must observe and photograph the fluorescein reac-
tion with an alternative light source (ALS) set between 455 and 485 nm and a yellow-barrier
filter.
358 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

sprayer, the only true consideration is volume and quality of the spray. The finer the spray
produced, the more effective the reaction. A fine spray is far more important when using
fluorescein, but a poor sprayer will also adversely affect luminol. Cheap bottle sprayers
never make the best application method, particularly when directed to vertical surfaces.
The heavy spray results in flows that alter and mar the area being enhanced. When using
fluorescein, a thickening agent (Ketrol) can be dissolved with the working solution to pre-
vent flows and dripping on vertical surfaces. The thickener is added slowly to the working
solution before being sprayed on the surface.

Amido-Black Enhancement of Latent Bloodstains

Protein stain enhancement techniques are functional crime scene techniques as well. This
includes water-based amido-black. Water-based amido should only be used on static surfaces
in the crime scene and not on evidence items. Water-based techniques do not fix the blood
and can interfere with subsequent analysis. Therefore any surface being enhanced should be
sampled for serology/DNA prior to application of the enhancement technique. Specific areas
that react to the chemical enhancement can subsequently be sampled as well, providing both
pre- and postsamples for serology and DNA analysis. The protein techniques are available in
kit form for ease of mixing and storage. They are particularly effective for developing bloody
footwear marks on a variety of scene surfaces, including floors and carpet.
Water-based amido-black is a solution mixed and sprayed onto a surface. The ingre-
dients are 500 ml of distilled water, 20 g of 5-sulfosalicyclic acid, 3 g of amido-black, 3
g of sodium carbonate, 50 ml of formic acid, 50 ml of glacial acetic acid, and 12.5 ml of
Kodak Photo Flo 600 solution. This solution is diluted in 1 L of distilled water. Although
ready for use once it is mixed, the solution works best if prepared several days in advance.
The diluted working solution is sprayed onto a surface. The reaction takes between 30 s
and 3 min. If necessary, the area can be rinsed with tap water.1 Amido-black results in an
enhancement that is blue-black in color (Figure 11.29).

Infrared Photography

As described in Chapter 6, infrared photography represents a significant tool for the crime
scene processor, particularly when evaluating patent bloodstains on dark or multicolored
clothing. Figure 11.30 depicts a multicolored fabric with an overlaying bloodstain pattern,
photographed with visible light. The bloodstain pattern is evident, but the fabric pattern
prevents effective visualization of the entire pattern. Figure 11.31 depicts the same fabric
photographed with an IR camera. With the majority of the visible light eliminated, the
fabric appears white, while the blood, with its high IR absorbance, appears black. There are
no absolute rules of when or on what surfaces IR photography will work, so the technician
must test the various backgrounds to determine if additional contrast is possible.

Summary

Bloodstain pattern analysis is directed at evaluating the bloodstain patterns found in the
scene in an effort to categorize them into an established taxonomy. This categorization
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 359

Figure 11.29   Amido black enhancement of latent blood. The subject mopped this floor clean
following a multiple murder. This resulted in smearing latent blood across the entire surface.
While it was still wet, the subject walked barefoot on the surface. This resulted in a negative
mark (an area lacking blood). In most instances, the amido-black enhancement results in a
positive mark, where the mark itself is blue.

is based on the nature of the creation event. The technician considers a number of physi-
cal characteristics of the stain and patterns, including but not limited to shape, volume,
dispersion, and orientation. Bloodstain patterns effectively establish what happened in
a scene, rather than who. Based on bloodstain pattern analysis, it is possible to deter-
mine the nature of the events that occurred in the scene, the general area where those
events occurred, and the relative positions of people and objects at discrete moments
in time.
After categorizing a stain or pattern, the technician evaluates the pattern and other
indications of motion to determine in which direction the individual droplets or stains
were deposited. Directionality of spatter stains is defined by the long axis of the individ-
ual stain and the presence of scallops, tails, and small satellite spatter. After determining
the long axis, the technician determines where the scallops, spines, and satellite spatter
are located. The concentration of these characteristics will be found on the far edge of
the long axis.
In addition to evaluating directionality, the technician can apply a simple mathemati-
cal formula to determine the impact angle of the individual spatter stains. This informa-
tion, when combined with directionality, will suggest the area of origin of the event. By
visual reference alone, the technician can estimate the approximate angle of impact. Long
elliptical stains generally indicate an impact angle of 10 to 30°. Bear claw-shaped stains
suggest impacts between 40 and 60°. Circular stains suggest impact angles between 70 and
90°.
360 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 11.30   The use of an infrared camera can also be effective for enhancing patent blood-
stain on items of clothing, particularly when the background does not allow good contrast.
A patent (visible) bloodstain is present on this mutli-colored fabric, but it is difficult at best
to visualize the stain. Compare this Figure with Figure 11.31. Photograph courtesy of Jeff
Borngasser, Oregon State Central Point Crime Laboratory, Portland, OR.

Figure 11.31   The same fabric as seen in Figure 11.30 viewed under an infrared camera. The
colors of the background fabric are effectively eliminated and the blood, which absorbs all
light including infrared, becomes darker. Photograph courtesy of Jeff Borngasser, Oregon State
Central Point Crime Laboratory, Portland, OR.
Applying Bloodstain Pattern Analysis in the Crime Scene 361

Even if the technician does not conduct a complete analysis, it is imperative that the
technician be able to recognize discrete patterns within the scene. The primary patterns of
interest include impact spatter, spurts, gushes, cast-off patterns, pattern transfers, wipes,
swipes, flows, drip patterns, drip trails, pools, and flows.
There are a variety of presumptive blood tests that can be used on scene. These include
phenolphthalein and leuco-malachite green. These tests provide the crime scene technician
with a greater level of confidence when presented with an aged bloodstain or stains that do
not appear normal. Chemical enhancement of latent blood using luminol and fluorescein
allows the technician to visualize latent bloodstain patterns that are either too light to see
or have been washed up in some fashion. Luminol requires darkness to view the results,
while fluorescein requires an alternative light source to visualize.
Bloodstain pattern analysis requires significant documentation effort for court
purposes and for any outside experts who might be called in to assist. Proficiency in
this advanced technique requires study and practice on the part of the crime scene
technician. Because bloodstain evidence is routinely encountered in a variety of crime
scenes, the crime scene technician should strive to become proficient at bloodstain pat-
tern analysis.

Suggested Reading
Bevel, T., and Gardner, R., Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene
Reconstruction, 3rd ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2007.
Ramirez, C., and Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL, 2011.

Chapter Questions
1. Describe the basic steps used to conduct a bloodstain pattern analysis.
2. What are the two primary categories in the bloodstain pattern taxonomy, and
what distinguishes one from the other?
3. What is the general rule regarding the relationship of a bloodstain’s shape and
impact angle?
4. What is meant by stain directionality, and how is it determined?
5. How are point of convergence and area of origin used to evaluate an impact spat-
ter pattern?
6. What are the three key elements considered when viewing and evaluating a lumi-
nol reaction?
7. In your own words describe the concept behind the pattern diversity principle.
8. How is infrared photography helpful in documenting bloodstain patterns on
some surfaces?
9. What is meant by a complex pattern?
10. Why are close-up detail and close-up photographs so important in documenting
bloodstain patterns?
362 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Notes
1. Herzig, W., verbal communication, September 2003.
2. Balthazard, V. et al., Etude ges Gouttes de Sang Projecte, paper presented at XXII Congress de
Medicine Legale, Paris, June 1939.
3. Backtrack Images is a registered trademark name of Forensic Computing of Ottawa,
Ottawa, Canada.
The Body as a Crime Scene
ROSS M. GARDNER
MICHAEL MALONEY
12
The victims of crime, specifically their bodies, are a significant source of physical evidence.
A body, alive or dead, is effectively a crime scene within a crime scene and requires very
specific and directed effort on the part of the crime scene investigator. Bodies present them-
selves as scenes in a variety of investigations, including death investigations, aggravated
assaults, and rapes/sexual assaults. Unlike the actual scene of crime, this scene within a
scene is not under the complete control of the crime scene technician, and that lack of con-
trol will require coordinated effort between the police and various medical professionals.
This chapter will describe basic approaches to both corpses located in the scene and at the
morgue, as well as live victims that present themselves subsequent to a crime.

Examination of the Corpse In Situ

Assessing
As a scene, the corpse is approached in a similar fashion as any crime scene. Thus the tech-
nician must assess, observe, document, search, collect, and analyze it. Assessment begins
on arrival. Recall that lifesaving always takes precedence over evidence integrity issues.
Initial responding officers typically have evaluated the body prior to arrival of the crime
scene team, but the technician has a responsibility to verify death. The manner in which
this is accomplished is generally less hectic than actions taken by the initial responding
officer, so the technician (unless acting as the initial responder) must approach the body
in a fashion that causes no further damage to evidence in the scene or on the body itself.
Movement to the body is generally accomplished using a point-to-point approach, using a
pathway that is generally clear of evidence. In deciding upon what path to use, whenever
possible the technician should consider and avoid likely ingress and egress paths by the
perpetrator(s).
Presumptive death is determined through two basic observations. The first observa-
tional consideration is whether there is evident trauma inconsistent with life. This may
include massive head trauma, decapitation, major evisceration, massive blood loss, or evi-
dent decomposition. The presence of any one of these conditions can be taken as presump-
tive evidence of death. The second observational consideration is an absence of normal life
signs, including a pulse in major arteries, heartbeat, respiration, evident body heat, con-
striction of pupils in response to light, flushing of the nail beds, and movement or an abil-
ity to react to stimuli. The absence of one or a combination of these conditions should not
be taken as evidence of presumptive death and may in fact demand medical intervention
(CPR) on the part of the technician. But if all of these conditions are absent, the probability
of death is high. In this instance, medical professionals should still verify death through
appropriate means.

363
364 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Once a presumptive assessment of death is made, the crime scene technician should
note any initial observations. What position is the body in? Are there evident injuries pres-
ent, and if so where? Is there fragile evidence present that must be acted on? Is so, the
technician should immediately document the evidence and collect it before it is damaged
or lost. A significant concern in the initial assessment is what postmortem indicators are
present and to what extent? The early postmortem indicators are livor mortis, rigor mortis,
and algor mortis, with later, more obvious postmortem indicators that include decomposi-
tion, entomological activity, mummification, adipocere formation, and ultimate skeletoni-
zation of the remains.
Livor mortis involves settling of blood in the body due to gravity after blood circula-
tion ends. It may present itself as a light red to dark purple coloration in as little as 30 min
following death. Livor discoloration will set and become “fixed” typically within 8 h of
death, but this is highly variable and the medical examiner is always the best source of
any time of death estimations. Livor mortis found in areas that are inconsistent with the
current position of the body may suggest subsequent manipulation or alteration of the
body and should be duly noted and documented. When describing livor mortis in notes,
identify both the location and color and whether the lividity is fixed. A simple procedure
to test whether the lividity is fixed is to press a gloved finger against the area in question;
if the lividity blanches (the blood is displaced by the pressure), then the livor mortis is not
completely fixed.
Rigor mortis is an evident stiffening of the muscles of the body. Rigor mortis affects
all muscles of the body at the same rate. However, it is typically evident in the smaller
muscles (e.g., jaw and face) first and then manifests itself in larger muscle groups such as
the extremities. It can appear within 2 h of death and is typically at its greatest 8–12 h fol-
lowing death. Unlike livor mortis, rigor will begin to break down and disappear from the
body typically 24–48 h after death. The factors affecting the onset and departure of rigor
mortis are also highly variable, and any estimation of time of death based on rigor is left to
the medical examiner. The technician can check the presence of rigor through observation
(e.g., a body in a position that defies gravity) or through simple manipulation of the joints
associated with the various muscle groups (e.g., jaw, face, neck, arms, or legs). When report-
ing rigor mortis, the most effective approach is to identify where rigor is noted and to what
extent it is evident (e.g., slight, moderate, complete). As with livor mortis, if the rigor mortis
is inconsistent with the final position of the body, this may indicate movement or alteration
of the body. Such inconsistencies may be immediately apparent or they can be very subtle,
as seen in Figure 12.1. In either instance, they should be fully noted and documented.
Algor mortis is the loss of body heat from the corpse. The most common approach
to determining body temperature is core temperature reading of the liver. This action is
normally an action taken by the medical examiner (ME) or the ME investigator. An addi-
tional approach is the use of digital thermometers that calculate core temperature from
external surface readings (e.g., the forehead). If neither of these methods is possible, an
axial temperature can be taken by placing the thermometer in the armpit. The investigative
notes should identify this as an axial reading. Body temperature is highly variable, with an
initial period following death in which it is static and any loss is effectively immeasurable.
Ambient environmental conditions, body habitus (e.g., thin or fat body), chronic medical
conditions, and any number of other factors may affect heat loss after death.
Decomposition involves the physical putrefaction of the tissue due to bacteria.
The primary source of the bacteria is the gastrointestinal tract of the victim; therefore
The Body as a Crime Scene 365

Figure 12.1  Rigor mortis can be very subtle. This victim was found in bed, covered, and her
death represented as a suicide. Note the condition of the right calf, when the top bedding was
removed. The legs are in a state of rigor, in which the right calf is not in contact with the bed.
Her final position was achieved after death and after rigor had become fixed in another position.
(Courtesy of C. Archer and the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, Montgomery County,
Texas.)

decomposition typically manifests itself first as a blue-green discoloration in the lower

right quadrant of the abdomen. Due to fermentation as bacteria interacts with the sur-
rounding tissues, gases build up, resulting in evident swelling of tissue, protrusion of eyes,
or tongue, and ultimately a blackish blue discoloration of tissue. The blood vessels often
become significantly discolored in this way, resulting in a condition referred to as mar-
bling. As the skin and underlying tissue lose their integrity, fluids may be purged and
slippage of the skin may occur when the body is handled. As with the other postmortem
factors, many environmental conditions have a direct effect on the rate of decomposition.
For instance, high heat and humidity speeds the process of decomposition, while cold will
delay it.
Entomological activity begins in and around the body quickly. The natural movement
of the insect world onto the remains is studied under the field of forensic entomology, and
this area can be helpful in establishing time of death. Flies will begin laying eggs on the
body within 20 min of death. The flies lay their eggs in warm, moist areas of the body such
as the nostrils, corners of the eyes, in the mouth, or any other body opening that is readily
available. The eggs develop into larval form (maggots). Together they will form a mag-
got mass at the point of infestation. A maggot mass can manifest itself in an unexpected
location such as the chest, abdomen, or on the extremities. When this occurs this may
indicate an open injury that made that area inviting to the flies. The maggots eventually
reach maturity and abandon the body. They enter the soft soil or other surrounding areas
where they will pupate, forming a hard casing from which the recognizable species of fly
will emerge. The life cycle of each species of fly can be determined for a given environ-
ment. With the careful collection of both living and preserved maggots, pupae casings, and
any adult flies on or near the body, a forensic entomologist may well be able to provide a
postmortem interval. Additional insects may also be present, including wasps and beetles.
366 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

These insects also move to the body in a fairly predictable pattern, which if documented
may allow estimation of the postmortem interval as well. The crime scene investigator
should coordinate well in advance of the need with his or her supporting forensic ento-
mologist, in order to determine what insect samples to collect and in what condition the
entomologist requires them. Typically the supporting forensic entomologist will have a
field questionnaire and often an associated checklist that will guide the technician through
what specimens to gather, from where and in what condition, as well as identifying the spe-
cific environmental information required by the entomologist. A more detailed discussion
of entomology evidence and its collection is found in the “Buried and Scattered Remains”
section of Chapter 13.
The crime scene technician is not responsible for estimating the time of death (TOD)/
postmortem interval. If a TOD determination is accomplished at all, a competent ME does
it in cooperation with any other specialists (e.g., the forensic entomologist). The ME bases
the TOD decision on many different factors relating to the context in which the body is
found. Each of the postmortem indicators is important to the estimation and may ulti-
mately assist the ME in making a time of death determination. The technician should be
sure to make specific note of environmental factors on scene, as these significantly influence
postmortem changes. These factors include interior and exterior temperatures, humidity,
and any evident air currents. Accurate observations by the crime scene investigator of all
of these indicators are important to the ME’s TOD determination.
Unless there are mitigating circumstances that demand movement of the body, the
crime scene technician should not be in any rush to alter the body’s position or remove
the body from the scene. If exposure is an issue, after the initial assessment, steps can be
taken to shield the body from prying eyes and news cameras. This may include setting up
portable screens or the erection of tents or canopies, as discussed in Chapter 5.

Observing, Documenting, Searching, and Collecting

After initial assessment of the body, other overall crime scene activities will take prece-
dence. This includes basic observations and scene documentation with the body in situ.
Once these actions are complete, a detailed examination of the body is conducted. Because
of the nature of physical evidence associated with the body (e.g., trace evidence, touch
DNA) and the fact that only portions of the body are initially exposed, the steps of observa-
tion, documentation, search, and collection all occur near simultaneous to one another as
each area of the body is evaluated.
In nearly every jurisdiction in the United States, the body belongs to the medical
examiner. Before attempting movement or manipulation of the deceased, the ME or ME
investigator should give approval. Evidence integrity issues, however, may be in competi-
tion with the ME’s needs. Prior coordination with the supporting ME office may allow
creation of an agreement between the police and ME that define under what conditions
movement and manipulation can be taken by the crime scene technician. This will lead to
a standard operating procedure that protects both parties’ interests. If no ME investigator
is employed in the jurisdiction, or one is not available to respond to the scene, then the
technician takes on an additional duty of acting as the eyes and ears of the medical exam-
iner. The crime scene technician’s observations, photographs, and documentation will be
of significant assistance to the ME in arriving at any conclusion regarding the death. This
role is exceedingly important and should not be forgotten.
The Body as a Crime Scene 367

During the detailed examination the technician should make in-depth notes regard-
ing the body, clothing, wounds, and any associated evidence. As this examination moves
forward, any trace evidence observed at any point during the examination is immediately
documented and collected to prevent loss. Postmortem indicators should be checked once
again and any changes noted. Photographs of the body will serve as the most effective way
to establish the body’s physical position and condition on scene, so significant effort is
directed to this end. First, a series of photographs taken at a greater distance are used to
help demonstrate the position of the body in relation to the scene. Detailed photographs
of the victim’s head, face, torso, extremities, and the clothing position and condition are
taken without manipulating the corpse’s physical position. Of specific interest, the techni-
cian should capture apparent bloodstains, clothing defects, the position of any evidence
associated to the body, including any weapons, visible wounds, and any visible identifying
marks in this initial set of photographs. Some technicians search the exposed surfaces with
the ALS and then tape these areas for hairs/fibers and trace DNA prior to initiating this
detailed photography. The mindset is that any movement around the body, even for pho-
tography purposes, has the potential of dislodging fiber and hairs. This may or may not be
true, but the technique presents a very cautious approach when there is a specific concern.
Once the initial photographs are completed, exposed surfaces of the body and the area
directly around the body are examined with both white light (direct and oblique) and vari-
ous wavelengths using the ALS. Hairs, fibers, semen, spittle, or any other trace evidence
located should be photographed and collected without delay.
All of the previously described effort was accomplished without any significant manip-
ulation or movement of the body’s final position. Now the body must be fixed to the scene
using standard crime scene mapping techniques as described in Chapter 7. Physical mea-
surements can be taken from various exposed landmarks on the body, including the nose,
elbows, wrists, knees, feet, or ankles. In addition to adding the body’s position to the overall
crime scene sketch, additional sketches depicting the body itself are helpful. Of particular
interest is mapping any bloodstains, wounds, or defects in the clothing. When documenting
this information, ME body diagrams can be used in addition to any hand-drawn sketches.
When annotating the sketch or when describing wounds in his or her notes, the technician
should use caution in attributing a specific term to a wound (e.g., referring to a wound as a
laceration vs. an incision or describing an entry gunshot wound as the exit). Although it is
important that a crime scene technician has a general understanding of patterns of injury/
wound mechanisms, in the end the ME is responsible for making such determinations. As
described later in this chapter, the recognition of basic patterns of injury directly serves the
crime scene technician’s role. It may assist in directing leads to homicide investigators, and
it can certainly focus on-scene search efforts for weapons. Nevertheless, the ME will ulti-
mately examine the body in a more controlled environment and with a more skilled eye.
Initial impressions by the crime scene team or homicide investigators regarding wounds
are exactly that, initial impressions. The technician should also be cognizant that emer-
gency medical services (EMS) personnel do not always identify injuries correctly, so any
input offered by EMS should be considered in the same light.
Once all visible aspects of the body have been examined, documented, and any appar-
ent evidence recovered, the body is moved to allow complete examination of areas that
were not visible. Before moving the body, a location should be cleared where the body can
be turned and dealt with. Within the limits of the situation, do not simply drag a body
from its original position to this location. Dragging the body through existing blood pools
368 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

will smear the bloodstain evidence, create significant contamination on the surrounding
area, and mar patterns or evidence on the victim’s clothing. Instead, place a clean cloth
sheet or disposable ambulance sheet in the cleared area and roll or lift the body onto it.
Immediately check the area beneath the body for any items of evidence, to include stains
and trace evidence. This area should be photographed in detail as well. Far too often tech-
nicians become focused on the body and the area beneath it is completely forgotten in the
photo documentation. This area should either be processed immediately or sufficiently
protected so it can be checked later for fingerprints, DNA, or foot or footwear marks.
After documenting and protecting the area beneath the body, examine the nonvis-
ible areas of the body as it lies on the sheet using the same protocol as the visible areas.
Make detailed notes and photographs, check all surfaces with white light and the ALS, and
if discovered immediately, document and recover any evidence located. At this stage of
examination manipulation of the body is no longer a factor, so the front and back of both
hands and feet should be examined carefully for trace evidence and then photographed.
DNA swabs of the fingernails can be taken, which will supplement any fingernail scrap-
ings recovered at autopsy. In shooting circumstances, be particularly vigilant to look for
minute spatter stains created by gunshot. These small bloodstains are often difficult to see
on skin, so pay particular attention to nail beds and associated jewelry (e.g., ring surfaces
often catch small spatter stains). These types of stains are often more apparent in both areas
due to the smoother surfaces involved. Also, look for any gunshot residues/soot caused by
either muzzle or cylinder flash. Both forms of evidence are often present on the surfaces of
the hands. If present, they should be swabbed for subsequent analysis. Scanning electron
microscope (SEM) analysis of GSR particles may or may not be considered appropriate by
the supporting lab; therefore the technician should act in accordance with his or her lab
guidelines. If collected, GSR tapes should be collected on scene, before significant manipu-
lation of the body.
If allowed by the ME, and only when there is clear unambiguous ME approval, outer
clothing that holds apparent bloodstain or gunshot residue evidence should be cut from
the body prior to rolling the victim over. This preserves the clothing condition more effec-
tively. A failure to do so may result in passive bleeding from wounds when the victim is
rolled over, or complete marring of evidence when the body is placed into a body bag. If
cut, the technician should cut at the seams so long as there are no major patterns, defects,
or evidence present. This results in a front and back section of the clothes that are easily
stored and reoriented to one another during subsequent examinations. Arbitrary cutting,
typical of what EMS does, is counterproductive to subsequent lab analysis. Remember, take
this action only when the supporting ME gives specific approval.
Throughout this detailed examination, if the technician encounters any indication
of direct manipulation of the body by the perpetrator, swab the areas of interest for trace
DNA before any further processing. These indications may be contextual, as in the case
of rapes or manual strangulation where touching the body is an integral part of commit-
ting the crime, or they can be direct, such as when clothing has been removed or bloody
smears are present, suggesting someone touched the victim. Use the trace DNA collec-
tion techniques described in Chapter 2, depending upon the surfaces involved (e.g., skin
or clothing).
Once this detailed on-scene examination is completed, the hands are bagged with
paper bags taped around the wrist, and the body is wrapped in the sheet, and then placed
in a disaster bag for transport. Whenever possible, position the body in the disaster bag as
The Body as a Crime Scene 369

close as possible to the position the body was found in. The body bag can then be sealed and
released to the appropriate ME authority. Upon completion of this on-scene examination,
the technician should have a narrative description of the body that includes both general
and specific features. This information should entail the following:

General features: Sex, race, complexion, estimates of approximate age, height and
weight, head hair including facial hair, hair color, eye color, prosthetics, clothing,
scars, marks, and tattoos, and any associated artifacts such as jewelry.
Specific features: Physical position and orientation, the presence or absence of post-
mortem indicators, apparent wounds, exudates from the body, clothing defects,
bloodstains, and any other evidential items discovered.

Examination of the Corpse at the Morgue

Once transported, the body is still an active crime scene and requires additional process-
ing. This final effort is conducted under controlled conditions at the morgue. Of specific
concern is documentation of all wounds, recovery of any evidence (e.g., bullets, sexual
assault kits, foreign bodies), and identification data in the form of major case prints and
DNA samples.
Even if the ME has photography capability, the technician should create a complete set
of photographs documenting the condition of the body. This will include:

• Facial (identification) photographs.

• The external condition of the body clothed and before cleaning. (Remember the
morgue is a controlled and brighter environment where artifacts, bruises, blood-
stains, and the like often photograph far better than those taken on scene.)
• The external condition of the body unclothed and before cleaning. (Pay particular
attention to both sides of the hands and feet.)
• The external condition of the body unclothed and cleaned.
• All injuries and abnormalities, both before and after they are cleaned and exposed
by the ME.
• Any evidence or artifacts discovered.

A reexamination of the body with white light and ALS is appropriate, paying particular
attention to light bruises that may not have been evident on scene, trace evidence in the form of
semen or spittle, and any foreign hairs or fibers. If fingerprinting for latent prints on the body
is necessary (as discussed in Chapter 9), this must be coordinated and accomplished prior to
any invasive action by the ME’s staff. If it was not collected on scene, GSR sampling is accom-
plished immediately after the hands are removed from the paper bags. Clothing items should
be recovered and appropriately packaged for transport and placement in a drying chamber.

Examination of a Live Individual

Rapes, sexual assaults, child abuse, aggravated assaults, and attempted homicides often lead
to the necessity of examining a victim or suspect who is alive. The nature of the evidence
370 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

sought by the crime scene technician really doesn’t change, as trace DNA, trace evidence,
and fingerprints are all still important. Nor does the expectation to properly document any
injuries that are present, but a live body will restrict some of the techniques used for collec-
tion and documentation and will certainly restrict who is involved. A live body demands
a certain level of sensitivity on the part of the crime scene investigator. Interestingly, there
is a distinct status/gender bias associated with examining and documenting evidence on a
live individual. When dealing with a victim, only a technician of similar gender is allowed
unless there is simply no other option available. So a male technician would never directly
document a female victim’s breasts or vaginal area. When a suspect is involved, it is not
uncommon that a female evidence technician is tasked to conduct the documentation of a
male suspect, yet female investigators are always used to examine female suspects. Unlike
television shows such as CSI, where male investigators conduct warrantless blue-light
examinations of female suspects’ breasts, the most appropriate response is to match the
gender of the examiner/documenter with the examinee, no matter what the status of the
individual.
For rape and sexual assault situations, a sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE) is the
most appropriate response. A SANE nurse is a forensically trained medical professional,
capable of collecting clothing and various forms of evidence as well as documenting spe-
cific injuries, no matter where they may be located. If no SANE nurse is available, typically
a medical doctor or ER nurse will have some experience collecting the evidence. The crime
scene technician may have to assist the medical staff by directing what specific areas need
to be examined/documented, and there may be a need to quickly tutor them on current
collection procedures or technology issues (e.g., use of the ALS or camera). But whatever
the case, this is a better practice than involving investigative personnel directly.
In terms of order of action, typically photography should precede evidence collection,
but this is context driven and there are no absolute rules. With a live victim the search for
physical evidence should be a more directed effort, using the victim’s testimony to narrow
down likely areas that hold such evidence. Areas where the suspect touched her, bit her,
held her, ejaculated on her, or interacted in any significant fashion should be examined in
depth. As a first concern, trace DNA and trace evidence are collected in the same fashion
whether the victim is alive or dead. This can be followed by fingerprinting techniques,
but fingerprinting of a live body limits the technician to the magnetic brush or adding
machine paper technique. Refer to Chapter 9 for a discussion of both. Apparent injuries
are documented by camera. In the case of bruises on a live victim, arrangements should
be made for a second photography session a day or two later. This will allow time for
the bruise to manifest itself and become darker through the body’s normal response to
injury. In terms of bruise photography, consideration should be given to utilizing infrared
(IR) photography, particularly in the case of dark-skinned victims. Suspects are exam-
ined with the same mindset. The context of the scene and situation should allow directed
efforts on the suspect’s body. For rape or sexual assault cases, standard suspect examina-
tion protocols should be followed. One major consideration for the crime scene techni-
cian is in preventing potential cross-contamination. The victim(s) and suspect(s) should
be transported to the examination location in different vehicles, and even if separated by
time, placed in different waiting areas. The examinations should be conducted in com-
pletely different rooms.
A problem area associated with victims transported to hospitals is clothing. Bloody
clothing and hospital personnel seem to have a natural repulsion that will create havoc for
The Body as a Crime Scene 371

the crime scene technician. Whether it is from a homicide victim who is initially trans-
ported to the ER or an assault victim, bloody clothing routinely ends up in the hospi-
tal’s biohazard waste without regard for its evidentiary value. If the technician does not
coordinate for retention of clothes, this discarding will occur quickly and without notice.
When that happens, it will demand the crime scene technician search out the offending
disposer and locate the clothing. It is unacceptable to simply say, “The hospital threw it
away,” and leave it at that. Every reasonable attempt to locate the clothing should be made,
even though it will be highly altered and its value as evidence degraded.
Evidence collection responsibilities at the scene or hospital can place the technician in
proximity to a live victim, who may be in a critical state. When this happens the techni-
cian must pay close attention to any statements or dying declarations made by the victim.
These statements have the potential to be used in court as an exception to the hearsay rules.
The technician should listen carefully and document these statements in written notes as
accurately as he or she can and as soon as possible. Any other parties who were present for
the declaration should also be fully identified in the technician’s notes.

Understanding Basic Mechanisms of Injuries

It is not necessary that the crime scene technician be formally trained in anatomy and
physiology, but he or she should have a general understanding of basic terms associated
with mechanisms of injury. This knowledge will aid him or her in recognizing and describ-
ing injuries on scene and assist him or her in interacting with medical professionals. A
single chapter in a book cannot do justice to a full understanding of patterns of injuries,
but what this text will do is introduce the reader to some basic terms. For a greater under-
standing, several texts are listed at the end of the chapter.
Forensic pathologists generally categorize injuries based on mechanism. The primary
mechanisms of injury of immediate interest to the crime scene technician are:

• Asphyxia: Resulting from a lack of oxygen.

• Sharp force trauma: The cutting of tissue.
• Blunt force trauma: The crushing and tearing of tissue.
• Gunshot trauma: Injuries produced by a projectile from a firearm.

Asphyxial trauma results when the body is unable to take in oxygen or eliminate car-
bon dioxide. There are various forms of asphyxial trauma, including strangulation, smoth-
ering, choking, drowning, positional or mechanical asphyxia, and chemical asphxia.
In strangulation, the mechanism of death is hypoxia of the brain. Rarely is the air-
way itself occluded by the strangulation mechanism, but there is sufficient pressure to
cut off major arteries serving the brain, which prevents sufficient oxygenated blood from
arriving. Common patterns of injuries associated with manual strangulation include
congestion of the facial features, abrasions or contusions of the neck and surrounding
skin, hemorrhage of the muscles in the neck with the possibility of damage, or breakage
of the hyoid bone.
In ligature strangulation, also known as garroting, common findings include conges-
tion of the face and a furrow mark produced by the ligature device. This mark is com-
monly located at or below the level of the voice box, but may be found higher. Unlike in
372 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 12.2  A ligature mark produced by garroting. Furrows produced by garroting generally
occur at the same height around the neck and are unlike the V-shaped furrows produced by
hanging.

hanging deaths where the ligature creates an inverted V shape at the point of suspension,
in garroting the ligature mark presents itself at a relatively even height around the neck (see
Figure 12.2).
In hanging deaths, the mechanism of injury is once again occlusion of the major ves-
sels feeding the brain. This occlusion can easily occur with either full or partial suspension
of the body. Common patterns of injuries include a furrow produced by the suspension
device, which is typically an inverted V shape. The furrow is often above the voice box, and
the apex of the inverted V indicates the point of suspension.
Autoerotic strangulation deaths are hanging deaths, but generally considered acciden-
tal. Using various forms of suspension devices, the individuals suspend themselves almost
always in a partial suspension fashion. The suspension device will have some escape mech-
anism, which may be simple or quite elaborate. The patterns on the body will be much like
that of the hanging event; however, scene indicators include the use of a padded ligature
and the presence of female clothing worn or otherwise present.
Choking deaths occur from a number of foreign bodies. These may include food, den-
tures, gags, and other objects. The mechanism of injury in choking is blockage of the air-
way itself. Little if any physical indicators will be present beyond the item blocking the
airway. In smothering deaths, where the mouth and nose are covered, little if any physical
findings are present on the body.
In drowning deaths, the typical mechanism of injury is cerebral anoxia, where water
invades the lungs, preventing any oxygen from entering the bloodstream. Vocal chord
spasm is also possible, where water does not enter the lung until after the victim is uncon-
scious and the chords relax. The investigator relies heavily on the medical examiner in
drowning, as the physical findings are very limited and dependent upon the condition of
the body at recovery.
In positional/mechanical asphyxia deaths, the mechanism of death is cerebral hypoxia.
In some fashion, through either position or compression, the individual is incapable of
breathing normally. Although often accidental, homicidal actions can produce the same
result. The primary physical effect noted is a red or purple color of the face and neck.
The Body as a Crime Scene 373

Figure 12.3  An incised wound is a sharp force injury that is longer than it is deep. Note the
clean margins, indicating tissue that was cut, not torn.

In many deaths, petechial hemorrhages of the sclerae and conjunctivae are present.
These petechiae are encountered in asphyxia deaths as well, but far too often assumptions
are made regarding the presence of these hemorrhages. Always rely on a qualified medical
examiner’s opinion as to the probative value of such injuries.
In chemical asphyxia there are no absolute physical patterns of injury, though often
the gas that replaces oxygen may be indicated by color of the skin. For example, if carbon
monoxide is the supplanting gas, there is often distinctive cherry red coloration of the skin.
Cyanide gas often results in a pink or reddish skin tone.
Sharp force injuries involve physical cutting of the skin. There are two primary forms
of sharp force injury: the incised wound and the stab wound. An incised wound is longer
than it is deep (see Figure 12.3). The defect may be gaping or have a narrow slit, depending
upon its orientation on the body and underlying lines of Langer. Incised wounds typically
produce a lot of bleeding. When fatal, the primary mechanism of death is exsanguination
(bleeding out). Secondary modes of death may result from a compromise in the airway or
blood supply to the brain, as when the throat is cut.
Stab wounds are typically deeper than they are long (see Figure 12.4). Stab wound char-
acteristics are dependent on the shape and size of the edged weapon used in the assault, as
well as the direction and force applied when the weapon is thrust into the victim’s body. It
is possible that evidence suggesting the type of weapon used in a stabbing may be present
on the victim’s body, depending on the force used. Unusual bruising or markings at the
point of injury may occur from the weapon configuration and aid the medical examiner in
better understanding the weapon’s nature or the orientation of the weapon when used to
produce that particular injury.
Blunt force injuries occur as a result of crushing of associated tissue. Blunt force injuries
are typically described as abrasions, contusions, and lacerations. Abrasions involve only
the upper layers of skin, which may be damaged or simply scraped away (see Figure 12.5).
Abrasions appear reddish brown with no significant tearing of the skin. There may be lin-
ear orientations such as found when a body is dragged or receives a scraping injury (e.g., a
brush burn) over a large area of the body.
Contusions, more commonly called bruises, result from damage to blood vessels in or
around the area of injury. Often the contusions are present just beneath the skin and easily
recognized, but deep internal contusions of major organs can occur as well. Depending
374 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 12.4  A stab wound is a sharp force injury that is deeper than it is long. A stab may
appear with the edges in close proximity to one another, as in this case, or they may gape
widely depending upon the underlying orientation of lines of Langer.

Figure 12.5  An abrasion is where the outer surface of the skin is scraped or worn away.

upon the age of the injury, a contusion can present itself in a variety of colors. Initially, it
may appear red. As it ages it will become blue to blue-purple, ultimately developing into a
green or yellow-green color. Significant discussion exists about “aging” a bruise; any such
estimates, if possible, should be relegated to the medical examiner. One common miscon-
ception about contusions is that they always occur over the exact injury site. An internal
hemorrhage can migrate and appear on the skin disassociated with the actual injury site.
However, patterned contusions/abrasions are also common and can be quite significant
to the medical examiner, illustrating where and in what orientation a weapon was used to
cause the underlying contusion.
Lacerations are a physical tearing of tissue by some form of blunt force. A laceration is
characterized by open, irregularly shaped trauma to the body with tissue bridging between
the sides of the defect. This tissue bridging is small strands of skin, connective tissue, or
nerves that did not tear from the force (see Figure 12.6). The edges of the laceration may be
undermined as well. Virtually any heavy object can cause this type of injury when coupled
with the velocity and force generated by a fast-swinging arm motion. Baseball bats, steel
pipes, chains, pistols, heavy rocks, or masonry brick are all capable of creating laceration
The Body as a Crime Scene 375

Figure 12.6  A laceration is a tearing of the skin. Unlike an incised wound, the margins tend
to be irregular. The hallmark of a laceration is small tissue bridges (nerves, capillaries, or other
connective tissue) connecting the sides of the wound.

type injuries. The obvious injury on the victim is typically not the cause of death. Death
generally results from lacerations to underlying internal organs, particularly when the lac-
eration involves the head.
Blunt force injuries typically occur in combination with one another. Thus a blunt
force injury may manifest abraded, contused, and lacerated areas all in the same wound.
An additional combination injury often observed is the chopping injury. The chopping
injury often manifests itself as primarily an incised wound, but with characteristics of a
laceration as well (see Figure 12.7). Chopping injuries occur when a heavy weapon with an
edged surface is utilized. This can include machetes and similar objects.
Firearm injuries occur across a broad spectrum, resulting from projectiles fired by
pistols, revolvers, rifles, and shotguns. When a bullet from a firearm strikes an individual,
it causes varying degrees of skin, tissue, and bone damage depending on a host of factors.
The factors influencing the wound include the distance of the victim to the firearm, the

Figure 12.7  A chop injury occurs when a heavy sharp force weapon or object is involved in
the wounding. The resulting wound can display characteristics of both sharp force (incised) and
blunt force (lacerated) injury.
376 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 12.8  A grazing gunshot wound to the back of the victim. The path of the bullet was
lower left to upper right. Graze wounds may help orient general position at the time of the
injury. (Courtesy of Tom Bevel and the Woodland Park Police Department, Woodland Park,
Colorado).

area of the body where the wound is created, whether the area is free or supported by
clothing or external objects, the caliber or size of projectile striking the subject, the velocity
of the projectile striking the subject, the amount of fragmentation or deformation of the
bullet, and the type of projectile striking the subject (e.g., hollow point, ball ammunition,
slug, jacketed vs. nonjacketed ammunition). Depending on these variables, it may be dif-
ficult during a preliminary external examination to recognize entry and exit wounds or to
recognize that the wound is actually a gunshot injury.
Gunshot injuries are typically classified as penetrating, perforating, grazing, and tan-
gential wounds. A penetrating injury is one where the projectile or a fragment enters the
body and does not exit. A perforating injury is one where the projectile or a fragment
enters and then exits the body. A grazing wound is one where the projectile or fragment
strikes parallel to the surface of the skin, producing an abraded injury without entering
the skin (see Figure 12.8). The tangential wound is where the projectile or fragment skims
across the surface of the victim, producing a series of shallow wounds that extend into the
subcutaneous tissues. On-scene recognition of penetrating vs. perforating wounds can be
difficult, simply because there is no way to know the interior track of the bullet. To com-
plicate the matter further, bullets can enter, exit, and reenter, producing odd numbers of
entry and exit wounds. On-scene annotations by the crime scene investigator regarding
the nature of a bullet wound should always be made cautiously with these factors in mind
and recognition that until the ME tracks a particular wound path at autopsy, such paths
are not always self-evident.
Of significant concern is a misconception held by many lawyers and occasionally crime
scene investigators and homicide detectives. The misconception relates to the wound path
description offered by the ME. It is important to recognize that the ME describes wound
paths based on what is known as standard anatomical position, a body positioned generally
as seen in Figure 12.9. So descriptions of the path of the bullet, such as up to down, back
The Body as a Crime Scene 377

Front View Side View

Figure 12.9  When describing wounds, the medical examiner describes all injuries, including
gunshot wound paths relative to standard anatomical position. This is standing, arms at the
side, palms facing outward. Thus a description of the red trajectory would be left to right, front
to back, and slightly upward. Bodies can twist and turn any number of ways at the moment of
wounding, so this description has no direct relationship to the actual orientation of the shooter.

to front, are describing the path of the bullet through the body in this standard position.
In standard anatomical position (Figure 12.9), the ME would describe the yellow trajec-
tory as right to left, front to back, and slightly downward. The red trajectory path would be
described as right to left, front to back, and upward. These descriptions relate the path to
the body and nothing else. But bodies move, twist, and can be positioned in many different
ways. Thus this description may have little relationship to the actual path of the bullet as
it relates to the shooter and the scene. For example, in Figure 12.10 the yellow wound path
becomes upward or even level by simple manipulation of the torso. If the torso is twisted,
what was a right-to-left trajectory as described in standard anatomical position suddenly
becomes left to right. The terminal ballistics information offered by the ME is only one part
of the information that allows any statement to be offered regarding physical position at
the time of a wounding.
A primary concern of the medical examiner for any gunshot injury is the recogni-
tion of entry and exit wounds. Once again, the crime scene technician should always
be cautious in making claims or statements regarding a gunshot wound based solely
on his or her on-scene examination. In some instances, wounds can defy expectations.
Nevertheless, as a general rule, entry wounds tend to be symmetrical with an abrasion
ring around the outer aspect (see Figure 12.11). The primary exception to this is the entry
wound where the weapon is in contact or close contact to a surface overlying a bony
prominence (see Figure 12.12). In this instance, the wound tends to present a large stel-
late appearance, with lacerations extending from the wound margins. Depending upon
the distance of the weapon from the victim and the level to which the underlying tis-
sue was exposed, soot and black residues may be present around or in the wound track.
Stippling, a condition in which partially burned and unburned gunpowder is driven into
378 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Leaning Falling backward.

forward,
trunk rotated.

Figure 12.10  An example of how the trajectory in Figure 12.9 can change dramatically by
simple manipulations of the victim’s torso. The red trajectory seen in Figure 12.9 becomes right
to left and significantly upward (as viewed on the left), or neither right or left and level to the
body (as viewed on the right).

the skin, is often present. These stippling patterns are quite helpful to the medical exam-
iner in determining the approximate distance between the muzzle and target. In describ-
ing these range determinations and entry wounds, medical examiners generally use the
following terms:

Contact: The muzzle of the weapon is pressed against the victim’s body. Gases dis-
charged during the explosion of the ammunition are forced into the opening of the
body created by the projectile. The gases create considerable force as they escape
and may cause significant stellate patterns when pressed against hard bone, as with
the head. Soot, powder residue, and metallic fragments are often found within the
area of the wound. Another common feature present in cases involving contact
firearm wounds is an impression/abrasion of the weapon’s muzzle left on the vic-
tim’s skin.

Figure 12.11  Typical entry gunshot wounds will appear circular to elliptical, with an abra-
sion ring surrounding the defect.
The Body as a Crime Scene 379

Figure 12.12  Entry wounds produced when the muzzle of the weapon is in contact with the
skin can produce very irregular defects, with stellate tears. These wounds are particularly jag-
ged when produced over flat bone, such as contact wounds to the skull.

Close contact: The muzzle of the weapon is held close enough for heat effects to occur
on the skin. This may manifest itself with apparent blackened, seared skin sur-
rounding the wound or on clothing covering the wound. Stippling patterns or
a powder pattern on any overlying clothing is generally present. These powder
particles are projected into the skin, causing a “tattooing” effect that cannot be
washed off. The stippling pattern produced is typically circular to elliptical, and
this shape may help illustrate the general orientation of the muzzle to the surface
where the stippling occurs. Depending upon the type of ammunition involved
and the weapon, stippling can be present when the muzzle-to-target distance is as
much as 3 ft. It is always appropriate to have the medical examiner confer with a
ballistics expert when making any claims of general range, as stippling distance is
highly variable in different ammunition and weapons.
Intermediate: The muzzle of the weapon is held far enough away from the body that
heat and soot effects are eliminated, but close enough for powder particles to be
projected into the skin producing stippling.
Indeterminate or distant: In these instances there are no heat, soot, or stippling
effects noted. In the past this type of wound was generally referred to as distant,
indicating the weapon was far enough from the victim to eliminate the heat
and powder effects, but medical examiners recognized that some intermediate
object might exist that they were not aware of, which the bullet passed through
at a closer range and the object took the soot and powder effects. As a result,
wounds that display no soot or stippling effects are now typically referred to
as indeterminate.

Exit wounds tend to be asymmetrical and irregular (see Figure 12.13). With rare excep-
tions (e.g., injuries through very thin areas of the body) there will be no soot or stippling
associated to the exit wound. Typically no abrasion ring is evident in the exit wound, with
one exception, the shored exit wound. If a tight piece of clothing (e.g., a bra strap or belt) is
in place at the point of exit or the skin is against a surface, this tends to shore up the skin
as the bullet exits. These shored wounds often appear very similar to entry wounds with
380 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 12.13  Exit wounds produced by gunshot tend to be irregular in shape.

an apparent abrasion ring. A shored exit can, on occasion, initially fool even a competent
medical examiner.
Shotgun entry wounds tend to be somewhat distinct. Contact wounds by shotguns
are often mutilating, creating significant tissue disruption, particularly when directed at
the head. In denser tissue (e.g., the trunk or large muscled areas) the entry wound may
appear as a very large circular defect, with associated soot and heat effects. As the muzzle-
to-target distance increases, shotgun entry wounds take on a cookie cutter appearance
where the defect has a scalloped edge. This is caused by individual shot beginning to sepa-
rate after leaving the muzzle. As the distance increases even more, individual shot pellets
will separate and produce satellite wounds around the primary wound (see Figure 12.14).
Depending upon the weapon and the style of ammunition, eventually the resulting wound
will appear as a series of individual gunshot defects in a circular or elliptical pattern on
the body. An additional injury caused by shotguns is from impact or penetration of the
shotgun wadding/pellet holder. In modern ammunition, this pellet holder is molded plas-
tic and becomes a projectile in and of itself. It can enter the primary defect, or produce a
secondary abrasion pattern.

Figure 12.14  A gunshot wound produced by a shotgun. Depending upon the distance of the
muzzle to the target, these wounds can vary greatly in appearance. Close up, they produce a
jagged entry, which may have a cookie cutter appearance. As the muzzle-to-target distance
increases, individual shot begins to separate from the shot mass, creating individual pellet
defects.
The Body as a Crime Scene 381

Thermal injuries are another mechanism of death that the crime scene investigator
should generally understand. The distinction of first-, second-, and third-degree burns is
one always left to the ME, but heat beyond direct burning of the skin and tissue creates
several interesting effects in bodies that can be misunderstood. The first of these is what is
known as pugilistic attitude/stance. As heat effects act on muscle and tendon, these tissues
often shrink. This shrinking causes the appendages and neck to bend. As a result, a body
exposed to fire effects is often found in a somewhat fetal position, head down, legs drawn
in, arms up as if in a fighting stance (hence the pugilistic stance). Exposed long enough,
this effect can result in broken bones, large tearing and lacerations to the external skin, and
other conditions that may be considered injuries. The skull of a victim can also fracture
from heat. Steam may build up in the cranial vault and, lacking a mechanism of release,
break the bone outward. Thus when presented with a body exposed to prolonged heat
effects, be cautious in describing any perceived “wounds” or “injuries.”
The intent of this section is not to make the crime scene investigator a medical exam-
iner’s investigator, or even suggest he or she should routinely make references to the
nature of wounds he or she observes in his or her notes. Unless properly trained (beyond
this short chapter) in mechanisms of injury and the resulting patterns produced, this is an
area fraught with problems. But recognition of the general types of patterns that manifest
themselves in different injuries will make the crime scene technician a better observer,
with a more functional vocabulary to describe what he or she sees. Additionally, when
interacting with both medical examiners and their investigators, a general understanding
of wound mechanics and the associated vocabulary will assist the crime scene investiga-
tor immensely.

Summary

The body of a victim, whether alive or dead, is itself a crime scene. As such it must be
approached in an appropriate fashion, documented, and whenever possible all forms of
physical evidence collected from it. This is no easy task, as in most instances the crime
scene investigator can only act within the limits presented by the medical examiner, who is
responsible for the body. Nevertheless, the body has a wealth of information and evidence
that must be recognized, located, documented, and collected.

Suggested Reading
DiMaio, V.J.M., and Dana, S.E., Handbook of Forensic Pathology, Landes Bio-Science, Austin, TX, 1998.
DiMaio, D.J., and DiMaio, V.J.M., Forensic Pathology, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1993.

Chapter Questions
1. Name three of the five observational conditions that are inconsistent with life.
2. What is livor mortis?
3. What is rigor mortis?
4. Who has the primary responsibility for estimating time of death?
382 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

5. Once the body is moved and recovered from the scene, what is an area of interest
that the crime scene investigator must consider? Why?
6. Why is the corpse reexamined at the mortuary by the crime scene investigator?
7. Who is the best qualified person to examine a live victim?
8. What is the difference between the two general sharp force injuries, stab and
incised wounds?
9. What is the primary observational difference between an entry and exit gun-
shot wound?
10. What is standard anatomical position and why is it important when considering
the description of the gunshot wound offered by the medical examiner?
Special Scene Considerations
13
No matter what level of skill a crime scene technician possesses, there are always scenes—
fire scenes, scattered or buried remains, landfill body recoveries—that present special dif-
ficulties. Such scenes are typically complex, requiring significant technical and physical
resources to manage, document, and evaluate properly. A complete understanding of the
complexities involved in each of these scenes is beyond the scope of a single chapter in a
book. What this chapter provides is some basic information that may help in preparing the
crime scene technician for the rigors and requirements of special scenes.

Fire Scenes

Fire scenes are one of the most complex and difficult scenes to work. The difficulties of the
fire scene lie in the conditions found at the scene and the difficulty in objectively evaluat-
ing fire signs in an effort to understand fire flow and origin. Scene conditions include the
fire damage itself, the resulting creation of unstable structures, the presence of significant
debris covering evidence, and the fact that burned surfaces are black and do not reflect
light effectively.
The National Fire Protection Association’s (NFPA) Guide for Fire and Explosion
Investigations sums up the process of fire investigation well, stating: “A fire or explosion
investigation is a complex endeavor involving both art and science. The compilation of fac-
tual data, as well as an analysis of those facts, should be accomplished objectively and truth-
fully…. With few exceptions, the proper methodology for a fire or explosion investigation is
to first establish the origin(s) and then investigate the cause.”1 The NFPA correctly argues that
this complex crime scene analysis is properly done through the use of scientific method.
The phrase “origin and cause” drives every fire investigation. Only by identifying and
evaluating all fire signs is it possible to understand fire flow. Without an understanding of
fire flow, it is often difficult to identify the origin of the fire. With no known origin iden-
tified, the ability to establish what caused the fire is difficult as well. Even in the best of
circumstances, a fire investigation is often a negative corpus case, in which the investiga-
tor must rule out accidental and natural causes for the fire. In order to do this, one must
understand what the fire is doing and why. So searching for, locating, and documenting
signs of fire flow are critical aspects of fire scene investigation.
On first look, fire scenes are at best chaotic. Not only has the fire damaged the scene,
firefighting efforts disturb and destroy evidence as well. As discussed in previous chapters,
identifying who may have altered the scene is an important function of the crime scene
investigation. In the fire scene, this action is a bit more complex. During fire suppression
operations, the firefighters may force entry into buildings, vent areas by breaking out win-
dows, tear down walls, or move objects such as furniture. Subsequent to fire suppression,
firefighters then engage in a technique known as overhaul. During this process, they search
for hot spots that might flare up, and if located, they eliminate the hot spot. Overhaul is an
extremely destructive process, where walls or ceilings are often torn into and debris moved

383
384 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

or removed from the scene. It is imperative that the crime scene technician coordinate
with fire authorities to obtain an understanding of how and where the fire was fought and
what actions were taken during overhaul. This may help explain anomalies presented by
debris in odd positions in the scene. It can also help in locating evidence that may have
been thrown from the building or moved within the building. The crime scene investigator
should obtain a copy of the fire suppression report prepared by the firefighters for inclusion
in the fire investigation report.
Detailed discussions of fire science and fire scene investigation are available from a
number of sources, including three works listed in the “Suggested Reading” section at the
end of this chapter: Practical Fire and Arson Investigation, by Redsicker and O’Conner;
Kirk’s Fire Investigation, by DeHaan; and an absolute “must have” reference by the National
Fire Protection Association, NFPA 921, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations. For
purposes of this discussion, suffice it to say that a fire is a living, breathing phenomenon.
In order to exist, a fire requires heat, fuel, oxygen, and an uninhibited chemical chain
reaction between the three. For example, simply placing a burning match on a log is not
enough to sustain fire. In its infancy, fire is an endothermic reaction. It requires sustained
heat to actually break down the fuel source (the log) into gas and vapors that burn, a pro-
cess known as pyrolysis. Fuel, heat, and oxygen are present, but the short-lived heat source
of the match does not have the ability to break down the mass of the log into its chemical
constituents. Fire is achieved only when there is a sustained interaction between the pyro-
lyzed fuel and the heat and oxygen. Fire becomes exothermic once this uninhibited chain
reaction begins, producing self-sustaining heat. Together, these four fire ingredients are
known as the fire tetrahedron. The investigator’s purpose at the fire scene is to understand
this complex relationship and determine how the fire moved through the scene.
As amazingly complex as fire science is, structure fires follow generally predictable
behaviors. Fire tends to flow up and outward from a source in a three-dimensional pat-
tern. Fire flow can change direction, however, moving toward an oxygen source or with
a fuel source. Upon encountering a horizontal obstruction (e.g., a ceiling), fire will flow
laterally across the obstruction. In a confined space such as a room, fire develops in a
very regular fashion. Initially, a hot gas layer develops at the upper layer of the confined
space. Over time, this gas layer will expand downward, marring and charring anything
above the hot gas boundary. Linear charring around the entire room will demonstrate
just how far the hot gas layer extended down. If the fire is not suppressed, when the tem-
perature in a confined space reaches 1,100°F, the phenomenon known as flashover will
occur. In flashover, nearly any ignitable surface in the room will begin burning. Thus
even items below the hot gas layer and not directly exposed to flame will suddenly ignite
and help propagate the fire.

Fire Patterns

All of these predictable behaviors of fire leave both blatant and subtle effects in the scene,
referred to as fire patterns. Even if the crime scene technician is not directly responsible
for conducting the origin and cause analysis, he or she must recognize fire patterns and
document them appropriately. Fire patterns show the progress of the fire, demonstrate the
nature of the fuels involved, and help to locate and isolate the actual origin of the fire. They
are, as the NFPA says, “the visible and measurable physical effects” on the material in the
Special Scene Considerations 385

Figure 13.1  An example of a V pattern on the door. Flames will propagate in a three-dimen-
sional pattern, which rises and expands outward. The top right-hand corner of the door was
exposed to the flame, scorching and burning the surface. The fire flowed out the door and into
the ceiling. V patterns help define fire flow.

scene.2 Patterns may manifest themselves in any number of ways, including demarcations
on a surface, such as the classic V pattern caused by a flame rising on a wall (Figure 13.1).
Fire signs may also present themselves as a surface effect, such as bubbling of paint on a
wall, a “clean burn pattern,” or the directional melting of glass in a light bulb (Figure 13.2).
Fire signs are also evident as damage patterns, where the level of damage present in one
area is contrasted with another in an effort to determine which was exposed to the fire

Figure 13.2  This light bulb was exposed to an approaching heat source and melted in a direc-
tional fashion. Plastic and glass objects will often melt on the side from where the flames
approach, giving a strong indication of fire flow in that area. The heat source in the photo
approached from the right lower corner.
386 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 13.3  A hallway exposed to a significant fire. The variations in the depth of char in the
supporting wall studs at different points along the hallway allow some interpretation of the
relative time these areas were exposed to the flames. The deeper the char depth, the longer the
period of burn. Char depth patterns are always considered in a macro fashion, looking at large
areas. In a localized area, a number of variables might produce different char depths.

longer. The most common fire signs found in the fire scene include char patterns, smoke
and soot patterns, and damage patterns.
Char patterns usually result from direct flame involvement. This includes deep char-
ring in joists or studs as well as more subtle char from heat convection or radiation that
limits itself to the exterior surface of materials (e.g., paints or veneers) in the scene. Char
patterns and char depth analysis can often demonstrate the relative time of burn for a sur-
face as well as indicate the direction of the fire movement (Figure 13.3).
Smoke and soot patterns result from the outflow of fire products. These patterns include
the smoke associated with the hot-gas-layer pattern, which will be evident on the vertical
surfaces in a confined space, or smoke and burn plumes on surfaces indicating where a fire
vented itself (Figure 13.4). Smoke and soot patterns help the investigator to recognize the
development and flow of the fire. The nature of the soot found deposited in the scene, even
the color of smoke and flame during the actual fire, can provide clues regarding the nature
of the fuel source burning.
Damage patterns can be evident on a single object or extend across an entire room. As
an object is subjected to flame and heat from the fire, the exposed surfaces are damaged.
The damage may consist of charring, melting, or soot deposits. Surfaces on the object that
are not directly exposed to the fire receive less damage. If these objects remain unmoved
in the scene, they will provide specific indicators as to fire flow. Glass and plastic objects
Special Scene Considerations 387

Figure 13.4  A room initially isolated from the main fire. The horizontal demarcation on the
walls and door indicates how far down the hot gas layer descended and shows that the door was
closed during the fire. The fire ultimately broke through the wall into the room.

often have very distinct damage patterns, melting in the direction of the approaching
heat source. Additionally, there may be spalling patterns in concrete foundations, “craz-
ing” of glass, ghosting patterns, and the consideration of melting point of various articles
and materials.
The primary problem associated with searching for fire patterns is the level of damage
present in the fire scene. Soot, smoke, and debris develop over the course of the fire and
may mar, destroy, or cover fire patterns of interest. Granted, damage or fire patterns on
vertical surfaces may be very apparent, but patterns on floors and other horizontal surfaces
can be covered by heaps of burned and partially burned debris (Figures 13.5 and 13.6). Fire
investigation is a dirty job. In order to find many patterns, the investigator must remove
the debris. But this is not as easy as just shoveling out everything on top of the floor, since
evidence may exist within the debris itself (Figures 13.7 and 13.8). Much as in the archeol-
ogy techniques used for gravesite recovery, the fire investigator must search the debris layer
by layer to establish what is where.
Vertical surface patterns such as V patterns on the wall will typically suggest areas of
specific concern on the floor. Floors are always of particular note, since the fire investigator
is looking for indications of low burn. Points of origin for the fire are often found in prox-
imity to low burn patterns, which of course demands significant excavation of the floor
and debris. It is important to note that the mere presence of multiple locations of low burn
in the scene does not identify the fire as arson. This condition may result from the presence
of accelerants, or it can occur as a natural part of fire flow. A classic instance of multiple
natural low burn patterns results from drop-down debris (e.g., drapes). These articles are
present in the hot gas layer, and after igniting, they fall to the floor or other lower surfaces,
creating additional points from which the fire will propagate. In order to fully understand
the nature of the fire flow and the reason behind low burn, it is not uncommon that an
entire floor will have to be cleared.
388 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 13.5  A bedroom closet in a suspicious house fire. The contents of the closet have
burned and now exist as debris, covering the floor and lower surfaces. Without excavation, it is
impossible to understand fire flow in this area.

Figure 13.6  The closet from Figure 13.5 after excavation. With floor and lower wall surfaces
exposed, there is significant evidence of low burn in the area that was not evident before the
excavation.
Special Scene Considerations 389

Figure 13.7  Debris located on the floor of the closet. In fire scenes, everything looks the same.
This makes it difficult to recognize evidence. Something is evident on the floor in the debris,
but what is it? Figure 13.8 answers the question. Fire scene excavation is conducted layer by
layer, so that items of importance are not missed.

Figure 13.8  The same item from Figure 13.7, when turned over, is revealed to be a fireplace
lighter. Its proximity to the low burn in the closet is significant. The cause of the fire was sub-
sequently determined to be children playing with this lighter in the closet. Excavation prevents
items such as this from being missed.

Problems Associated with Fire Scenes

Fire scenes are a dangerous place to work for a variety of reasons. A critical consideration
at the fire scene is structural stability. Floors and walls may be weakened and can easily
collapse while the fire investigator is working the scene. Collapse becomes an even greater
hazard during excavation efforts. The local fire marshal is an important resource to help
ensure the team’s safety. Other hazards exist in the scene, such as exposed metal, nails, and
other objects. Inhalation hazards are also a problem. During any action other than a simple
walk-through, significant levels of dust are disturbed, which the unprotected investigator
is bound to inhale. To reduce these hazards, each team member should be equipped with
good solid boots, heavy pants, and long-sleeve shirts, as well as gloves and particle masks.
390 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Lighting is another problem associated with the fire scene. Electricity is often disrupted
by the fire, and all of the scene surfaces are blackened, reflecting little light. The lack of
reflected light produces a situation where there is little difference between highlight detail
and shadow detail. This makes it difficult to see, search, or navigate the scene. Work lights,
as discussed in Chapter 5, are necessary to ensure complete processing of the fire scene.
The light and reflectivity issue of the fire scene is a particular problem when taking
photographs. Quality fire scene photographs are difficult to achieve. When using a stan-
dard 35 mm camera, it is a good practice to bracket exposures. The investigator should take
the metered exposure indicated by the camera; the investigator then takes multiple photo-
graphs with the f-stop opened and closed one to two stops from the metered exposure. As
a result, the investigator ends up with several photographs of the same area, but at different
exposures. Digital cameras give immediate feedback and allow the investigator to correct
any problems on the spot. Low-end digital cameras, however, do not work effectively in fire
scenes. They are often unable to find a focus point, and the pictures are both out of focus
and underexposed.

Fire Scene Methodology

The specific methodology for dealing with a fire scene is not that much different from any
other crime scene, with the noted exceptions of the dangers involved and the concentra-
tion on fire signs. The technician must assess the scene, determine its extent, and then in
an orderly fashion begin processing the scene.
Assessment begins on the exterior of the building, where fire flow patterns may be well
defined. The exterior perspective will also help the technician in understanding the full
extent of the fire damage (e.g., smoke venting through roofs and attics that is not evident
from the inside). If possible, view the scene from an elevated position to better understand
fire patterns or damage that may be on the roof.
In the assessment and observation phase, it is best to work from the least damaged
areas inside to the more heavily damaged areas. This will give the technician a better
understanding of the condition of the scene prior to the fire and will make it easier to
understand what the technician is observing when confronted with the chaos of a heavily
damaged room. Remember that a primary goal of the investigation is to understand how
the fire moved through the scene and thereby locate the point or points of origin. Once
located, the investigation shifts focus and seeks to understand what caused the fire. With
that in mind, there are two rules of thumb in fire investigation. The first rule is that the area
exhibiting the most damage was exposed to the fire for the longest time; therefore it is more
likely to contain the point of origin. This is nothing more than a guideline and any number
of factors can prove it invalid. A second rule of thumb is to seek out any indication of low
burn. Throughout assessment, the technician looks for indications of fire flowing from low
points to higher points. These areas require significant examination and demand excava-
tion in order to understand their relationship to the overall fire flow.
After the assessment, observation, and initial documentation phases are completed,
the examination is best conducted by evaluating specific fire patterns independently of
other patterns and evidence (e.g., in a step-by-step evaluation, looking at the burn pat-
terns, then the smoke patterns, then at char depth, etc.). If the scene involves a large area, it
may be necessary to break the larger area down into zones and then apply the step-by-step
Special Scene Considerations 391

process to each. No one fire sign will tell the entire story, but all of them must be taken
into account. Excavation of floors or rooms will be necessary in order to see low-lying fire
patterns. Areas excavated should be thoroughly photographed before the excavation and
throughout the process.
There are a number of helpful resources available to the investigator faced with a sig-
nificant fire scene. These include the local fire marshal, fire department fire investigators,
as well as a variety of investigators from the federal agencies. When presented with a com-
plex fire or a fire death, it is imperative to include these individuals on the investigative
team. Use caution, however, when employing such individuals. Arson certification, state
or otherwise, indicates nothing more than the fact that an individual is trained to a spe-
cific level. It in no way ensures the quality of the resulting product. Two case examples will
illustrate the point well.

Case Example 1: Arson in Spite of the Facts

At the scene depicted in Figure 13.4, a state-certified fire department arson investigator
arrived on scene early in the morning immediately following the fire. He remained for
a total of 15 min before declaring the scene “arson” due to low burn. He returned the
following day to actually process the scene, although he failed to excavate important
areas involving the low burn. Ultimately, his conclusion was that the “suspect” had
poured a trailer of kerosene from the living room of the home, down the hallway into
a back bedroom, and onto the unconscious victim. The suspect then returned to the
living room, igniting the blaze, and left from there. The hallway depicted in Figure 13.9
shows the area on which the kerosene was allegedly poured. The inset shows the condi-
tion before excavation and clearing by the author, indicating the arson investigator did
not clear this area. A sample of the flooring was taken before the excavation to show
its original condition. The door to the bedroom where the victim was found can be

Figure 13.9  A hallway in a fire scene. The arson theory offered was that the suspect poured
kerosene from the living room, across this surface, and into the bedroom behind the door at
the top of the picture. The kerosene was lit and resulted in the fire. The immediate problem
with the theory is that there is no burn on the linoleum before the door. Moreover, as Figure
13.4 indicates, there is no surface burn on the floor of the bedroom, and the bedroom door was
closed during the fire.
392 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

seen from both sides in Figures 13.4 and 13.9. Note the lack of burning on the last 3 ft
of linoleum leading into the bedroom from the hallway and the lack of burnt linoleum
in the bedroom. Of particular note, there is a consistent hot-gas-layer pattern present,
indicating that the door of the bedroom was shut during the fire. In Figure 13.4, it is
clear that the fire burned through the adjoining walls to enter this bedroom. Beyond
the fire pattern issues, there were no less than two contradictions to the arson investi-
gator’s theory. The first was that the suspect claimed to have exited through the back
bedroom window, injuring himself in the process. Bloodstains supporting this claim
were evident high on the exterior wall of the mobile home below the broken window,
and the suspect had significant lacerations consistent with climbing through the glass.
The second contradiction was the presence of a handprint outlined by smoke and soot,
outstretched on the wall immediately above where the victim’s arm was found. This
print clearly showed that the victim was conscious as the fire was burning and deposit-
ing soot and smoke on the wall.

Case Example 2: Test Your Hypothesis

In this instance, the investigator was an ex-ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) agent
who, one would hope, was significantly trained in arson and fire scene investigation.
The case was a grisly quadruple murder in which the victims were disrobed, raped, and
shot before the scene was set afire. Of interest in the case, a questionable confession was
obtained detailing certain aspects of setting the fire. In trying to make sense of these
details, the prosecuting attorney first sought the insight of an MD (medical doctor)
whose specialty was burns. The MD was alleged to have commented to the prosecuting
attorney that the burns present on the victims were indicative of a fire burning directly
on their skin. This information was presented to the ex-ATF agent, and he was asked to
comment. His conclusions fell in line with the prosecutor’s input, and the theory pre-
sented at trial was that the suspects piled flammable items on top of the four victims’
bodies, poured lighter fluid over the items, and then set them ablaze. This fire led to
adjoining surfaces and ultimately involved the entire room, including the ceiling. Of
interest at the scene, the ceiling received significant damage, and ceiling tiles fell on top
of the victims as they lay in the scene.
Upon cursory examination, the state’s theory tended to make sense. However, upon
close examination of the fire scene, certain exceptions to the theory were quite evident.
First and foremost, once the ceiling tiles were removed from the bodies, there was no
debris on top of the bodies. The second problem was that the bodies beneath the ceiling
tiles were, for the most part, undamaged—certainly nothing in line with the belief that
a fire had been burning directly on them. The doctor, when called to trial, stated that
he had never told the prosecutor that the fire burned directly on the bodies and had
certainly never written anything of that nature in his report. In this instance, the arson
investigator seemed to have fallen into the trap of accepting the prosecutor’s pet theory
without challenging it. Additionally, he accepted the verbal conclusion of a doctor from
a lawyer, a dangerous act in and of itself, without ever verifying the information. There
is no question that the investigator failed to challenge his own theory, as scientific
method demands, by comparing his conclusions with the excavated condition of the
bodies. But that was not the only problem; the investigator also made multiple claims
unsupported by the scene. He told the jury that a hot-gas-layer pattern on a wall and
Special Scene Considerations 393

The alleged V pattern on a door.

3 sources of exposed wood generally
Consistent hot gas layer demarcation show the same char and burn height.
patterns at other door junctures in The gypsum wall however is flame
the scene. retardant.

Figure 13.10  An alleged V pattern on a door. An expert claimed a flame was rising on this
door, resulting in the pattern. The problem is that the burn is linear across the door, and there is
no burn beneath it. The pattern is nothing more than the hot-gas-layer pattern. The surround-
ing wood burned faster than the flame-retardant gypsum in the wall. By merely looking at the
other door/wall junctures in the room, the nature of the fire pattern became evident.

door juncture was in fact a V pattern of flames rising up the wall from the fire on the
bodies. This pattern extended down the wall to a point about 5 ft off the ground, which
would logically demand that the pile of burning debris was at least several feet high
and burning so intensely that it reached out across the large gap of space between the
bodies and the wall. Of course a hot-gas-layer pattern develops throughout a room. In
this scene, all one had to do was look at the other two door and wall junctures to see the
exact same pattern the investigator claimed was a V pattern (see Figure 13.10).
In the scene, immediately to the south of the bodies, there was debris on the floor
consistent with the items described in the confession as well as fire patterns rising from
the floor level. The overall fire flow was more than apparent and explained nearly every
aspect of the fire scene. Thus, the manner in which the fire was set did not in and of
itself negate the guilt of the individual. But guilty or not, that is certainly no excuse
for presenting false and misleading information to a jury, simply to bolster the overall
theory of the crime and make it fit a confession.

The author has always taken note of the difference between arson investigators and
fire scene investigators. Fire investigators show up at a scene, take the necessary steps to
evaluate and collect their data, and then allow the data to define the conclusion. The former
show up, call the scene an arson, and then search for anything that will support their con-
clusions without considering any alternative hypothesis. They also tend to rationalize away
any data that gets in the way of their theory. Just as a death investigator treats every body as
a homicide until proven otherwise, there is nothing wrong with the fire investigator treat-
ing every fire scene as an arson. That mindset ensures that every facet of the investigation
is pursued until proven unnecessary. The distinction is that treating the scene as an arson
394 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

does not require wild and unsupported claims of arson. As with any investigation, the
scene must speak for itself, and it cannot speak clearly until it is understood.
In fire investigations, as with all investigations, the crime scene technician must collect the
data before coming to conclusions. Otherwise, the technician is likely to ignore important data
at the scene and simply seek information to support some theory. It is the author’s experience
that the ability to be an objective investigator is less a function of training and more a function
of personal ethics. Although certification and proficiency testing help build objectivity in the
investigator, no level of certification or proficiency testing will eliminate the possibility of sub-
jective interpretations. Be very cautious of individuals, no matter what their credentials, who
arrive on scene and arbitrarily put their final conclusion before their analysis.

Landfill Recoveries

It is not uncommon to encounter cases involving bodies that have been disposed of in a
landfill. The dumping of a body into a landfill creates significant issues for the investiga-
tive team. Rarely can a search be mounted without some intelligence regarding when and
where the body was dumped. Any ad hoc search is likely to produce no results and exhaust
vast amounts of investigative resources.
Functional landfill search and recoveries are possible. But not every case will present
a set of circumstances that make a landfill search viable. When the right circumstances
present themselves, the experiences of organizations like the San Jose Police Department
and Detective Sergeant Bruce Wiley provide a simple functional technique to apply in such
scenes. Success presumes a situation in which the investigative team is looking for a body
dumped from a specific location on a specific date (e.g., as when presented with a confession
where the suspect identifies the dumpster and date when the body was disposed of). Another
condition that increases the probability of a successful recovery is a managed waste site.
Managed waste sites are not just dump-and-run operations. It is not uncommon for
the managed waste company to have extensive records reflecting truck routes, truck iden-
tification, when specific trucks came in, where they dumped their load, and at what time
they dumped their load. Even lacking such specificity, managed dumps typically use a
technique known as an engineered compacted landfill. In effect, the waste site is broken
down into cells. On a recurring basis (often daily), trash is dumped at a specific location. A
trash cell may be as large as 100 to 150 square ft. After dumping the trash from the trucks,
this area is compacted by large heavy-equipment compactors. Each cell is subsequently
covered with clean dirt, generally a 1 ft compacted layer. Each new cell is thus separated
from the previous cell by this buffer of dirt, creating what Bruce Wiley refers to as a “layer
cake” effect.3 The waste company’s records should make it possible to quickly distinguish
and identify a cell’s location and its date of creation. These records give focus to what would
otherwise be a “needle in a haystack” search.

Problems Associated with Landfill Recoveries

There are, of course, significant associated problems when dealing with a landfill recovery.
The three primary issues are the compacting of the body and evidence, the heat generated
by the landfill, and the various hazards present in the landfill.
Special Scene Considerations 395

Compacting both in the truck and at the landfill will result in significant damage to
the body and to associated evidence. Compacting begins when the trash is dumped from
the dumpster into a truck. Repeated compacting in the truck over the course of a trash
route creates a mixing bowl effect. Associated artifacts (e.g., clothing, personal effects, or
coverings) are often separated from the body itself. Once dumped at the landfill, large
compactors weighing in excess of 100,000 pounds are used to compact the trash cell. The
end result is that the body may be mangled, with organs lost or bones broken, making it
difficult to define specific homicidal injuries and preventing the recovery of associated
evidence (see Figure 13.11).
Landfills produce significant heat, which is generated by the decomposing trash.
Temperatures often reach in excess of 170°. This heat will create difficult environmental
conditions for anyone involved in the search. Besides heat, there are a variety of hazards
present in the landfill. Despite regulations preventing the disposal of toxic or biohazardous
materials, never doubt that such items are present. Anything the investigator can imagine
will be found in the trash. Even normal trash articles such as broken glass, sharp metal, or
decomposing waste present hazards and create possible injury mechanisms.
To deal with all of these hazards, personal safety equipment is necessary for anyone
working in the landfill search. This equipment includes safety boots, high-risk latex gloves,
eye protection, Tyvek sleeves, rain pants, and particle masks. Hard hats may be neces-
sary as well, not only to prevent accidental injury from moving trash around, but also as
a precaution against items dropped by scavenger birds that routinely appear once trash is
exposed. Safety vests should be required, since heavy equipment (backhoes and bulldoz-
ers) will be operating in and around the teams. A variety of sturdy hand tools are necessary
for the search teams, the most important tool being a three-prong cultivator rake. This tool
has been found to be effective when raking through compacted trash.

Figure 13.11  The corpse of a murder victim after being exposed in a landfill. The action of the
trash truck, compaction at the landfill, and the nature of items in which the body is disposed
result in significant postmortem injuries as well as the loss of associated articles and evidence.
(Courtesy of Bruce Wiley, San Jose Police Department. With permission.)
396 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Landfill Recovery Methodology

The specific technique to apply in a managed landfill is to first identify the appropriate
cell or cells in consultation with the landfill operator. Once this is done, the landfill opera-
tor must remove cells that were deposited on top of the cell(s) in question (Figure 13.12).
Once the cell is exposed, the services of a backhoe and bulldozer are needed throughout
the operation.
Human resources are an obvious concern. The technique described here requires both
observation and rake teams. Each observation team requires two individuals. Each search/
rake team requires at least four to five individuals. In order to make any progress, a mini-
mum of three search/rake teams must operate simultaneously. To field a functional group,
total human resources will easily exceed 25 to 30 individuals.
The backhoe is placed into operation at the far end of the slope for the cell in ques-
tion and begins digging downward (Figure 13.13). An observation team is placed at the
slope where the backhoe is operating. One member is responsible for watching the hole
where the shovel is digging. The other member is responsible for watching the shovel as it is
removed from the hole. Using this method, should the body be visible to either, operations
can be halted immediately without further damaging any evidence.
Directly behind the slope where the backhoe is working, a large flat area is required.
Each shovelful of trash removed by the backhoe is dumped and spread as evenly as
possible with the shovel blade (Figure  13.14). Rake teams then search through this

Figure 13.12  The inset picture shows the scene in an engineered landfill prior to removing
the additional trash cells that were deposited over the cell of interest. The larger picture shows
the same scene after removal of the cells that were deposited over the top. Removing overlaying
cells and locating a specific cell is not a trivial matter. (Courtesy of Bruce Wiley, San Jose Police
Department. With permission.)
Special Scene Considerations 397

Figure 13.13  A backhoe is used at the far end of the cell to remove one shovelful of trash at
a time. The observers watch the shovel and the pit. If any items of interest are noted, they call
a halt to operations. (Courtesy of Bruce Wiley, San Jose Police Department. With permission.)

Figure 13.14  As each shovelful of trash is removed, it is deposited on a flat area behind the
backhoe. Using hand tools, the teams search through the debris. Once searched and nothing
found, a bulldozer scrapes this area clean to make way for the next shovelful of trash removed
from the pit. (Courtesy of Bruce Wiley, San Jose Police Department. With permission.)
398 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Cell in question 4

Initial search stage

3
2

Adjoining cells
5

Latter search stage

Figure 13.15  The sequence of events for searching a compacted trash cell. (1) The backhoe
removes a shovelful of trash from the pit. (2) The trash is deposited on a flat area behind the
backhoe, where searchers examine it. (3) Once examined, a bulldozer moves the trash off the
cell in question. (4) The searched trash is pushed to a holding point where it will not interfere
with operations. (5) The backhoe works the pit along the front edge, working backward until
the entire cell has been cleared.

single shovelful of trash. Dumping more than a single shovelful in one location will
result in the team being overwhelmed quickly. It is possible, however, to run multiple
rake teams simultaneously, each working a single pile. When the teams have com-
pleted their examination and nothing is found, the area is bulldozed clean and the
process repeated.
The backhoe works from the far end of the cell, along its exposed slope, moving back-
ward. The bulldozer is generally employed on the portion of the cell as yet unexposed,
pushing the searched trash off the cell into a designated area (Figure 13.15). This is a long,
tiring, and difficult job, so it is appropriate to keep one team resting in reserve. Teams are
routinely cycled through a rest period, allowing each group to recoup and recover.
Cadaver dogs can assist in the search process, but there are clear limitations. The vari-
ous hazards present in the trash will affect the dogs as well. Methane pockets in particular
may represent a significant hazard for the dogs. The amount of decomposing trash (e.g.,
meat, fecal matter in diapers) will tend to create distractions for the dogs. If possible, dogs
should be employed only in the early morning. Landfills are likely to overwhelm the dog’s
senses, so do not expect outstanding results from even the best-trained dog.
Despite the large size of the typical trash cell (e.g., 100 ft × 100 ft × 30 in. in depth) cre-
ated in an engineered landfill, the cell is still a discrete area when compared with the entire
landfill. Thus it can be searched effectively in a matter of days using the described tech-
nique. If, however, additional cells are involved, the task becomes more daunting, costly,
Special Scene Considerations 399

and time-consuming. Unfortunately, the various technologies used to search for buried
remains (e.g., gravesites), such as magnetometers and ground-penetrating radar, will not
work in the landfill, even as a means of narrowing the scope of the search. The entire area
is a debris field and the high-technology tools will not be able to see through this chaotic
distribution. There may be situations in which it is not feasible to attempt a search, and
there are no rules that will absolutely define whether such a search is feasible. The investi-
gative team will have to make a case for the search based on a number of factors, including
the known intelligence; the level of cooperation demonstrated by the waste management
company; and the physical, human, and monetary resources available. This is not a task to
be undertaken lightly or started on a whim.

Buried and Scattered Remains

Any homicide scene demands significant effort on the part of the crime scene team. Bodies
that have either been buried or exposed to the environment for an extended period create
additional issues. When a relatively fresh body is found outside, it is certainly possible that
items associated with the body and the crime may have been dispersed. But this dispersal
is at the surface, and standard crime scene search techniques are more than sufficient to
locate any evidence. Evidence items associated with buried bodies or bodies that decom-
pose on the surface over an extended period tend to be widely dispersed in the surround-
ing soil and vegetation. This demands the application of archeological techniques in an
effort to locate and document the evidence and its scene context.

Buried Bodies

Cases involving buried bodies generally occur in one of two varieties. The police will either
be presented with a grave (e.g., someone stumbles upon a foot extending out of a shallow
grave), or they will be seeking a grave, based upon some form of intelligence (e.g., look-
ing for additional bodies in and around a dump site of a serial murderer). A study of 788
reported homicides involving burial of the victim’s remains found that 55% were located
only when a witness to the actual disposal or the subject divulged the location of the clan-
destine grave.4 Lacking such information, searching for a clandestine grave is a demanding
task, requiring skills well beyond the typical investigator’s ability. The “forensic back-
hoe” technique routinely demonstrated on the nightly news is not the appropriate initial
response. As was evident in the landfill situation, the backhoe is the only viable method of
moving compacted trash. Arbitrarily digging up a backyard in hopes of stumbling upon
a grave is crude and ineffective. Even if the backhoe operator stumbles onto a body, the
technique is likely to destroy significant amounts of evidence. Lacking intelligence that
directs the search to a very specific and discrete location, the best advice for the investiga-
tive team is to seek professional help in the form of organizations such as NecroSearch
International. This group is a nonprofit organization that assists law enforcement agencies
in locating clandestine graves. NecroSearch developed out of the research effort known
as Project Pig. This collaborative research effort was conducted over a number of years at
the Highland Ranch in Douglas County, Colorado. It involved the application of diverse
disciplines and technologies such as botany, thermal imaging, geophysics, archeology,
400 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

entomology, geology, and aerial photography in an effort to detect clandestine gravesites

through nonintrusive means.5
If the search for a grave involves a discrete location (e.g., a yard or cellar), visual tech-
niques as well as technology can help in locating the grave without introducing signifi-
cantly intrusive methods. Depending upon a number of factors (e.g., the length of time
the body has been buried, the type of soil the body is buried in), the grave may exhibit any
number of appearances, including disturbed soil, a grave mound, or even soil compaction.
Vegetation around the immediate grave is likely to have been disturbed by activity; there-
fore it may be absent from the grave or in a state of regrowth that is visually dissimilar to
the surrounding vegetation.
Nonintrusive technologies that may help locate the grave in a discrete area include
the use of magnetometers, ground-penetrating radar, and infrared thermography.
Magnetometers detect anomalies in the surface’s magnetic field. They will quickly rec-
ognize metallic objects (e.g., weapons) but are also useful in recognizing a grave. The dis-
placement of soil, such as encountered when a grave is dug and filled, results in a “remnant
magnetization” that the magnetometer can detect.6 Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) is
another effective technique. GPR sends a low-frequency signal into the ground that is
returned in different ways after encountering different conditions.7 The GPR produces
what could best be described as a cluttered display, but anomalies such as displaced soil or
bodies are often evident to the operator. Infrared thermography works due to a difference
between the surrounding heat signature of the soil and that present at the gravesite. Initial
theories involving infrared thermography held that the grave would produce a higher heat
signature than the surrounding ground due to decomposition. Through experimentation,
the opposite was actually proven correct. Graves create a dead space that produces a lower
heat signature than the surrounding ground, and the technology can often recognize this
heat differential.8 A final nonintrusive technique for locating a grave is the use of a trained
cadaver dog.
Intrusive techniques for locating graves include the use of probes and vapor moni-
tors. Vapor monitors are used to detect decomposition gases. A primary gas produced by
decomposition of any nature (e.g., human, animal, or plant) is methane. Various devices
can be used to detect these vapors, including hydrocarbon detectors utilized by the fire
department. Vapor detectors are best employed when the temperature is greater than 45°F,
and these are typically used in conjunction with a probing technique.9
Probes are used to detect differences in the compaction of regular soil and disturbed
soil. The probes are made of ⅜ in. stainless steel and are generally 40 in. in length. A handle
of some nature is affixed to one end, allowing the user to insert the rod into the ground
and apply pressure. Individuals outfitted with a probe can be placed on line and follow a
standard line search pattern, or each searcher can be given an area that is searched using a
strip or grid technique. In either situation, the probe is inserted every 10 to 15 in. in a hori-
zontal pattern directly in front of the searcher, a pattern that was developed from avalanche
search techniques. In effect, a probe is made directly in front of the searcher’s left foot, one
halfway between the feet, and one directly in front of the right foot. Using a line of search-
ers, everyone steps forward after the probe, one normal step, and repeats the probing.
The probe is inserted into the soil, and any differences noted are brought to the atten-
tion of the team leader. Once an anomaly is located, additional probing may help narrow
down the grave outline. The use of a methane detector can also corroborate the find prior
to expending any effort digging. It is important that prior to the search, probing teams
Special Scene Considerations 401

practice to get a feel for how compact the ground conditions are. This becomes a standard
they will compare each probe to. The protocol used by the probe team should begin with
a line of searchers working across the suspected area or anomaly. The line works across
the area and then reforms to cross the same area at a 90° angle. If the probe penetrates an
area to a greater depth based on the same level of effort, that may suggest an underlying
soil disturbance. All areas of interest are flagged for further evaluation. Areas of greater
compaction are of interest as well. These may occur in situations where the grave is capped
by branches or rock, creating a “hard spot.”10
When confronted with a large area and a situation in which the described technologies
and techniques have failed to locate the grave, the crime scene investigator may be left with
no other choice than to use heavy machinery in the latter stages of the search. Previous
authors have described backhoe techniques for isolated areas where a grave is believed to
be. As described, they are intended as last-ditch actions, when all other attempts to locate
the grave have failed. Generally, the backhoe is used to slowly scrape topsoil in discrete lay-
ers from the area in question. Observers watch the hole and the blade and stop the operator
if any artifact is exposed. At that point, the backhoe is removed and the grave excavated in
a normal fashion. The preference of the backhoe over any other equipment is that it does
not ride over the area in question. This effectively reduces additional damage to the grave,
body, and any artifacts through compaction. If the area is not isolated to a location where
the backhoe can be utilized, the FBI developed a technique involving a bulldozer. If search-
ing across a wide area, the bulldozer operator initially clears a top layer in one pass, remov-
ing any surface obstacles. The operator then creates a 4 ft trench on one side of the area. The
bulldozer operates within the trench, moving laterally and removing the soil in a vertical
slice, rather than a horizontal slice. On each pass the blade is repositioned approximately
6 in. Observers are positioned to watch both the blade as it cuts into the balk and the back
of the bulldozer, in case artifacts are displaced as it passes. If any artifact is observed, the
operation is halted. Once a grave is located, dozer operations cease and standard excava-
tion techniques are employed.19
Once a gravesite has been detected or is suspected by any means, excavation of
this focal area is required. A grave, although the focus of the investigation, is not the
end-all of possible evidence present at the scene. Upon initial discovery, the team must
document the overall surface context in and around the suspected grave before it is
destroyed. As with every crime scene, the technician considers paths in and out of the
area and the possibility of deposited or discarded evidence along any paths. Specific
effort is directed at looking for any associated evidence (e.g., tools, tire marks, or items
discarded) in the immediate area. A grid is then established over the area, including
datum points for elevation readings. The grave is a three-dimensional artifact, and the
elevation aspects must be documented. All surface artifacts are mapped to the datum
point and collected. The use of a rigid grid is an effective technique for gravesite exami-
nation. A PVC or wooden grid is placed over the grave, and all measurements are made
in relation to the grid. Once the grid is leveled and secured, it provides a stable land-
mark for making all two- and three-dimensional measurements. A grid can also be
used effectively in situations involving surface finds, if the majority of the remains are
localized in one area.
Once evident surface finds are documented properly and collected, the entire surface
of the site is examined with a metal detector and any hits are flagged. Standard surveyor
flags work well in this instance. Once surface debris is removed, these flagged areas can be
402 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

1 Preparing the Site For

Excavation
4 2 3
1. Set datum and grid.

2. Locate and map

all surface artifacts.

3. Remove all surface

debris by hand (e.g.
leaves, loose twigs).

4. Cut growing plants

close to the surface.

Figure 13.16  Preparing a gravesite for excavation involves more than just digging a hole. (1)
The technician must set a datum point and grid. Graves are three-dimensional artifacts, so
elevation is an important aspect as well. (2) All surface artifacts must be located and mapped
to the grid. (3) All loose debris is removed until the grave outline and mound are evident. (4)
Growing plants are never pulled out, as their root system may extend into the grave. They are
either cut close to the surface or excavated in order to recover the root system for botanical
study.

excavated independently. Loose debris (leaves, twigs, and the like) are removed by hand
from the respective grids and examined for any potential evidentiary value. The techni-
cian should use caution when doing this so that scene context is not lost (e.g., disturbing
a set of twigs fashioned in a cross over the grave) and to ensure that underlying items
of evidence are not disturbed. All natural loose debris is removed until the mound is
exposed. The ground level is then reexamined for any objects or items of evidence, which
are documented, mapped, and collected using standard procedures. Ground plants are
then removed by cutting them at the surface (Figure  13.16). The same precaution with
regard to removing plants exists as when casting an impression; plants are never pulled
or uprooted. In most instances, plants are cut at the ground level, but if a root system is
needed by the forensic botanist, the investigator may have to carefully excavate the plant
as the exhumation proceeds. Coordination with a forensic botanist (like those employed
by NecroSearch International) will provide specific guidance on what samples of plants to
retain as evidence.
Screens are used to examine all litter, debris, or soil removed from the site. This will
preclude missing small items such as bullets, teeth, small bones, and other artifacts. Fill
soil and debris should always be managed in such a fashion that the context of where the
soil originated is not lost. This allows the technician to reassociate any artifacts discovered
during the screening to a general origin (depth and grid) in the grave. Experts in the field
generally suggest a two-level screening effort. The first screen is made up of ¼ in. mesh,
while the second is made up of 1/16 in. mesh.11 Double screening will make it more likely
that small objects such as hairs, fibers, or shot pellets are located and recovered.
Actual excavation of the site is undertaken in levels. General archeological protocol
dictates that excavations proceed in arbitrary levels following the surface contour until
an evident stratum is located (man-made or natural). A stratum may be a layer of some
specific soil type, a layer with some form of particular debris, or any level in which an
Special Scene Considerations 403

artifact or artifacts become exposed. This new stratum is exposed in its entirety and then
mapped. Once excavated and mapped, the process continues for each newly discovered
stratum. Thus the dig proceeds along layers. The primary tools required for excavating
include trowels and brushes. In archeology, sites are generally excavated along established
balks, which are vertical boundaries that help the archeologist recognize the various verti-
cal levels and maintain order in the dig. In gravesite excavation, balks are uncommon and
unnecessary, as the grave itself will have specific limits. The grave usually represents an
artifact created during a single episode with distinct edges. The grave is always excavated
to the physical extent of this initial disruption. As digging proceeds, it will not be difficult
for the technician to reach down into the grave and excavate so long as the grave is shallow.
In deeper graves, it may be necessary to create a dig trench alongside the grave. This trench
is excavated in such a fashion that those excavating can be positioned at a depth lower than
the surface without having to stand inside the grave. The dig trench is only created when
necessary. If used, the trench is always higher than the last exposed surface of the grave.
This precludes the dig trench from disturbing evidence associated with the graveside (e.g.,
tool marks) and also prevents any incursion into the grave itself.
Stratification/superposition is a basic concept of archeology that is applicable to
gravesite excavation. Each obvious layer or significant artifact encountered is removed in
the reverse order of its deposition. Identifying and documenting this stratification pro-
vides the investigator with significant scene context regarding the specific actions taken
during the creation and subsequent filling of the grave. As the technician digs down, he
or she looks for any change in soil, for debris, or for the presence of artifacts. When an
identifiable stratum is observed, the site is exposed to that level and fully documented in
an effort to understand why it is there. Simply shoveling the fill soil from the grave will
disrupt the stratification, and all of this sequencing evidence will be lost. To preclude this,
dirt is removed in no more than 2 in. layers. If a thinner stratum is encountered (e.g., a 1
in. layer of gravel), then less soil is removed when working through that stratum. This pre-
vents the digging effort from disturbing the underlying cadaver or any evidence that may
be deposited deeper in the fill. Once excavation of the fill is started, the tools used by the
technician are the trowel and brush. The trowel is used to carefully slice or scrape fill dirt
from the excavation rather than digging it out. The technician uses the brush to carefully
remove loose fill on the layer being examined. A shop vacuum is an effective tool as well;
although never used to excavate the fill dirt, the vacuum can be used to remove loose fill
dirt that has fallen into the excavation, much as a surgeon uses suction to remove excess
blood. All vacuumed dirt is screened.12 As the grave sides are exposed, they should be
excavated very carefully. The technician specifically looks for evidence of tool or footwear
marks present on the gravesides. Any marks noted are documented and collected using
casting techniques before disrupting the grave further.
New artifacts, as they become visible, are carefully exposed, documented, and mapped
to the overlying grid. This includes measuring the objects’ elevation in relation to the grid
datum point. Lacking other methods (e.g., total stations or the use of a rigid grid and
stadia poles), elevation data are easily measured using a string, string level, and plumb.
A string is stretched from a datum elevation mark, across the excavation, and over the
artifact in question. The string level is centered on the string and ensures the string is level
across its entire length with the datum elevation. Once the string is in place, the technician
lowers a plumb and tape measure from the string to the artifact, measuring and recording
this distance.
404 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Datum
point

Second significant layer, clothing uncovered

body excavation continues.

Datum
point

First significant layer, weapon uncovered

and initial exposure of remains.

Figure 13.17  Excavation of the grave is undertaken in layers in order to capture the stratifica-
tion of the grave. Fill dirt is removed in 2 in. layers across the entire surface until a stratum
or artifact is located. In the figure, two distinct strata are located, a layer holding the hammer
and a layer holding the clothing. Each is exposed and documented before moving to the next
layer. Portions of the remains may appear early in the excavation, but the layered approach is
not abandoned.

Following standard archeological practice, the dig is kept “in phase,” where all identifi-
able aspects of a given layer are exposed before proceeding to the next13 (see Figures 13.17 and
13.18). Given the small surface area involved in a grave, this is usually an easy undertaking.
Special Agent Michael Hochrein, a noted author and lecturer on buried body recover-
ies, makes the comment that a sharp trowel is a necessity. The technicians should keep a
file on hand to maintain the trowel edge, as this allows the digger to effectively cut layers
from the soil and to distinguish different layers as they are encountered. Used with care,
postmortem trauma by the excavator is usually avoided. As the body is exposed, Hochrein
suggests using devices such as plastic-coated utensils or bamboo sticks.14 In the early stages
of excavation, small flat-bladed shovels may be effective as a method of scraping discrete
layers from the surface, following the original surface contour. Once the grave’s outline is
discovered, however, the shovel is abandoned, and the trowel becomes the primary excava-
tion tool. Good trowel and excavation techniques cannot be taught; they are more a matter
of experience. Unfortunately for the crime scene technician, this is a technique not often
encountered, so it should be engaged in carefully.
Upon initial exposure of the body, there is a tendency to forget concepts such as strati-
fication and keeping the dig in phase. There may be a desire to expose the cadaver quickly.
The technician should maintain elevation control (layered removal of soil), slowly expos-
ing the body and collecting any associated artifacts that are found. A significant number
of photographs should be exposed, documenting each step of exposure and condition of
the body. Once the body is completely exposed, its position is documented in relation to
Special Scene Considerations 405

Datum
point

Fourth significant layer, bottom of grave

exposed and footprint located.

Datum
point

Third significant layer, remains fully

exposed.

Figure 13.18  The end-all of the grave excavation is not the body. Although it is a primary
layer, once the body is removed, the grave must be excavated to the bottom of the pit. Here
additional evidence in the form of bullets, artifacts, and shoe and tool marks is possible.

the grid, and any associated articles found on or beside it are documented, mapped, and
collected. The body is then removed, and excavation continues until the technician reaches
the base of the pit.
Removal of the body is not the end-all of the grave excavation. The bottom of the
gravesite has the potential to hold important evidence. Tools used to dig the grave may
have left marks on the edges or bottom, individuals standing in the grave while digging it
may have left shoe marks, or objects may have been thrown into the grave before deposit-
ing the body. The technician should not rush the removal of the body from the grave, since
the presence of the body on top of these marks may protect them from fill or compaction,
particularly in recent burials. Haphazard disturbance of the grave at this point, or rough
handling while removing the remains, can result in the destruction of such evidence.
As with arson, buried bodies demand a level of expertise that cannot be fully explained
in such a short section of a single chapter. There are a variety of references available to the
crime scene technician that effectively demonstrate and teach this subject in depth.15–17

Scattered Remains

Scattered or skeletonized remains also appear in two basic types. The find is either local-
ized (e.g., the skeleton or badly decomposed body is found relatively complete at a single
location), or it is widely dispersed over a large area. Any combination of dispersal pat-
terns is possible, resulting from dispersal by animals, erosion, or flooding. Each scene is
examined in the same fashion, but widely dispersed remains will prove more difficult to
406 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

map. Compared with grave recoveries, however, scattered remains are somewhat easier to
examine and document, but the process is not as simple as just walking about and picking
up bones.
Dispersal of a cadaver can result from homicidal actions, but it is very likely a function
of animal activity. If the remains were left exposed for an extended period, the skeleton
and associated artifacts can be dispersed over a wide area. Upon initial discovery, the first
step is to verify the remains as human. Presented with a single bone, it is difficult for the
layperson to be confident that it is in fact of human origin. Decomposing bear paws, in
particular, have an amazing visual similarity to the human hand. A forensic pathologist
will assist the investigator in this aspect.
Once the remains are verified as human, a grid is established over the primary find
location. The size and scope of the grid is dependent upon the amount of surface scatter.
The use of a line search is effective when dealing with scattered remains, particularly when
confronted with remains that are dispersed over a large area. During the search, obvious
remains are flagged when observed. As with a buried body, the immediate surface sur-
rounding the remains is checked with a metal detector. Any hits or artifacts are flagged
and examined in detail later.
After documenting the surface context and all obvious remains, the area immediately
surrounding the remains is cleaned and exposed using the same techniques described for
the grave. All surface debris and plants are removed. Specific care should be used when
plants are noted growing in or around the bones and other material. The condition of the
plants should be documented and photographed and the plants recovered as evidence.
Growth through remains or objects can provide important details regarding the length of
time the body has been present at the site. All items encountered are documented, mapped,
and collected using standard crime scene procedures. Once this task is completed, all areas
directly surrounding any remains should be troweled to a depth of at least 2 inches and all
of the removed soil screened for artifacts.
Mapping of either graves or scattered remains can be a difficult challenge. As long as
the remains are not located in a heavily wooded area (where line of site is an issue) the use
of total station or Scan-Station® systems is very effective when presented with scenes of this
nature. Lacking such systems or lacking the ability to employ them in a given circumstance,
the crime scene technician can use the techniques of rectangular coordinates on a grid or
triangulation on a grid (both described in Chapter 7) to effectively document the scene.
Graves will always require an elevation view sketch to properly demonstrate the relative
depths and interrelationships of artifacts and layers discovered during the excavation.
An associated problem in recovering scattered remains is cataloging the find, in other
words, knowing when all of the bones have been located. Without some form of on-scene
demonstrative aid, it can be difficult to know what is left to be sought or to recognize when
all of the primary bones have been discovered. Archeologists often employ a skeletal dia-
gram, marking each bone off the diagram when located. This can be accomplished at the
crime scene using a standard skeletal diagram available from most pathologists. Another
simple and effective method is to lay the skeleton out in proper configuration at the scene
(Figure 13.19). This allows searchers to visualize and focus on those portions of the skel-
eton still missing. The only caution when using this latter method is to ensure that each
bone is properly tagged before it is placed into its orientation. This prevents contextual
information (e.g., where the bone was found) from being lost. This technique should not be
Special Scene Considerations 407

Figure 13.19  Throughout the search effort for scattered remains, it is important to use some
method of tracking what items have been found. Here, the skeleton is reconfigured on a Tyvek
suit on scene to assist in visualizing what bones have yet to be recovered. (Courtesy of Roy
Heim, Tulsa Police Department. With permission.)

used when the bones are wrapped, contained, or buried in some fashion, as both trace and
contextual information will be lost.

Entomological Evidence Associated with Bodies

Entomology is the study of insects. Forensic entomologists use the various insects found
in, on, and around dead bodies in an effort to establish the postmortem interval. In situa-
tions involving buried bodies or decomposed surface remains, insect activity is quite com-
mon, but forensic entomology is not limited to only gravesites and scattered remains. It
can be used in any death case where time of death is uncertain due to decomposition and
there is insect activity.
The types of insects found around the grave or decomposing remain may include spe-
cies attracted specifically to the carrion (e.g., flies), predator species that feed on the former
(e.g., beetles), and omnivorous species attracted to any kind of food source (ants and wasps).
In the initial stages of decomposition (death to +2 days), several species of blowflies
will be attracted to the body. The adult flies lay their eggs on the corpse, which subse-
quently hatch and grow through four larval stages. During this period, the larvae feed
on the remains. After their final postfeeding stage, the larvae change to pupae. Adult flies
later emerge from the pupae, starting the cycle over. As the body decomposes, putrefac-
tion odors draw more flies as well as additional species of insects, including beetles. Using
the apparent life stages of flies present on the corpse, the quantity of those species, and the
succession and presence of additional species, it is possible for the forensic entomologist to
estimate the postmortem interval.18
In order to accomplish this task the crime scene team must obtain specific information
and specimens. It is best if the forensic entomologist is called to the scene to collect the
specimens and observe them in situ, but that is not often possible. Otherwise, specimens
must be collected of each evident stage of insect (e.g., pupae, maggots, adult flies). One-half
408 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

of the specimens are preserved, while the remaining specimens are kept alive in order to
allow them to mature. Collection should occur immediately upon discovery, as adult flies
and beetles will relocate quickly once the body is disturbed.
Larvae are the easiest to locate and collect. Fly larvae can be collected with forceps
or by using a moistened modelers’ paint brush. Live samples should be placed in a con-
tainer with moisture and a food source (e.g., a piece of liver and moistened paper towel) to
prevent cannibalism. The recommended number of larvae to collect ranges significantly
from source to source. A minimum of 20 to 30 live larvae are usually sufficient unless the
technician is specifically asked to collect more. The preserved sample should be of a simi-
lar quantity. Adult flies and wasps must be caught using a net. Pupae are usually found in
drier environments, away from the maggot mass, to prevent predation. They can be found
in clothing and surrounding soil. Beetles are often located in the soil beneath the corpse.
All are collected in both live and preserved states.
Preserved specimens are placed in vials of ethyl or isopropyl alcohol. Live specimens
require moisture and air but also demand careful sealing. Adult flies can emerge from the
pupae at any time. Each sample is annotated as to the nature of the specimen when col-
lected (e.g., larva, pupa, or adult), where it was collected, and the time and date of collection.
Additionally, the estimated number, size, and temperature of the larval mass should be noted.
The specific location on the corpse of each mass should be noted as well (e.g., wound sites or
natural openings). Soil samples from a variety of areas, including beneath the corpse and at
distances of approximately 3 ft around the corpse, should be collected and placed in small
containers. The technician marks each container with identifying data describing where it
came from.
Elements of the scene important to the forensic entomologist include whether the area
is shaded or sunlit, how much light it gets over the course of a day, the nature of the foliage
(e.g., wooded, grassy), the weather conditions (including soil and air temperatures), and
the condition of the body (e.g., buried, partially buried, clothed). The technician should
note all of this information in the documentation, as well as the general description of
all evident insects and an estimate of the number present. This information is recorded
in the same manner as standard crime scene information. The forensic entomologist may
provide the crime scene technician a death scene study form that details all pertinent data
required. In that instance, the form is completed and returned with the specimens.
The best advice for the crime scene team is to locate a forensic entomologist in advance
of any need. The investigative agency can then coordinate the specific data and the nature
of specimens that the supporting entomologist will require. This preemptive effort will
spare the team from expending effort on scene, only to learn later that they failed to collect
the requisite information for that particular scientist.

Summary

Fire scenes represent a significant difficulty not only because of the complexity of the scene,
but also as a result of the damage caused by the fire. This can create conditions that are both
difficult and dangerous to work in. An investigation of a suspicious fire is also known as
an origin and-cause investigation. The first step of the effort is to examine the various fire
patterns in an attempt to locate the origin of the fire.  Fire patterns allow the investigator
to read the fire flow through the scene. These fire patterns include char patterns, smoke
Special Scene Considerations 409

and soot patterns, and damage patterns. Each pattern is of importance, and together they
may indicate or suggest the point of origin. Inherent in this search is the fire investigator’s
continual efforts to identify points of low burn. Although a low burn in and of itself does
not prove arson, points of origin are most often encountered at these locations. Even if the
crime scene technician is not responsible for the fire scene analysis, he or she must recog-
nize basic fire patterns and document them effectively.
When searching through the fire scene, the best methodology is to begin on the out-
side of the structure, move into the least damaged areas of the structure, and then move
on to the most damaged areas. In areas that are significantly damaged, it may be necessary
to conduct excavation of the debris in order to expose fire patterns on floors and other
surfaces. Excavation is carried out in a layer-to-layer process so that evidence in the fire
debris is not lost. A critical consideration for the crime scene technician is understanding
what fire suppression activities occurred within the scene. Fire suppression can effectively
damage and destroy the scene context and mislead the crime scene technician.
Landfill recoveries present significant obstacles. Lacking some level of intelligence
regarding when and where the body was disposed, it may be impossible to mount a landfill
recovery. If a location and date of disposal is known and the landfill operates as a “man-
aged waste site,” it is possible to isolate and search specific cells of compacted trash for
remains. The process requires heavy machinery, a number of searchers, and can take sev-
eral days. Landfills represent significant hazards, so additional protective clothing and
search tools are necessary when conducting such searches. Even when the remains are
found, the nature of the landfill (frequent compaction by heavy equipment) will reduce
the value of the evidence remaining with the body. Landfill recoveries are not a task to be
entered into lightly or on a whim.
Buried bodies and scattered remains require a significant level of preparation as well.
Finding a grave is a task in and of itself. Appropriate techniques include both nonintrusive
and intrusive means. Nonintrusive methods include magnetometers, ground-penetrating
radar, infrared thermography, and the use of cadaver dogs. Intrusive techniques include
probing the ground for anomalies and testing for vapors such as methane. The use of heavy
equipment such as a backhoe is not an appropriate initial search method. These means
destroy evidence and scene context, presuming of course that they are able to locate the
grave in the first place. They are undertaken only when all other means fail.
The excavation of a grave is accomplished using archeological techniques that doc-
ument the stratification of the gravesite and thus capture any associated scene context.
Graves are not simply dug up with a shovel; they are excavated in layers following an estab-
lished methodology. Excavation tools include the trowel and brush, where discrete layers
of dirt are removed from the entire grave surface slowly and methodically. As objects are
encountered, they are mapped in the scene, including their elevation in the grave. Any fill
dirt recovered from the grave is screened in order to locate small artifacts. Once the body is
uncovered and removed, the grave excavation is not complete. The floor of the grave as well
as the sides may also hold important evidence, such as shoe marks or tool marks.
Scattered remains are a little easier to work with than buried bodies. Remains can be
scattered through a number of mechanisms, including animal activity, erosion, and flood-
ing. Line searches are an effective means to search for scattered remains. Once located, all
remains and artifacts are mapped in the scene and recovered. The ground beneath the remains
is removed and screened to a depth of at least 2 in. in an effort to locate small artifacts.
410 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

In both buried and scattered remains cases, entomology evidence can be useful in estab-
lishing the interval of death. Insects such as flies, beetles, wasps, and ants will invade the area,
seeking a food source. By considering both the life stages of insects present and the quantity
of insects, the forensic entomologist may be able to limit the interval of death significantly.

Suggested Reading
arker, P., Techniques of Archeological Excavation, Universe Books, New York, 1982.
B
DeHaan, J., Kirk’s Fire Investigation, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1997.
Haglund, W., and Sorg, M., Eds., Forensic Taphonomy: The Post Mortem Fate of Human Remains,
CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2002.
National Fire Protection Association, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, NFPA 921, NFPA,
Quincy, MA, 1998.
Ramirez, C., and Parish-Fisher, C., Crime Scene Processing and Investigation Workbook, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL, 2011.
Redsicker, D., and O’Conner, J., Practical Fire and Arson Investigation, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1996.

Chapter Questions
1. What is meant by “origin and cause” when discussing fire scene investigation?
2. In what ways will firefighting activity affect the fire scene investigation?
3. What are the basic types of fire scene patterns encountered?
4. What are some of the problems associated with investigating fire scenes?
5. What is a managed waste site, and why is it so important to a successful land-
fill recovery?
6. What conditions and circumstances negatively affect the recovery of evidence in a
landfill recovery?
7. Why is the use of a “forensic backhoe” an inappropriate means for searching for a
clandestine grave?
8. What is meant by stratification of the grave, and why is keeping the dig in phase so
important to recovering scene context?
9. When dealing with scattered remains, how and why might plants be of some sig-
nificance in the scene?
10. Describe the basic methods required when collecting insects for entomological study.

Notes
1. National Fire Protection Association, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, NFPA 921,
NFPA, Quincy, MA, 1998, pp. 921–929.
2. Ibid., pp. 921–924.
3. Wiley, B., Gloria Bonilla: A Tragic Success Story, presentation to the Association of Crime
Scene Reconstruction, Denver, CO, October 2002.
4. Hochrein, M.J., et al., The Buried Body Cases Content Analysis Project: Patterns in Buried
Body Investigations, paper presented at 51st annual meeting of the American Academy of
Forensic Sciences, Orlando, FL, February 1999.
5. Le Cochon Connection: Search Methods and Techniques for Locating Clandestine Graves, a
presentation by the Rocky Mountain Division of the International Association for Identification,
Aurora, CO, May 1989.
Special Scene Considerations 411

6. Davenport, C.G., Geophysical Surveying: A Handbook for Criminal Investigators, self-published,

Lakewood, CO, 1997, p. 13.
7. Ibid., p. 43.
8. Weil, G., and Graf, R.J., Infrared Thermographic Detection of Buried Grave Sites, EnTech
Engineering, St. Louis, MO, 1997.
9. McLaughlin, J.E., et al., The Detection of Buried Bodies, Andermac, Yuba City, CA, n.d., p. 24.
10. Hochrein, M., personal communication, August 2003.
11. Ibid.
12. Ibid.
13. Barker, P., Techniques of Archeological Excavation, Universe Books, New York, 1982, p. 80.
14. Hockrein, M., personal communication, April 2003.
15. Dirkmaat, D.C., and Adovasio, J.M., The Role of Archeology in the Recovery and Interpretation
of Human Remains from an Outdoor Setting, in Forensic Taphonomy: The Post Mortem Fate of
Human Remains, Haglund, W., and Sorg, M., Eds., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1996, pp. 39–64.
16. Morse, D., Duncan, J., and Stoutmire, J., Handbook of Forensic Archeology and Anthropology,
Florida State University Foundation, Tallahassee, 1983.
17. Hochrein, M.J., An Autopsy of the Grave: Recognizing, Collecting and Preserving
Geotaphonomic Evidence, in Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory and
Archeological Perspectives, Haglund, W., and Sorg, M., Eds., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2002,
pp. 45–70.
18. Kondratieff, B., Forensic Entomology, presentation to the Rocky Mountain Division of the
International Association for Identification, Aurora, CO, May 1989.
19. Christensen, A.M., Lowe, W.M., and Reinecke, G.W., The Forensic Bulldozer as
a Clandestine Grave Search Tool, Forensic Science Communications, 11(4), 2009,
http://www2.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/backissu/oct2009/technical/2009_10Technical_Note.html.
The Role of Crime Scene
Analysis and Reconstruction
14
The recurring analogy between a jigsaw puzzle and the crime scene investigation is an
effective one. Every action taken by the technician at the scene is done with the spe-
cific purpose of capturing data. In effect, the technician captures pieces of the crime
scene puzzle in the hope that they might help the investigator understand the true
nature of the events that transpired. The problem for the scene investigator is that
there are only so many puzzle pieces available. Granted, these pieces may be rich in
information, but they simply cannot fill in every part of the crime scene puzzle. Thus
the crime scene investigator cannot afford to arbitrarily discard or ignore any single
piece. In some fashion, each piece must be considered against the whole in an effort to
understand what it defines about the incident. This analysis is the final step of crime
scene processing.
Analysis is accomplished in two very distinct venues. The first venue is that of the crime
laboratory. Forensic scientists using the various forensic disciplines described in Chapter
2 and throughout this book examine items recovered at the scene. Given the limits of the
technology, the scientists and technicians deduce what they can from each item. This anal-
ysis produces a vast array of refined forensic data that are both discrete and specific: this
is Mary’s fingerprint; that DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is not from the suspect; this glass
was broken from the outside. An interesting aspect of this analysis is that most scientists
work within a narrow discipline and generally do not or are not allowed to correlate their
results in relation to other forensic results. In some instances, this narrow analysis is more
than enough for the court. The discrete data provided by the forensic scientist can solve
many of the investigative or judicial questions posed. For example, given a rape charge in
which the suspect claims no association or contact with the victim, the mere presence of
the suspect’s DNA in a sperm sample recovered from the victim will effectively help a jury
to decide guilt or innocence.
More often than not, simply having this wealth of discrete data fails to resolve the diffi-
cult questions posed by a crime. The specifics of what occurred, in what order those events
occurred, and claims of mitigation are all concerns of the jury. The jury is bombarded with
discrete data and left to figure out their value guided only by lawyers, as if the lawyers were
somehow knowledgeable on forensics and were objective in the first place. Unfortunately,
possession of data does not imply understanding. We can possess all the facts in the world,
but unless we can correlate those facts in a logical and appropriate fashion, their true
meaning will remain elusive. Mere possession of refined forensic data from the crime lab
is no guarantee that the data can provide the clarity required by the fact finders, who must
reach a decision of innocence or guilt.
We might ask, “What else is there?” The answer is simply context and interrelation-
ship. The second venue for analysis is the application of crime scene analysis using all of
the data that may be available to the investigation. Discrete data are great, but as Chisum
and Rynearson remarked, the interpretive value of evidence is a function of time and sur-
roundings. It is only when we take the pieces of the crime scene puzzle and put them in
some order that meaning is derived. Until then, the pieces of the puzzle are just that, pieces.

413
414 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Any single piece, in and of itself, may support any number of subjective theories. By put-
ting the pieces together and placing them in a context with one another, we arrive at true
understanding. The vast majority of the crime scene investigator’s efforts at documentation
are accomplished for the specific purpose of capturing this scene context.
Unfortunately, many crime scene investigators are content to go to a scene and simply
collect “things.” Is the end-all of crime scene processing simply to effectively collect stuff?
Is it enough that we clean up the mess and then hand all of the puzzle pieces to a jury,
expecting them to make sense of it? The answer to these questions is no. Crimes beg ques-
tions. Who did this, and why, and how? Police have a specific responsibility to investigate
crime and report their findings. So the burden of asking and answering these questions
lies with the investigator, long before any trial is considered. Only by objectively answering
these questions is it possible to achieve justice. The investigative purpose then is to make
sense of all of the information that is developed.
Evidence comes to the investigation in two basic forms: it is either physical or testi-
monial. Anyone who has been an investigator for more than a day understands one simple
truth about the difference between the two: people lie, people misperceive, and people get
it wrong. Humans are subjective creatures, and as such, humans are not the best witnesses.
Testimonial evidence, although important, is neither the strongest nor the most objective
evidence available.
Hans Gross made this point in 1898 in his book System Der Kriminalistik, where in
discussing circumstantial cases he stated:

Here comes in the supposed art of heaping testimony upon testimony, of making the neces-
sity of one witness spring from the testimony of another; and if the Investigating Officer have
recourse for this plan … he will be almost always led astray and found wandering from the
goal [the truth]. The Investigating Officer must in such a case reconstruct the occurrence,
build up by hard labor a theory fitted and coordinated.1

J. Adams, in his introduction to the translated version of Gross’s text, which he entitled
Criminal Investigation, spoke to this issue as well, stating:

The trace [evidence] of crime discovered and turned to good account, a correct sketch be it
ever so simple, a microscopic slide, a deciphered correspondence, a photograph of a person or
object, a tattooing, a restored piece of burnt paper, a careful survey, a thousand more mate-
rial things are examples of incorruptible, disinterested and enduring testimony from which
mistaken, inaccurate and biased perceptions, as well as evil intention, perjury and unlawful
cooperation are excluded. As the science of criminal investigation proceeds, oral testimony
falls behind and the realistic proof advances; “circumstances cannot lie, but witnesses can
and do.”2

Of course, people can screw up anything, including objective evidence. The crime
scene investigator or the fact finder can overstate the physical evidence, misrepresent it, or
misunderstand it, but that is a problem associated with our human frailties and is not the
fault of the evidence itself. Physical evidence—if properly collected, evaluated, and corre-
lated—has the power to establish facts regarding an incident that are irrefutable by anyone.
It is in evaluating the objective evidence for context and interrelationship that the second
venue of analysis, the final step of the crime scene investigative process, occurs. This pro-
cess is known as crime scene analysis or crime scene reconstruction.
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 415

The crime scene investigator accomplishes crime scene analysis or crime scene
reconstruction in an effort to seek context from the physical evidence. Context is sought
by correlating all of the evidence items to one another in an attempt to objectively
describe the nature and order of the actions that entail the incident being investigated.
This is a difficult task and one that must follow a specific methodology. The difficulty lies
in the tendency of the analyst to incorporate subjective considerations into the analy-
sis. Although subjective behavior by crime scene investigators or forensic scientists is
always dangerous, it is in this final step that subjectivity becomes the most dangerous.
The crime scene investigator never has all of the pieces to the puzzle; thus there are
always holes and fuzzy areas in which the analyst must try to understand the context of
individual pieces of data. The desire to have closure—to have a complete understand-
ing—will cause the investigator to try and fit all of the pieces of the puzzle into a neat
and tidy theory. In doing so, subjectivity can creep into the process. It is only by applying
established methods of crime scene analysis that the investigator can keep subjectivity
at bay and produce an objective picture of the incident.As defined by the Association
of Crime Scene Reconstruction, crime scene analysis is “the use of scientific methods,
physical evidence, deductive and inductive reasoning and their interrelationships to gain
explicit knowledge of the series of events that surround the commission of a crime.”3 The
author and Tom Bevel described this process of crime scene reconstruction as “event
analysis,” defining it as an in-depth crime scene reconstruction that employs scientific
method to evaluate the physical evidence known to the analyst.4 The specific purpose
of the analysis is to gain explicit knowledge of the series of events that comprise a given
incident and, when possible, to identify the most likely sequence of those events. So
crime scene analysis is concerned not only with deciding what happened but also in what
order it happened.
Crime scene analysis or event analysis uses a defined methodology to look at each
piece of physical evidence, its interrelationship to the scene, and other items of evi-
dence. From this, it attempts to define specific actions that occurred during the course
of the incident. Whenever possible, it goes one step further by adding order or sequence
to those actions. Note the word attempts. Crime scene analysis rarely provides an all-
inclusive theory of the entire incident. As in the puzzle analogy, the crime scene inves-
tigator only has certain elements, specific pieces of the puzzle. By placing these pieces
into some context, the analyst will provide a skeleton of the crime. But not all of the
pieces will easily fit into the developing picture. It is not uncommon to find evidence
of actions that the investigator knows happened, without being able to place them in
the overall sequence. Nevertheless, this skeleton, however incomplete, will serve as an
objective foundation on which all of the subjective information from the investigation
can be considered.
It is critical to recognize that objective crime scene analysis will not answer each
and every question. One of the most interesting aspects of crime scene analysis is that,
if approached properly, the analysis will become less specific as the analyst refines it.
Ironically, in becoming less specific, the analysis also becomes more accurate. The more
the crime scene investigator challenges what he or she has included in the analysis, the
more likely it is that the analyst will recognize subtle subjective inferences.
416 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

A History of the Concept of Crime Scene Reconstruction

The methods of crime scene analysis are not new to the investigation of crime. The basic
methods described here have been included and described in investigative texts for over
100 years. As early as 1900, Hans Gross spoke of the necessity of reconstructing the crime
through a meticulous examination and collection of facts.5 Although Gross described his
beliefs across his entire text and did not present them as a specific methodology, he dis-
cussed every aspect of our current beliefs. This included the necessity of making detailed
crime scene observations, scientific examination of physical evidence in an effort to obtain
as much objective data as possible, and applying this information to specific questions
regarding the crime in an effort to “reconstruct the occurrence, build up by hard labor a
theory fitted in and coordinated.”6
In 1933, Luke May wrote a manual entitled Scientific Murder Investigation. May went
so far as to outline a very distinct series of questions that should be answered in the inves-
tigative process, but in leading his readers to these questions, he outlined the process of the
investigation itself. May used a slightly different analogy, that of a building and the investi-
gation, stating that without plan and direction, only the simplest of structures was possible.
He likened the murder investigation to building a skyscraper; without planned effort and an
underlying superstructure, successful completion of the investigation was impossible. May
went on to state that the investigator must “develop other facts, correlating and interlocking
to make a whole from apparently disassociated separate units.”7 May concluded that unless
the investigator knew what to search for, there was little purpose behind the crime scene
search. He warned of developing subjective personal theories and the all too common habit
of trying to fit the pieces of the investigation into such theories rather than trying to obtain
additional information that might lead to novel and more accurate theories. May felt that
the true mark of the scientific investigator was one who could “work untiringly, obtaining
facts upon which to predicate theories, changing his theories as the facts developed war-
rant.”8 As in the case of Gross, May did not spell out a specific step-by-step crime scene
analysis methodology, but his beliefs set a clear foundation for such a methodology.
Edward Oscar Heinrich, also known as the “Wizard of Berkeley,” is perhaps one of
the first investigative authors to set out a specific crime scene analysis methodology. He
commented correctly that one must first analyze the method of the crime before one could
properly understand its purpose or hope to identify the criminal, a belief not lost on cur-
rent-day criminal profilers. Heinrich went so far as to describe analysis as “like a mosaic
… every fact must be evaluated before it can be fit into the pattern. In that way every fact
as it is developed and equated becomes a clue.”9 Heinrich’s methodology included defining
precisely what happened, where it happened, and when (in what order) it happened. All of
this information, developed from the crime scene, would ultimately lead to the more sub-
jective questions of why it happened and who did it. Heinrich can effectively be credited
with articulating a theory for crime scene analysis. In his biography, written by E. Block,
Heinrich described the process by saying:

Rarely are other than ordinary phenomena involved in the commission of a crime. One if
confronted with scrambled effects, all parts of which are attributable to causes. The tracing of
the relationship between isolated points of fact, the completion of the chain of circumstances
between cause and effect, are the highest functions of reason.10
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 417

This theory has been refined to a simpler, perhaps less elegant statement of “Nothing
just happens.” Every condition and artifact we find in the scene has a history. We seek to
explain simple cause-and-effect relationships based upon the data in the scene and through
the various relationships define that history, bringing content and form to the analysis.
In 1933, H. Rhodes made the case that crime scene analysis was a specific scientific
process. In his text Clues and Crime, he indicated that the object of the crime scene evalu-
ation was to decide specifically how the crime was committed and in what order the events
occurred.11 As with future authors, Rhodes felt that the scientific method was the underly-
ing foundation of any such analysis.
The noted Dr. Paul Kirk, famous for his efforts in the Sam Shepherd case, was one of
the first authors to refer to his work as “crime scene reconstruction.” Dr. Kirk wrote Crime
Investigation in 1953, and although he did not mention reconstruction directly, he made
the case that the crime scene was the foundation of the criminal investigation and that field
technicians (police officers and crime scene technicians) had to work side by side with sci-
entists (forensic scientists at the crime lab) in order to unveil what physical evidence could
describe about a given crime.12 His application of these beliefs was evident in his affidavit
in support of Dr. Shepherd, filed in April 1955.13
Between 1956 and 1978, Charles O’Hara’s Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation was
a standard reference utilized in criminal investigation courses. Like Kirk, O’Hara placed
a significant emphasis on the objective value of physical evidence and its scientific evalua-
tion. He went so far as to spell out a specific methodology for crime scene analysis. O’Hara
described his process in terms of scientific method, stating that it involved:

• Painstaking, comprehensive collection of data

• Arrangement and correlation of that data
• Definition of issues and investigative questions
• Development of a hypothesis along the lines of the available data and subsequent
resolution of any hypotheses
• Testing of the hypothesis and elimination, when possible, of contradicting
hypotheses
• Testing of the final hypothesis before acceptance14

Although O’Hara broadened this “representative approach” to the entire investigation,

including subjective aspects such as testimonial evidence, he agreed with Kirk and others
that physical evidence and the crime scene shouldered a distinct responsibility in solving
crime. He also made the case for conducting a separate crime scene reconstruction in an
effort to determine the circumstances of the crime.15
James W. Osterburg, another noted criminal investigative author, made a specific associ-
ation of the reconstruction process to the scientific method in his text Criminal Investigation:
A Method of Reconstructing the Past. Osterburg was clear in his belief that physical evidence
was the primary source of data from which any reconstruction should develop.16
Prior to 1997, one of the most defined methodologies for crime scene reconstruction
was Chisum and Rynearson’s text, Evidence and Crime Scene Reconstruction. Their par-
ticular methodology emphasized the importance of contextual information, a concept
grounded in the belief that time and surroundings were a significant source of objective
data. They suggested the use of logic pathways and a “storyboard approach,” in which spe-
cific events were mapped out once they were identified and then sequenced within the
418 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

whole reconstruction.17 If any criticism exists of this methodology, it would be that Chisum
and Rynearson continued to incorporate subjective aspects of the investigation, such as
intent and motive, into the early stages of the reconstruction process. They believed this
information should be considered early on, rather than waiting until after defining the
events through the evaluation of the physical evidence alone.
The noted Dr. Henry Lee would comment on the reconstruction issue in both his text
Crime Scene Investigation and his subsequent text Henry Lee’s Crime Scene Handbook. Lee
advocated the use of scientific method as the specific means utilized in reconstruction.
His process included five steps involving data collection, conjecture, hypothesis forma-
tion, hypothesis testing, and theory formulation.18,19 Like many authors, Lee did not state
categorically that reconstruction is based on physical evidence, but he made it clear that
the primary data of any reconstruction were based on the evaluation of physical evidence.
Peter Lamb, of the UK’s home office forensic science unit (FSU), defined the recon-
structive process as involving four phases: information, observation, interpretation, and
conclusions. Lamb described the information phase as considering the initial known infor-
mation in an effort to define investigative questions. Lamb’s observation phase involved
the collection of specific data regarding the problem. The interpretation phase involved
correlating the information and observations, challenging observations, and looking for
valid hypotheses. The final conclusion phase is described as a matter of testing hypotheses
and eliminating those that can be objectively eliminated.20
In 1997, the author in conjunction with Tom Bevel first published Bloodstain Pattern
Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene Reconstruction, in which we presented a
concise and specific methodology incorporating and drawing upon the previous efforts
of many individuals.21 This method of reconstruction is a distinct process confined to the
objective evidence and conducted after all forensic analysis is complete. The methods and
concepts were refined over three editions and were subsequently published in a separate
book, Practical Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction, in 2009 by the same authors.

The Underlying Principles of Crime Scene Reconstruction

The theory of crime scene analysis and reconstruction is simply “Nothing just happens,”
but a theory alone has little value. In some fashion there must be principles that guide and
define what the analyst does and what he or she looks for in pursuing his or her theory.
Crime scene analysis is no different. Four basic principles guide the crime scene analyst:

• Superposition
• Continuity
• Chronology
• Relationship

Superposition is about layers. The concept is derived from geology and archeology
and Nikolas Steno’s Law of Superposition.22 Steno stated geologic strata are deposited
in a time order, oldest to youngest unless otherwise disturbed. In archeology this con-
cept is carried over to artifacts as well. The most effective example for both archeology
and crime scene analysis is a grave. During excavation, consideration of the depth and
layering of artifacts and the body is relevant information. For example, the presence of
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 419

a casing beneath the body defines that it was deposited in the grave prior to the body.
As classic an example as a grave is, layers exist throughout all crime scenes. They may
include bodies upon bodies, objects on top of or beneath bodies, objects displaced onto
other objects, and residues deposited beneath or on top of artifacts or surfaces. Thus
when presented with crime scenes, the order of deposition of all of these items tells us
something about what was happening in the scene and the order that it happened. Layers
occur throughout a crime scene, and the analyst must be cognizant of them and docu-
ment them completely for later consideration.
Continuity is also based on Nikolas Steno’s effort, particularly his Law of Lateral
Continuity. Steno stated that strata are not deposited in a way in which they abruptly end;
thus when presented with disassociated strata or artifacts, they can by their similarities
be considered to be from the same depositional period. To explain this more effectively,
consider deposition of small impact spatter in a crime scene when a victim is shot. Small
spatter are often ejected in a three-dimensional pattern out into the scene. These small
stains are deposited on any and all objects in proximity to the event. Thus if an object such
as a lamp is present and the stains are deposited onto it and the table where it sits, but the
lamp is later moved, the end result is disassociated stains. Recognizing the presence of a
void in the spatter on the table (an abrupt end of the deposition) and finding similar spatter
(same size, same DNA, and a recognition of their spatial orientation) on the lamp allows us
to state with some degree of certainty that they are from the same depositional period (the
same event). In Steno’s concept, an association is made between the disassociated strata or
artifacts.
But continuity is a broader concept for the crime scene analyst than Steno’s mindset.
Continuity or lack thereof is a major indicator to the analyst. For example, consider being
presented with a scene in the early morning, dew still present on the ground. If the claim
is that someone entered, burglarized, and then left along a given path in the yard, then the
continuity of the dew is a major indicator. Should the crime scene investigator find marks
that lead out only a few feet into the yard and then cease, that will likely lead him or her to
a completely different conclusion than if he or she finds the continuity of the dew disrupted
along the length of the yard out to the roadway. The disruption or lack of disruption of
various surfaces or deposits in scenes will assist the crime scene investigator in recognizing
if something happened as claimed.
Chronology is another concept shared by both archeology and crime scene analysis.
No action or event just happens; every action has something that naturally precedes or fol-
lows it. By considering the two aspects of chronology, time and sequence, specifics as to the
flow of a given incident become evident. Sequence is evaluated using three simple logical
relationships. Every action occurring in the scene is considered against all other actions
to determine if it precedes, follows, or is simultaneous to those actions. For example, one
cannot deposit a bloody handprint until a blood source has been exposed. Unfortunately,
not every action can be associated to every other action in this fashion, but from the evi-
dent relationships, objective data will be forthcoming. Timing is less evident, but given the
amount of video and audio data available today, occasionally specific times can be estab-
lished for specific actions that are ongoing in the scene.
The final principle of concern is that of relationship. This principle finds its roots in
Locard’s Principle of Exchange, but once again is broader. Locard’s principle, as stated
today, is that every contact leaves its trace. Through associations of evidence we estab-
lish relationships between various items of evidence. Fibers from a suspect’s vehicle to the
420 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

clothing worn by the rape victim, and paint chips from the hit-and-run to a suspect’s vehi-
cle are examples of these associations and relationships. Within any scene there are many
relationships present. They may be logical, spatial, or temporal. Our concepts of chronol-
ogy, superposition, and continuity are all aimed at defining any and all relationships. For
example, the orientation of several cast-off patterns rising up on a wall from where the
battered body lies helps us understand the direction and application of the weapon. Every
item in the scene and every action defined as occurring in the scene are considered against
the other evidence and actions to define if some relationship exists.

Crime Scene Reconstruction Methodology

The basis of all crime scene reconstruction is, at its core, the scientific method. The sci-
entific method follows a generally accepted five- to six-step process (depending upon the
author) to collect and evaluate information regarding some subject. These steps include
defining the problem or question to be resolved, collecting data to resolve the problem,
developing a hypothesis, classifying and organizing data and establishing predictions, test-
ing the predictions of the hypothesis, and defining a conclusion (Figure 14.1). The scientific
method helps us find answers to complex questions by providing form and direction to the
search. The answer developed through the scientific method rarely claims to be absolute;
rather, the scientific method provides the best explanation given the data. It is, however, an
explanation arrived at with far less subjectivity. It has a clear and specific foundation that
allows others to examine and evaluate for themselves. A reconstruction developed through

Scientific method starts with a question, the answer to which usually begs another
question. As a result, scientific method is often referred to as circular process.

6. Conclusion. 1. Problem.
Identify an opinion Define the investigative
and repeat for each question.
variable

5. Test. The product of scientific

2. Hypothesis.
Test the hypothesis method is best described as
against the Identify viable an ever expanding, self
evidence at the explanations or correcting body of knowledge.
scene. possibilities.

4. Expect. 3. Data.
Identify what would Collect information
be found if the to resolve the
hypothesis were true. problem.

Figure 14.1  Scientific method is the backbone of all analysis. It includes a six-step process
that begins with a question and ends with a conclusion.
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 421

Scientific Method
• Define the problem or question Investigative Question

• Recognize variables, form hypothesis. Investigative Processes:

• Crime scene processing
• Gather and weigh evidence • Interviews/Interrogations
• Lab analysis
• Identify predictions • Sources of information
• Crime scene analysis
• Test predictions

• State opinion Investigative conclusion

Figure 14.2  The methods employed by criminal investigators are an integral part of the scien-
tific method. The primary difference is that the scientific method is always a well-thought-out
and conscious effort.

scientific method is not based on opinions grounded in “because I think so.” It always
relies on specific data that others can see and independently consider.
This application of the scientific method is similar to the standard techniques applied
in any criminal investigation. Even lacking training in research techniques, criminal inves-
tigators routinely define investigative questions, seek and weigh data, develop hypotheses,
and make conclusions (Figure  14.2). The critical steps, however, lie between developing
the hypothesis and defining the conclusion, which include classifying and organizing data
and then testing predictions. These actions are often accomplished subconsciously or in a
haphazard fashion by criminal investigators. When these steps are performed without an
applied methodology, the reconstruction can quickly become subjective.
The methods of crime scene reconstruction are applied in several specific circum-
stances to resolve investigative issues. In one fashion, the methods are utilized to recon-
struct the entire incident (the crime) using the process known as event analysis. A full-scale
event analysis is a formal effort that considers all known data from the crime scene and
involves the examination of all of the physical evidence in an attempt to establish specific
actions of the incident and the order in which those actions occurred. Although this all-
inclusive approach is oftentimes revealing, it is not always necessary given the investigative
circumstances. All of the concepts described are also routinely applied in an ad hoc fashion
on scene by the crime scene investigator. This informal analysis assists the investigator in
deciding what is evidence, what is not evidence, and where to look for additional evidence.
It is extremely useful in this latter aspect for its predicative value. Using simple “if this, then
that” logic, the crime scene analysis will refine the investigator’s understanding of where
fingerprints, footwear marks, trace DNA, or other evidence might be located. Finally, there
may be instances where a more discrete process is applied to data in an attempt to resolve a
very specific investigative question. The text will describe these techniques in some detail.

Scientific Method Used to Resolve a Specific Investigative Question

Oftentimes, a specific investigative issue will be all that is in question before the court. This
issue may revolve around guilt or innocence or perhaps mitigation, but beyond this issue
there will be little question as to what happened and how. In this instance, the crime scene
422 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

analyst applies the scientific method in a very direct approach in an attempt to resolve the
issue.
One of the most important aspects of using the scientific method is in knowing what
the problem is. A problem ill-defined or too broad will reduce the probability of answering
the issue. Therefore, the first concern is in knowing how to pose the question or realizing
what subproblems must be answered before one can answer the ultimate question. For
example, the question “Is this homicide or suicide?” is far too broad. To answer this ques-
tion, the analyst must evaluate and answer a number of more precise questions, such as:

• How was the weapon employed?

• Can the final position of the weapon and the victim be explained?
• Can the injuries be self-inflicted?
• Is there any single injury that cannot be self-inflicted?

When an investigative question is posed correctly, there will be a discrete number of

possible answers. These answers represent the array of viable solutions to the problem.
For example, consider the investigative question “Is the scene a dump site?” The possible
answers are: yes, it is a dump site; or no, it is not a dump site. As posed, there are only two
possible answers. If the question is “In what order were the weapons first utilized?” there
may be any number of answers, depending upon the number of weapons involved.
To answer the investigative question, the analyst develops a hypothesis, an educated
guess as to the answer. The development of the first hypothesis is often based on very lim-
ited knowledge. This hypothesis, however, will aid in the search for more data. The ana-
lyst looks at the situation and, based upon his or her interpretation of the scene and the
evidence collected to that point, develops a belief as to what the answer to the question is.
In other words, the analyst develops a conjecture. In order to evaluate this or any other
hypothesis, the analyst must identify and consider predictions. With every hypothesis,
there are predictions of what one might expect if the hypothesis were true. An underlying
belief in reconstruction is that nothing just happens. There are actions that led up to and
follow any claimed action in the scene. The critical skill for the analyst is in recognizing
these pre- and postactions, since they form the basis of any predictions. With a question
and a hypothesis in mind, the analyst then looks for data that may allow him or her to test
his or her predictions. Once the data necessary to resolve the question are collected, they
must be organized and classified in order to understand their meaning. In this stage, the
analyst evaluates how any one item of data may relate to any other. It is through this cor-
relation of information that we are able to test a hypothesis and make a conclusion. In some
instances, the predictions regarding a specific hypothesis may hold, and we will conclude
that our hypothesis is possible. In others, the predictions may fail, requiring us to either
revisit the hypothesis or reject it as impossible.
The scientific method is often described as a circular process, creating an ever-expand-
ing, self-correcting body of knowledge on a subject. As this body of knowledge develops,
the scientific method is best at eliminating possibilities rather than identifying the one
and only answer. Therefore, in order to resolve an issue, the analyst will have to evaluate
any viable hypothesis, test the predictions, and when appropriate, eliminate those that are
unworkable. Only then can the analyst objectively conclude anything.An important part
of crime scene reconstruction is in knowing what the data prove or disprove. For example,
the presence of a fingerprint on the trigger of a murder weapon in no way defines absolutely
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 423

that the owner of that fingerprint was responsible for pulling the trigger during the mur-
der. It may be compelling evidence, but one must consider other possibilities as well. An
obvious possibility is that the individual picked the weapon up at the scene following its
discharge, inadvertently leaving the print as it was handled. Inferences presented as data
(e.g., Joe’s fingerprint is on the trigger, thus Joe pulled the trigger) can lead the reconstruc-
tion to ruin. The analyst must identify the predictions, test them, and then define an over-
all conclusion based on the predictions. In some instances, this may require correlating
only a few pieces of data, but in other instances, it may demand considering a significant
number of data items.

Event Analysis: Reconstructing Entire Events

Figures  14.3 and 14.4 are a case example of an event analysis worksheet, which is an
effective format for dealing with and resolving specific investigative issues. On those
occasions when a single investigative issue is in question, the use of the scientific method
in combination with the event segment worksheets is a functional and appropriate
response. Oftentimes, particularly in homicide investigations where little, if anything, is
known about the events that transpired, there is a need to reconstruct all of the actions

Case:
Date:
Analyst:
P
State investigative question: Is battle damage assessment victim 18 standing (e.g., fleeing) when initially
shot?
h
Define hypothesis 1 Define hypothesis 2
BDA 18 is standing when initially shot. BDA 18 is not standing when shot.
d

Define Data to Resolve the Investigative Question

Defect in right cheek, consistent with entry GSW Defect left cheek, nose area, exit
Directional spatter into left rear shoulder (B-F, R-L) Large exit left frontal lobe, with brain ejection
Brain matter restricted to large pool beneath V Brain material, left collar inside
Spatter event W-E from pool toward feet Right arm overlies, with no spatter
Large pool beneath the V No disassociated spatter or brain material
Blood flow R-L from probable entry Large volume flow right ear across forehead
2 saturation stains, one round right outer thigh No blood flow beneath the Adam’s apple
No blood onto left back of neck Blood flow R-L on left cheek, below ear
BDA 19 overlies V, with head wound close to Probable spatter on right side of victim
saturations
No disrupted dirt below boots No blood or wounds evident on V’s back
Lack of flows beneath obvious injuries No brain material ejected onto left shoulder

Figure 14.3  An event analysis worksheet. This document is used to evaluate specific inves-
tigative issues. Such documents serve to capture the information relative to an issue and help
form the various hypotheses related to the issue.
424 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

e State Predictions for Hypothesis 1 e State Predictions for Hypothesis 2

• Initial wound capable of incapacitation (drops V in • Blood flows consistent with other than standing
place) position
• Blood flows consistent with generally upright • Lack of disassociated spatter and ejected material (all
position material in or around final position)
• Spatter/brain matter ejected into the scene, • All ejected spatter suggesting low position
disassociated to final position
• Spatter ejected away from body and appendages • Hands in a neutral position
consistent with upright position
• Drips onto lower clothing, shoes, hand, or arms • Interrelated spatter on various aspects of V’s clothing
• Dirt marks on knees or buttocks consistent with
falling
• Wound on posterior aspect (shooter to the rear of
V)
• Dirt disturbances when shoes impact final position

t Test Predictions by Identifying Information t Test Predictions by Identifying Information

Relationships for Hypothesis 1 Relationships for Hypothesis 2
All brain matter is isolated to the pool, none spattered All evidence suggests frontal lobe wound is second,
onto the left shoulder, indicating the frontal lobe cheek injury is first, but no downward flow from the
wound occurs in the final position, excluding it as a cheek injury. The immediate flow is R-L.
first shot.
There is no other incapacitating injury except the right V had mobility subsequent to his final wounding, the
cheek/nose. This wound creates directional spatter on right arm was not in the final position when spatter
the left shoulder, indicating the V’s head was turned was ejected L-R and backward toward his right side.
left somewhat, placing the shooter to the right of the V.
This wound also produces a flow pattern, but the flow A left side down position (based on flows) would result
moves R-L and not downward; thus the victim was not in the reposition of V18 toward V19’s bloody head,
upright when he received this wound. accounting for contact stains on the right thigh.
All flows on the victim show sideways motion. This would also expose and explain the spatter event
deposited on V18’s right side, associating it to the
frontal lobe injury.
Injuries that were clearly free flowing did not bleed onto All brain matter ejected backward from the head,
the neck, below the Adam’s apple. consistent with the evident spatter event.
There is no ejected spatter disassociated to V18, except Flow from the left cheek, flows R-L and never
the spatter on V19 (deposited while V19 was in his downward, showing he was not in an upright position
final position). This excludes any of these spatters as after receiving the injury.
occurring while V18 was in a standing position.
There are no drips onto the lower clothing, suggesting a Heavy staining and flows move across the victim’s face
standing position. R-L and onto the upper neck, but not downward.
There are no disturbances in the dirt beneath the V’s There are no disruptions in the dirt, suggesting V18 fell
shoes, suggesting a standing position. to his current position.
There are no evident wounds that enter from the Hypothesis 2 supported.
posterior aspect of the body.
The right cheek, left nose wound has no clear reason for
incapacitating the victim.
Hypothesis 1 refuted.
C State opinion as to the best explanation: V18 is not
standing when shot.

Figure 14.4  The second part of an event analysis worksheet. Here predictions are defined for
the various hypotheses, which are then compared to the data available in an attempt to refute
or corroborate the hypotheses.
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 425

associated with the incident. This is a daunting task, demanding significant effort on
the part of the analyst. Event analysis uses the scientific method as a backdrop while
applying seven steps to identify (as fully as possible) the specific actions taken during
an incident. Event analysis concentrates on objective evidence (the physical evidence)
and only rarely concerns itself with subjective aspects such as witness testimony. The
end result of the event analysis, however, will be compared in detail with testimonial
evidence and investigative theories in an effort to determine whether they are valid state-
ments or theories.
In order to understand event analysis, we must define three basic terms associated with
the process. The incident in event analysis is the overall situation being investigated. In
time, it may well be identified as a criminal act, but to refer to the incident as a crime prior
to the analysis is, in some cases, putting the cart before the horse. Each incident is made up
of macro components, analogous to the chapters in a book. These chapters are referred to
as events. Events define gross aspects of the incident, such as approaching the scene, con-
trolling the victims, killing the victims, etc. Without significant effort, these chapters can
be defined at the scene by simply considering what the investigator observes. As a result of
an in-depth analysis, they are later refined and adjusted to be more accurate. Each event
is made up of event segments, micro components of the event. Event segments are snap-
shots of specific moments in time, detailing specific actions that occurred. Think of them
as statements about an entity undergoing change. Thus they include the entity, either an
individual or artifact, that is changing (e.g., deposited, moved, injured). Event segments are
the basic building block of any crime scene analysis.
How are these building blocks defined? The presence of physical evidence and a vari-
ety of interrelationships between items of evidence will speak to the existence of any given
event segment. Event segments are always defined by specific data. The more event seg-
ments the analyst is able to define, the more accurately the analyst can describe the true
nature of the event. Thus an event analysis is always reverse-engineered, beginning with
the crime scene data and working backward to a conclusion. Event analysis is conducted
after all forensic reports are completed and all available data have been collected. The steps
used to produce this analysis are described below. A case example is included, but for the
sake of brevity, the supporting documentation for the example is limited. Although the
example will not demonstrate the overall scene analysis, it will illustrate the application of
the process.

Step 1: Collect Data, Establish Likely Events

Walking into the scene, the crime scene analyst is bombarded with information. Throughout
processing, additional information comes to light, all of which allows the investigator to
understand the gross aspects of the analysis. For instance, in a close-in knife attack, it will
be obvious that the perpetrator had to get close to the victim, even though the analyst may
have no idea as to how that was done. As the scene is evaluated, areas where confrontations
or a specific wounding occurred may be evident. This kind of information will speak to the
existence of the event, even though the specifics of the event may still be lacking. The true
function of events is the same as our analogous chapter of a book. They serve to break the
reconstruction down into manageable parts, to which specific details can be associated and
then worked, rather than trying to deal with all of the information as a single conglomerate.
426 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Case Example: Defining Events

A husband returns home to find his wife dead on the floor of their bathroom
(Figure 14.5). She is naked, with significant blunt trauma to the head and bearing signs
of ligature strangulation around her neck. Ties belonging to the husband are beneath
the body. There is a significant volume of blood in the scene, but all visible blood is
confined to the bathroom. The house shows no signs or indications that anyone has
ransacked or searched it in any fashion, and nothing is missing. There is no evidence
of disarray anywhere else in the home. The home security system is off, and the front
door was unlocked upon the arrival of the husband. There are no bloodied weapons in
the scene or unbloodied items that would be consistent with the blunt force injuries.
Based upon the initial information presented, there are three events readily recog-
nized: entry, strangulation assault, and final blunt trauma assault. It is always possible
that there are additional events, such as a search of the house or some other post-
incident behavior by the perpetrator. Lacking evidence of such activity, however, we
confine ourselves to what the initial scene suggests until other evidence presents itself.

Step 2: Establish Event Segments from the Data Available

By considering all of the information available, the analyst begins to define specific aspects
of the reconstruction. The order in which these event segments are identified is totally ran-
dom. Event segments are identified through evaluation of forensic reports, photographs,
sketches, and examination of physical evidence. Oftentimes, when developing the event
segments, the investigator will find it beneficial to work data regarding one area of the
scene at a time. This will help reduce the randomness of developing the event segments and
make it easier for the analyst to make sense of the bigger picture.
Event segments can be defined by the presence of specific evidence, by the interre-
lationships of that evidence, or by scientific analysis of that evidence. For example, in a
shooting scene, a bullet recovered from the wall of a scene indicates a gunshot event associ-
ated with that area. The defect created by the bullet may point to a specific trajectory within
the room. That trajectory, in consideration of the presence of ejected shell casings, may
support the general location from which the gunshot was fired. The wound track identi-
fied in the ME’s (medical examiner) report, of a perforating gunshot injury, along with the
presence of a spatter pattern in the scene, may identify the orientation of the victim at that
moment. Finally, an analysis of the casing and recovered bullet, at the very least, will iden-
tify the nature of the weapon involved. If specific weapons were seized, scientific analysis
may identify or refute that a specific weapon was the wounding agent. Each of these items
defines part of the snapshots of what transpired during the incident. The analyst describes
event segments as objectively as possible, eliminating inference and any subjective associa-
tion. Each will have a specific basis, grounded in physical evidence, that allows the analyst
to lay claim to its existence.
You will recall that we said the analyst applies scientific method in pursuing the anal-
ysis. Scientific method is about asking and answering questions. Very specific context-
driven questions will arise from the analysis, but long before they appear, there are four
basic questions that must be answered with regard to each and every object found in the
scene. These questions lead the analyst to recognition that a given event segment exists.
These questions are:
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 427

Blood transfer on
phone handset

Panties (folded) Closet

under lotion bottle
Spilled coffee Towel w/coffee stain

409 Terry cloth cover-up

House slippers

Hair brush
W 315
N
270 0
Blood transfers

Palm down
225 45

Palm up
180 E 90
S
135

Neck tie 0 1' 0" 2' 0"

Shoes
Approximate scale

Direction of blood spatter

Master bedroom

Bloody
Closet
footprint

Towel rack

Shower

Figure 14.5  The crime scene sketch of the scene depicted in Figures 14.6 through 14.9. (Courtesy
of Oklahoma City Police Department Crime Scene Investigation Unit. With permission.)

• What is it?
• What function did it serve?
• What interrelationships exist between the item and other items?
• What does it tell us about time and sequence?

What it is is usually quite simple. It is a shell casing, a swipe pattern, or a bullet hole.
But objects and artifacts will be encountered that are not easily understood or recognized.
What function it served is an important question as well. Not every object in the scene will
be used as it was originally designed. What interrelationships exist between this object and
every other item in the scene? These relationships may be physical, temporal, or spatial. This
428 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

question often requires significant effort. What this item tells us about time or sequence
deals with temporal associations and provides order and flow to the overall analysis. As
simple as this may seem, answering this question can become extremely convoluted.
As every aspect of the physical evidence and scene is examined and these questions
posed, any number of event segments may be discovered and documented. How many are
discovered is a matter of how detailed the investigator is, how much evidence exists, and
how well it was documented.

Case Example: Defining Event Segments

In reviewing the scene (see Figures 14.6 through 14.9) and discussing the autopsy with
the ME, we can establish the following event segments:

The killer, prior to alarming the victim, obtained the ties.

A spatter-producing event involving the victim occurred low to the floor while
the cabinet door was open.
A significant volume of blood was deposited onto the floor, creating a coagu-
lated pool.
The white rug was displaced.
The blood pool was disturbed.
The hair dryer and towel were deposited on the floor.
The lamp was deposited on the floor unplugged.
The victim was left in her final position.
The spray bottle was deposited on the lamp.
The hairbrush was deposited on the lamp cord.
The victim was struck multiple times with an unknown heavy object that had
distinct angled edges (ME report).

Figure 14.6  A view of the bathroom. A significant volume of blood has pooled on the floor
and was subsequently disturbed. (Courtesy of Oklahoma City Police Department Crime Scene
Investigation Unit. With permission.)
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 429

Figure 14.7  Event segments defined by this area of the bathroom include a spatter event near
the floor while the cabinet door was open. (Courtesy of Oklahoma City Police Department
Crime Scene Investigation Unit. With permission.)

Figure 14.8  Event segments defined by this area include movement of the white rug after the
pooling of the blood. (Courtesy of Oklahoma City Police Department Crime Scene Investigation
Unit. With permission.)

The victim was strangled from behind with a ligature, consistent with the ties,
which would have immobilized her (ME report).
The blunt force weapon was removed from the scene.

These event segments may or may not be significant to the investigation, and they
are developed in no specific order or with any association. Obviously, when dealing
with the entire scene, the number of event segments would increase significantly.
430 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Figure 14.9  A significant number of relational and sequencing aspects are evident in this pho-
tograph. Consider the positions and layering evident by the lamp, the lamp cord, the hairbrush,
the spray bottle, and the victim’s final position. The hairdryer is located beneath the white
towel at the top of the picture. (Courtesy of Oklahoma City Police Department Crime Scene
Investigation Unit. With permission.)

Step 3: Define Associated Event Segments

As the event segments are developed, the analyst looks for associations between the vari-
ous event segments and events. Once all of the segments are identified, the analyst reviews
the entire product for any associations that may have been missed. It is here that events
assist the reconstruction. The analyst will make associations of the various event seg-
ments to the events, breaking the mass of data into manageable chunks of information.
Occasionally, specific event segments will be misidentified, or the analyst will not recog-
nize what, if any, association exists. As the process continues, misidentification of event
segments will become evident, and their rightful place in the reconstruction will be found.
In some instances, however, the analyst will have no idea as to how or in what manner the
segment relates to the incident. There will be little doubt that the event segment occurred,
but its context in the overall incident may not be understood.

Case Example: Define Associated Event Segments

After identifying the event segments, we must find associated event segments. As
discussed, our definition of events may change in the light of additional information
discovered through recognition of event segments. In this scene, we need to add an
event—post-incident actions—to describe actions that clearly occurred subsequent to
the murder. After making this change, we can identify the following associations.

Strangulation assault:
The ties were obtained prior to alarming the victim.
The hair dryer and towel were deposited on the floor.
The lamp was deposited on the floor unplugged.
The victim was left in her final position.
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 431

The victim was strangled from behind with a ligature, consistent with the ties,
which would have immobilized her (ME report).
Final blunt trauma assault:
A spatter-producing event occurred low to the floor while the cabinet door
was open.
A significant volume of blood was deposited onto the floor, creating a coagu-
lated pool.
The victim was struck multiple times with an unknown heavy object that had
distinct angled edges (ME report).
The blunt force weapon was removed from the scene.
Post-incident actions:
The white rug was displaced.
The blood pool was disturbed.
Event segments that have no clear association:
The spray bottle was deposited on the lamp.
The hairbrush was deposited on the lamp.

These last two segments may be associated with the initial assault, or they could be
some form of post-incident actions. Lacking a specific association, they are kept sepa-
rate for the time being.

Step 4: Order and Sequence the Associated Event Segments

Reconstruction considers not only that specific actions occurred during a crime, but also
the order in which they occurred. By considering a variety of data elements, this chro-
nology of sequence between respective event segments can be identified. This sequencing
information can be self-evident, or it can be quite subtle. For example, a wound must occur
before bleeding can begin. Bleeding must occur before a bloodstain is deposited, and the
bloodstain must exist before a subsequent action can disturb it. The sequence of wound,
bleeding, and deposition of blood is self-evident, but the subtle differences that may allow
the analyst to recognize when the alteration of the bloodstain occurred may be anything
but evident.
The chronology of event segments provides form to what would otherwise be a mass
of information. Imagine a book in which all of the paragraphs were simply jumbled. No
one could read and fully understand the story. Chronology puts order to the actions.
This chronology of the event segments is defined in two ways: either as absolute chronol-
ogy or relative chronology. Absolute chronology is related to timing aspects. When did
the event segment occur? In this era of computer-aided dispatch (CAD) systems, there is
often a wealth of information regarding when specific actions occurred. For example, it
is possible to compare the time of a 911 call with the background noise and description
of what is occurring, creating an absolute chronology. Although not common, when
evaluated such information is often revealing. Relative chronology, on the other hand, is
the sequencing of event segments in relation to one another. Relative chronology is the
true backbone of the reconstruction. Relative chronology speaks only to what precedes
or what follows a given segment, with no association to absolute time. Borrowing on
concepts from archeology, the analyst considers the event segments in an effort to define
those that must have preceded another event segment (known as terminus ante quem),
432 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Defining Relative Chronology

The brush is on top of the lamp, therefore it had

to have been placed there after the lamp.

The victim is on top of the cord, therefore the cord

had to have been there before the victim.

The orientation of the spray bottle and the victim’s

shoe and slipper suggest they occurred near
simultaneous to each other.

V’s Final Ante

Post Position Cord V’s Final
Lamp Brush
Position Placement Peri Position Position
Spray
Position

Figure 14.10  Relative chronology is defined by three associations. An action can precede
another action (terminus ante quem), an action can follow another action (terminus post quem),
or two or more actions can be near simultaneous (terminus peri quem).

those that must have followed another event segment (terminus post quem), and those
that were likely simultaneous event segments (terminus peri quem) (see Figure 14.10).
Rarely will sequencing information exist that allows the analyst to associate the order
of each and every event segment with every other segment. In some fashion, however,
the relative chronology of each known event segment will be evident in relation to at
least one other segment. By combining these interrelationships, the analyst will develop
a mosaic of logical order for the majority of the event segments (Figure 14.11).

Combining Chronology

V’s Final
Position

EMS
Cord Arrival
Spray
Position
Position

Lamp
Brush
Position
Placement

Figure 14.11  The most effective means of understanding and demonstrating relative chronol-
ogy is to illustrate it graphically.
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 433

Case Example: Ordering Associated Event Segments

After identifying and associating the event segments with an event, we examine the
information in an effort to identify a sequence or chronology for the event segments
(see Figure 14.12). The segments are ordered as follows:

B. Strangulation assault
1. The ties were obtained prior to alarming the victim.
2. The hair dryer and towel were deposited on the floor.
3. The lamp was deposited on the floor unplugged.
4. The victim was strangled from behind with a ligature, consistent with the
ties, which would have immobilized her (ME report).
5. The victim was left in her final position.
6. The spray bottle was deposited on the lamp.
7. The hairbrush was deposited on the lamp.

Prior to assaulting the victim, the perpetrator must obtain the ties, so this takes
the number one position, B1. The hair dryer and towel are not bloodied and are asso-
ciated with the counter adjacent to where the victim is found lying. They take posi-
tion B2. The victim was then strangled and immobilized, leading to her position on
the floor. The positioning of the spray bottle beneath the victim’s foot is very likely a

Hairbrush
Hair Lamp on lamp
dryer on on floor B7
floor B2 B3

Cord on
floor B3a Victim
in final
position
Victim B5
Ties
strangled
obtained
from behind Bottle Blood pool White rug
B1
B4 deposited disturbed displaced
on lamp D1 D2
B6

Spatter
producing
event C1 Volume of
blood pools.
C3
Victim
hit multiple
times C2

Blunt force
weapon
removed.
C4

Figure 14.12  By combining the evident relationships between actions, the investigator can
develop a mosaic of the overall incident. Although there is no specific relationship between the
presence of the hair dryer (B2) or the lamp (B3) on the floor and the victim being strangled (B4),
their relationship becomes evident through their shared relationship to the ties being obtained
(B1) and the bottle deposited on the lamp (B6).
434 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

simultaneous event to the final position of the victim. The hairbrush is on top of the
lamp, so it arrived some time after the lamp was deposited on the floor, position B3.

C. Final blunt trauma assault

1. A spatter-producing event occurred low to the floor while the cabinet door
was open.
2. The victim was struck multiple times with an unknown heavy object that
had distinct angled edges (ME report).
3. A significant volume of blood was deposited onto the floor, creating a coag-
ulated pool.
4. The blunt force weapon was removed from the scene.

Before spatter can occur, there must be a wound, but in this instance we may be look-
ing at simultaneous events, given the position and immobilized victim. After wound-
ing, a large volume of blood bled out into the scene, producing the pool. Sometime
subsequent to the attack, the wounding agent was removed from the scene.

D. Post-incident actions
1. The blood pool was disturbed.
2. The white rug was displaced.

The blood pool was exposed to the environment for some time prior to its distur-
bance. The pool has limits, indicating it extended to the original position of the rug and
that the pool saturated the rug. The rug was then displaced to the northeast.
The relative chronology presented by this information is not a simple linear series of
events (e.g., 1 through 5), and the only functional way to sort them out is to graph them,
as seen in Figure 14.12.

Step 5: Audit the Information

From the moment that order between two or more event segments is defined until the
completion of the report, the analyst constantly checks and challenges his or her beliefs.
Auditing is the process of looking beyond the obvious to try and validate or refute previous
conclusions. It is often the case that contradictory evidence suggests multiple variations
of order or even associations. Step 5 is a process that, once begun, really never stops. The
addition or consideration of some new piece of data or data relationships may allow the
analyst to better define a sequence or eliminate a sequence that was previously defined. The
most important aspect of this step is to take a position completely opposite of your original
opinion. Auditing only works when you actively try to prove yourself incorrect.

Step 6: Determine and Final-Order the Events

The reader may recall that a certain level of assumption was introduced when defining
the events. Events are rarely defined by hard facts in the initial stages, yet they are often
self-evident. After working through the event segments, the order and nature of the events
will be far more evident. This may demand redefining the events or even reordering the
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 435

events. The information derived from the event segment analysis will provide the basis for
reordering or revisiting the events.

Step 7: Final Flowchart of the Overall Incident Based

on the Event and Event Segment Sequence
The incident develops in the form of specific actions, ordered and sequenced as effectively
as possible. Flowcharting is graphically representing the order of the event segments; this
begins in step 4 and continues throughout the process. To validate and audit the analysis
and make it understandable to an audience, the analyst must physically chart out the recon-
struction. This ordering cannot be dealt with in the mind alone. Figure 14.12 is just a small
part of the entire flowchart from the case example. The final step of the reconstruction
effort is to validate the flowchart, looking to ensure that no logical errors have been missed.
The end product of event analysis is a defined outline of what can objectively be con-
cluded as having occurred during the incident. The only things included on the flowchart
are objective aspects. The analyst may have event segments or sequencing information that
he or she believes is correct but cannot objectively establish. This information is not forgot-
ten, as it may be helpful in developing an overall theory of the crime, but it is not included
in the final flowchart.
Care must be taken to protect the objectivity of any crime scene analysis, particularly
when the investigating officer is the one conducting the analysis. A crime scene analysis
will define both factual evidence and opinion evidence. It is imperative that the analyst
knows the difference. From the photo in Figure 14.9, it is a fact that the lamp and cord were
in their final position prior to the final positioning of the victim. There are no options.
Whether the spray bottle and victim’s final position are a simultaneous action is not an
absolute fact; it is an opinion. The totality of the objective evidence suggests that they were
simultaneous, but it is possible the bottle’s positioning preceded the victim’s final position.
Granted this detail may not be of great importance, but it is still an opinion. To make the
flowchart more objective, the two items could easily be separated, rather than presenting
them as simultaneous.
Another aspect of maintaining objectivity is that the analysis report will, for the most
part, be anonymous with regard to suspects. For example, given a circumstance where
“Joe” is caught after a murder and a pair of boots in his possession have spatter containing
the victim’s DNA, Joe’s name would not appear on the analysis. A resulting event seg-
ment might read, “The brown boots were in proximity to a forceful impact involving the
victim.” Granted Joe may well have been wearing the boots, but the analyst has no way of
objectively establishing this. Thus the crime scene analyst cannot invade the jury’s domain
of deciding guilt. This is true even if the investigator knows that statements made by Joe
and other evidence implicate him. Additional care should be exercised when identification
evidence is encountered that is associated with a suspect. Fingerprints, blood, or other
body fluids may well establish the presence of the individual in the scene, but that does
not tell us everything that he or she was doing at the time. The analyst cannot presume
the nature of that presence. Let us continue the previous example and say that in the crime
scene a bloody fingerprint is located. The fingerprint belongs to the suspect Joe. Based on
this evidence, a resulting event segment might read, “Subsequent to bloodshed, Joe was in
contact with the victim’s blood while present in the scene.” Granted, the evidence against
Joe is certainly starting to stack up, but the analyst has no objective evidence to prove that
436 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

Joe was in the scene wearing the boots and killing the victim. Trust the jury to make sense
of this. Unless some specific identification evidence places a suspect in the scene or asso-
ciated with the evidence, the name of the suspect should not be included in the analysis
report. When such evidence does exist, the analyst should use caution in claiming what the
evidence proves the suspect was doing.
The use of event analysis is varied. First and foremost, it provides a backdrop that the
investigative team can use to test investigative theories. It is also effective when used to
evaluate testimony and confessions, helping to identify individuals who may not be telling
all or telling the truth. It is important to remember that the scientific method is best for
excluding things rather than identifying the one right answer. But exclusion always adds
clarity. In evaluating a theory or statement, if the information presented contradicts the
analysis, the theory or statement is excluded as having occurred in that particular fash-
ion. Thus the theory must be reexamined or the statement giver must be reinterviewed
to understand the contradiction. If resolution is not possible, the theory or statement is
invalid and excluded by the physical evidence.
On the other hand, the statement or theory may match up to each and every aspect of
the known reconstruction. That does not prove that the theory or statement is the “one and
only right answer.” It merely establishes that the theory or statement is possible given the
circumstances. Remember that a reconstruction routinely provides only a skeleton of facts
about what transpired. There are always holes or blank spots, areas where there are no sup-
porting data or facts to identify what was going on. Take the spray bottle in Figure 14.9. Why
is it in the scene, and when was it placed there? For every person who might choose to look
at that issue, there is an equal number of ways to fill in the answer. Was the bottle part of a
post-incident cleanup? Or was it placed there the day before and forgotten and is now sim-
ply a coincidental artifact? The totality of objective evidence would support either theory.
Without specific facts to evaluate the issue, we cannot exclude either possibility. As a result,
a reconstruction can routinely present a situation in which there may be any number of
possible scenarios that, although similar, are also materially significant in their differences.
This is the dilemma of reconstruction. In each and every case, we are presented with
only so many pieces of the puzzle, and no matter how hard we work there will always be
blank spots. These blank spots will be of a nature that the analyst will have little, if any,
idea as to the associated actions. Forget concise theories; forget stories that play out from
start to finish; this simply is not the case in crime scene analysis. But from the pieces
presented, we have an obligation and duty to derive the most objective picture possible.
The methodology of event analysis allows the investigator to create an objective picture
of specific elements of the crime or incident. Armed with this information, the investiga-
tor can resolve issues relating to investigative theories; evaluate statements by witnesses,
suspects, and victims; and when necessary, provide a firmly grounded opinion in court of
what took place.

Summary

The possession of data in no way implies an understanding of what those data really mean.
Collecting evidence and then failing to consider the context and interrelationships of the
various items of evidence in the scene creates a similar circumstance. Thus the final step
of crime scene investigation is to conduct an analysis. There are two forms of analysis. The
The Role of Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction 437

forensic scientist or technician conducts the first at the crime lab. From this effort, more
refined data regarding the evidence are established. Once this is complete, the second form
of analysis—a crime scene analysis—is possible.
Crime scene analysis, crime scene reconstruction, and event analysis are synonymous.
They refer to a process of evaluating objective evidence (the physical evidence and its con-
text) in an effort to define specific actions that occurred. Once defined, these actions are
considered against one another in an attempt to order and sequence them. The appropriate
vehicle for conducting crime analysis has and always will be scientific method. Scientific
method begins with a question, followed by a collection of data to resolve the question. The
analyst puts forth a hypothesis, an educated guess as to the answer to the question. In order
to test the hypothesis, the analyst must make predictions regarding the hypothesis and
seek additional evidence in the scene that would corroborate or refute the hypothesis. After
considering and testing all viable alternatives, the analyst defines a conclusion. In seeking
answers, the more precise the question, the more likely it is that an objective answer can be
found. The final product of a crime scene analysis is distinct from an investigative report.
It deals only with objective evidence and what that evidence can define. Subjective aspects
are excluded whenever possible from the crime scene analysis report.

Suggested Reading
Bevel, T., and Gardner, R.M., Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene
Reconstruction, 3rd ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1997.
Gardner, R.M., and Bevel, T., Practical Crime Scene Analysis and Reconstruction, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL, 2009.
Nordby, J., Dead Reckoning: The Art of Forensic Detection, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2000.
Chisum, W.J., and Rynearson, J.M., Evidence and Crime Scene Reconstruction, Rynearson, J.M., Ed.,
Shingletown, CA, 1989.

Chapter Questions
1. What are the two primary venues in which analysis is accomplished?
2. Why are context and interrelationship so important to crime scene analysis?
3. Describe the steps involved in the scientific method.
4. Crime scene analysis can be applied to two different issues. What are they?
5. Why is the manner in which an investigative question is posed so important?
6. What is the difference between relative and absolute chronology?
7. What is the basis of any defined actions (event segments) that the crime scene analyst identifies?
8. When testing investigative conclusions using event analysis, what are the two possible results?

Notes
1. Gross, H., as translated by Adams, J., Criminal Investigations: A Practical Textbook, Sweet &
Maxwell Ltd., London, 1924, p. 38.
2. Gross, H., as translated by Adams, J., Criminal Investigations: A Practical Textbook, Sweet &
Maxwell Ltd., London.
3. Association of Crime Scene Reconstruction, By-laws, www.acsr.org, 1995.
4. Bevel, T., and Gardner, R.M., Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene
Reconstruction, 2nd ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2001, pp. 45–50.
438 Practical Crime Scene Processing and Investigation, Second Edition

5. Gross, H., System der Kriminalistic, in Criminal Investigation: A Practical Textbook, Adam, J.C.,
Ed., Sweet Maxwell Ltd., London, 1924, pp. 37–38.
6. Ibid., p. 38.
7. May, L.S., Scientific Murder Investigation, Institute of Scientific Criminology, Seattle, WA, 1933,
p. 9.
8. Ibid.
9. Block, E., The Wizard of Berkeley, Coward-McCann Publishing, New York, 1958.
10. Block, E., The Wizard of Berkeley, Coward-McCann, New York, 1958, p. 44.
11. Rhodes, H., Clues and Crime, Mussery Publishing, London, 1933.
12. Kirk, P., Crime Investigation, Interscience Publishers, New York, 1953.
13. Kirk, P.L., affidavit of Paul Leland Kirk, in the Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Branch, State of
Ohio Cuyahoga County vs. Samuel H. Shepherd, No. 64571, Cuyahoga County, OH, April 26, 1955.
14. O’Hara, C.E., Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation, 4th ed., Charles C. Thomas Publishing,
Springfield, IL, 1976, pp. 20–21.
15. Op. cit., p. 58.
16. Osterburg, J.W., Criminal Investigation: A Method of Reconstructing the Past, Anderson
Publishing, Cincinnati, 1992, p. 194.
17. Chisum, W.J., and Rynearson, J.M., Evidence and Crime Scene Reconstruction, Rynearson, J.M.,
Ed., Shingletown, CA, 1989, pp. 100–108.
18. Lee, H.C., Crime Scene Investigation, Central Police University Press, Taiwan, 1994, pp. 198–200.
19. Lee, H.C., Palmbach, T., and Miller, M.T., Henry Lee’s Crime Scene Handbook, Academic Press,
San Diego, 2001, pp. 276–281.
20. Lamb, P., The Murder of Carl Chauhan: Using BPA to Clarify Events, presentation to
International Association of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts, Odessa, TX, October 2003.
21. Bevel, T., and Gardner, R.M., Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene
Reconstruction, 1st ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1997.
22. Nikolas Steno, http://academic.emporia.edu/aberjame/histgeol/steno/steno.htm, 1 Sept., 2011.
Appendix A: Crime
Scene Equipment

What ultimately ends up in a unit’s crime scene kit is very much a matter of personal pref-
erence and the organization’s operational tempo. Nevertheless, to meet any crime scene
processing task, an investigative unit should have the following items in some form or
fashion, or have near-immediate access to such items on an on-call basis. If developing
a “new” cache of equipment, begin with those items most often required and build the
equipment kits up over time.
Once an established kit is in place (whether it is mobile or kept at the office), supervi-
sors must initiate a recurring inventory and restocking procedure. This resupply should
be scheduled at a minimum twice monthly. If resupply is left to the individual technician’s
discretion, the crime scene team is guaranteed to arrive on a significant scene missing
critical items. Purchase and organize the equipment based on the way the unit operates
and to meet the environmental conditions in which the unit operates.

Basic Kits

Fingerprint Kit
Regular and magnetic powders (light and dark colors or biochromatic)
Fiberglass brushes for each color of standard powder
Magnetic brushes
Fluorescent powder
Lifting tape (both standard and 2 to 3 in. wide)
Rough-surface lifting tape
Fingerprint tape backing cards (white and black)
Hinge lifters (multiple sizes and colors of backing)
Palm adhesive lifters
Rubber or gel lifters
Silicone lifting material
Scissors
Sharp-point indelible pen
Postmortem print kit
Superglue (fuming wand, liquid, or cards)
Portable fuming chamber
Small-particle reagent

439
440 Appendix A: Crime Scene Equipment

Photography Kit
35 mm SLR or large-format digital camera with capability of:
50 mm lens
55 or 105 mm macro lens
28 mm lens
Tripod
Shutter release cable
Off-camera flash unit with diffuser
Duo-sync cord (minimum 3 ft length)
Reference scales including:
ABFO scale
6 in. white-and-black rulers
Footprint scales (e.g., Bureau scale) or folding scale
Adhesive measuring tape
Millimeter scales for close-up photographs
Adhesive numbers and letters
Paper scales (1 to 96 in.) or adhesive scaled tape
Disposable photo placards (both alpha and numeric)
Surveyor flags
High-visibility photo markers (e.g., Evipaq evidence markers or disposable Loci
Forensics arrows)
Tape, clay, or reusable rubber adhesive compound (used to attach scales in odd positions)
Spare batteries (flash and camera)
ALS filters for camera lens (orange and yellow)
Photo gray card
Lens cleaner and paper
Video camera with strobe

Casting Kit
Dental stone (prepackaged in Ziploc type containers)
Collapsible gallon water container
Expandable impression form
Spray sealant for loose soil conditions
Silicone evidence casting material (e.g., Durocast or Microsil)
Clay (used to create dams for silicone casting on vertical surfaces)
Gelatin lifters
Footwear adhesive or rubber lifters
Fingerprint roller (clean, used solely for impression evidence)
Electrostatic lifting device and film
Indelible marking pen
Tape
Consider an alternative mixing container for dental stone (e.g., rubber or plastic bowl)
Appendix A: Crime Scene Equipment 441

Mapping and Sketching Kit

Magnetic compass
Tape measures
10 to 25 ft steel or fiberglass (×2)
100 to 200 ft steel or fiberglass
Wheel or rolling tape measure
Laser measuring device
Graph paper and clipboard
Writing tablets
Pens
Appropriate straight edges and templates (e.g., Berol templates)
Body and vehicle diagrams
Preprinted evidence measurement logs
Self-adhesive sticky note pads (2 × 2 in., 2 × 4 in.) (used to set reference points)
Bold markers
2 ft rebar sections (×2) (used to set datum points)
When using baseline techniques:
100 ft wide cloth tape measure
Grading stakes
When using polar coordinates:
Sighting transit or laser with tripod
Stadia rod
When using grid techniques:
Grading stakes
Twine (used to align stakes or set grid in gravesites)
Rigid grid for gravesites

Personal Protective Gear

Tyvek suits, sleeves, booties
Face masks or particle masks
Rubber gloves (heavy duty, nonpowdered)
Cotton gloves for wear beneath rubber gloves
Goggles
Work gloves
Knee pads
Heavy-duty clothes and boots for hazardous scenes (e.g., fire scenes)
Prewet hand towels (e.g., Clorox wipes)
Paper towel
Hand sanitizer
Portable eyewash station
Sunscreen/insect repellent
Biochemical gas mask with filters
Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) gear if utilizing solvent-based techniques
on scene
442 Appendix A: Crime Scene Equipment

Scene Integrity Equipment

Barrier tape
Rope/parachute cord
Crime scene screen
If possible, crime scene tent/cover (prevents overhead observation by media)

Evidence Collection Tools

Basic tool kit containing:
Hammer
Screwdrivers
Socket set
Pliers
Crescent wrench
Saws
Pry bar
Metal detector
Inspection mirror or bore scope
Glass cutter
Forceps
EMT utility scissors (they cut almost anything)
Single-edge razor blades
Sterile swabs
Sterile disposable pipettes
Sterile disposable scalpels
Square-bladed shovel
Sieve screens

Evidence Collection Containers

Paper envelopes:
Small (change envelopes)
Medium (letter sized)
Large (manila)
Bags (paper):
Small (lunch style)
Large (grocery style)
Bags (plastic Ziploc style, various sizes)
Large plastic bags (used to containerize bloody objects until they can be returned to
a drying room)
Paper for creating pharmacist folds or glassine envelopes
Clean pill bottles
Clean plastic bottles, with screw-on lids
Indelible marking pens
Evidence tags
Butcher paper
Appendix A: Crime Scene Equipment 443

Large, 3 to 4 in. clear adhesive lifting tape (used for recovering fiber and hair evidence)
Appropriate rape evidence recovery kits (both victim and suspect)
Unused paint cans (pint and gallon) with lids
Arson bags
Evidence tape
Cardboard boxes and plastic ties (used to stabilize and containerize weapons, knives,
and similar objects)

Lighting Equipment
Utility work light (halogen) and stand
Flashlights with spare batteries
LED headlamps
Drop light (e.g., mechanic’s light)
Spare bulbs for all lighting devices
100 ft interior/exterior extension cord, with three-prong outlet
Alternative light source kit (similar in capability to the Labino Astra Torch)
Spare barrier-filter goggles for ALS

Additional Kits

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis/Enhancement Kit

5 or 10X loupe w/mm scale
Metric caliper, digital (fiberglass not metal similar to the General Tool UltraTech #1433)
ABFO scales (minimum of 6)
L/Footwear scale (minimum of 2)
Carpenters plumb (small)
7–8 m measuring tape or laser electronic distance measuring device
Metal compass
Scientific calculator
Bloodstain stringing kit
Angle finder
4 rolls of adhesive meter scale
2 rolls of 6 mm adhesive scale measures
2 rolls of large adhesive black arrows
Bluestar or similar luminol kit
Leuco-crystal violet kit
Fluorescein kit
Presumptive blood test kits
Steriwipe/handsanitizers

Trajectory Analysis Kit

Trajectory rods with lasers
Centering guides
444 Appendix A: Crime Scene Equipment

Angle finder
Plumbtesmo/Cupertesmo detection paper
10 × 10 in. white foam core square (used with laser trajectory kits)
Appendix B: Risk Management

Throughout the text, there were repeated references to hazards and risks and the efforts
needed to mitigate them. Risk is mitigated by implementing risk management. Risk man-
agement is not a euphemism for telling the crime scene team to “be careful out there.” Risk
management is a deliberate effort to identify hazards, assess the significance of those haz-
ards, and then implement controls to mitigate the risk and reduce the probability of injury
or harm. Risk management is employed across industry, the military, and other organiza-
tions as a method of increasing the safety of personnel.
Risk management has four basic tenets:

1. Begin managing risk in the planning stages of an event: Before one engages in a
specific activity, it is useful to sit down in advance and identify potential hazards.
When planners know and consider the hazards in advance, control measures are
more deliberate and thought out more thoroughly, and thus they are more likely to
resolve the risk. Hasty attempts to deal with a risk during an activity may or may
not resolve the problem. Oftentimes, such spur-of-the-moment responses result in
what the military refers to as being overcome by events (OBE).
2. Accept no unnecessary risk: Unnecessary risk is generally considered to be a willful
engagement in a hazardous activity for which an obvious control measure exists.
Driving a car without buckling the seat belt is an unnecessary risk. We all have
to take our chances on the highways, but there is no rational reason for doing
so without using readily available safety equipment. Entering a biohazard crime
scene without using available protective gloves and suits is clearly an example of
unnecessary risk.
3. Make risk management decisions at the right level: Although supervisors are ulti-
mately responsible for everything their subordinates do, there is no reason to allow
less experienced subordinates to make critical decisions on managing risk. One
might read into that statement and assume that risk management endorses micro-
management, where only the boss makes decisions. This is hardly the case. Risk
management simply sets logical and appropriate levels of authority based on a full
consideration of the nature of the risk. If the potential effect of a hazard is cata-
strophic, then an individual with the appropriate level of experience and training
should decide how to respond to the risk. One would not allow a rookie officer to
make the green-light call for a SWAT sniper, any more than one would allow a young
technician to independently decide that it was safe to enter an unstable building.
4. Accept risk only when the benefits outweigh the costs: In policing, much as in the
military, real-life dangers are a part of the culture. The police cannot walk away
from a hostage scene and say, “Not my problem,” any more than they can say,
“That scene is bloody and I’m not working it.” The mission must be accomplished.
Weighing risks and benefits demands a consideration of the mission and the neces-
sity of activity. But even with a necessitating circumstance, some risks are simply
445
446 Appendix B: Risk Management

too significant to take. An excellent crime scene example is the methamphetamine

lab. The scene must be processed, but unless trained personnel are on scene, this is
not a risk any sane supervisor is willing to chance.

These four tenets provide an underlying theory for risk management. Depending upon
which authority you consult, risk management is accomplished in four to five practical
steps. For the purposes of this text, the process will be presented in four steps:

Step 1: Hazard identification. Any activity poses some form of risk. Walking on the
street, taking a bath, dancing—all have possible consequences. Work activities and
certainly those involving hazardous environments have evident risks. Supervisors
analyze the operations involved in their organization’s mission by considering the
normal course of personnel activities. From this analysis, they identify common
forms of hazards that may be associated with these activities. Many of the haz-
ards associated with crime scenes were discussed in Chapter 5. Inhalation hazards,
biohazard exposure, and unstable structures are just a few of the obvious risks
associated with scene processing. These hazards are considered in advance of the
activity, as they are common to many scenes. Although preplanning is important,
on-scene hazard identification is necessary as well and is an integral part of ongo-
ing assessment of the crime scene. Unique situations and environments or other
circumstances can result in new hazards not previously considered. Hazard iden-
tification requires constant vigilance.
Step 2: Risk assessment. Once a hazard is identified, it must be assessed for two spe-
cific issues. The first consideration is the potential effect of the hazard. Generally,
hazard effects are classified as negligible, moderate, critical, or catastrophic. This
classification speaks to the danger posed by the hazard to both personnel and the
mission. The second consideration is how probable or likely it is that the hazard will
occur. Typical classifications for probability include frequent, likely, occasionally,
seldom, unlikely. These two classifications can be combined to provide an overall
risk assessment, as seen in Figure B.1. This matrix classifies the overall assessment
of the risk in four values: extreme, high, medium, and low. Consider the example
of the methamphetamine lab. Handled by untrained individuals, these scenes are
literally bombs waiting to go off, so the hazard probability is likely. The hazard
effect can be catastrophic to personnel. Together, these two classifications define
an extreme risk.
Step 3: Risk control and mitigation. One cannot eliminate risks altogether, but by
taking certain steps we can make most activities safer. Once a risk is identified,
control measures are considered as a means of reducing the probability that the
hazard may occur, or of reducing the effect of the hazard on personnel. Control
measures can be simple or elaborate, depending upon the nature of the hazard. As
in the case of the methamphetamine lab, the control measure is simply to leave the
scene and wait for a trained team.
Step 4: Supervision of controls. Control measures often include defined levels of deci-
sion authority specifying who can override a control measure or allow a procedure
to go ahead in the face of the risk. For medium and low risks, the decision author-
ity is generally low. As the risk assessment increases to high or extreme, the deci-
sion authority is usually placed at a much higher supervisory level. Returning to
Appendix B: Risk Management 447

Risk Assessment Matrix

Hazard Probability

Frequent Likely Occasional Seldom Unlikely

Catastrophic Extreme Extreme High High Medium

Hazard Effect

Critical Extreme High High Medium Low

Moderate High Medium Medium Low Low

Negligible Medium Low Low Low Low

Figure B.1  Considering both the likelihood that a given hazard will occur and the effect that
the hazard would create, the matrix provides an overall risk assessment of the hazard. For
instance, if the hazard were considered to be an event that seldom occurs but had a moderate
effect, the overall risk assessment would be low. On the other hand, if hazard had a moderate
effect but frequently occurred, the assessment would be high. This assessment helps the super-
visor decide where to place his or her priorities in reducing risks and to define at what level a
risk management decision can be made.

the methamphetamine lab example, the on-scene technician should not have the
authority to override the control measure of “leave and wait for a trained team.”
If that decision were to be questioned and the control measure perhaps ignored,
a much higher level of authority would have to make the decision because of the
probable dangerous consequences of ignoring the control measure.

Risk assessment and control measures look good on paper, but risk management
is accomplished only through supervision and leadership. Once a control measure has
been identified and a level of decision authority has been defined, then everyone in the
organization must be held accountable. If a control measure is put in place stating that
“all personnel will wear appropriate PPE (personal protective equipment) in a biohazard
scene,” then everyone is expected to abide by the control measure. It is in the supervision
step that risk management almost always fails. Supervisors will either ignore established
control measures or release decision authority to subordinates. Far too often, this results
in injury for a hazard that had previously been assessed and for which control measures
had been identified.
From a practical perspective, many risk management decisions are based on an opera-
tional analysis of the organization, and these decisions end up being incorporated into a set
of standard operating procedures (SOPs). Of course, ad hoc risk management is still neces-
sary for unique hazards that present themselves on scene, but these are dealt with by the
appropriate supervisor. If necessary, the lessons learned from dealing with these unique
hazards can be incorporated into the SOP or documented for future reference in the form
of an after-action report.
448 Appendix B: Risk Management

Risk management is an absolute responsibility for supervisors at every level. If high-

level supervisors (including the chief) fail to act on risk management procedures, lower-
level supervisors and certainly on-scene supervisors must take action. There is no excuse for
sending crime scene personnel into hazardous situations without at least considering how
to make the situation less dangerous. Risk management should be an integral part of an
organization’s mindset. Supervisors have a distinct responsibility to manage risk, but every
member of the organization should recognize and use risk management procedures. To
accomplish this goal, risk management should be a part of in-service training for all officers.
NAL JUSTICE
FORENSICS & CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Gardner
Second Edition Second Edition

CRIME
PRACTICAL
SCENE PCROCESSING
RIME S CENEAND
PROCESSING
INVESTIGATION
AND I NVESTIGATION

PRACTICAL CRIME SCENE PROCESSING AND INVESTIGATION

Ross M. Gardner Ross M. Gardner

it is essential
“I am convinced
that all officers
it is essential
and investigative
that all officers
personnel
and investigative
have a solidpersonnel have a solid
professionally
understanding
accepted
of professionally
crime scene protocols
acceptedincrime
orderscene
that their
protocols
agency
in order that their agency
antagecan of today's
take fullsophisticated
advantage oflaboratory
today's sophisticated
techniques and
laboratory
technologies.
techniques and technologies.
ay a significant
This bookrole
caninplay
helping
a significant
responsible,
role in
concerned
helping responsible,
individuals realize
concerned individuals realize
that objective.”
—Eugene R. Cromartie, Deputy
—Eugene
Executive
R. Cromartie,
Director/Chief
DeputyofExecutive
Staff Director/Chief of Staff
International Association ofInternational
Chiefs of Police
Association of Chiefs of Police
Major General (Ret), United
Major
States
General
Army Criminal
(Ret), United
Investigation
States Army
Command
Criminal Investigation Command

weakestAlllink
tooinoften,
the chain
the weakest
of criminal
link justice
in the chain
is the ofcrime
criminal
scenejustice
investigation.
is the crime scene investigation.
n of evidence
Improper blocks
collection
the finding
of evidence
of truth.blocks
Nowthein its
finding
second
of edition,
truth. Now in its second edition, Practical
Practical
ocessingCrime
andScene
Investigation
Processingpresents
and practical, proven
Investigation presents
methods practical,
to be usedproven methods to be used
e to ensure
at anythat
crime
evidence
sceneistoadmissible
ensure thatandevidence
persuasive.
is admissible and persuasive.

more than
Accompanied
300 color photographs,
by more than topics
300 color
discussed
photographs,
include: topics discussed include:
he nature
•Understanding
of physical evidence,
the nature
including
of physical
fingerprint,
evidence,
biological,
includingtrace,
fingerprint, biological, trace,
nd otherhair
forms
and
of fiber,
evidence
and other forms of evidence
sponding
•Actions
officer,offrom
the responding
documentingofficer,
and securing
from documenting
the initial information
and securing
to the initial information to
ency care
providing emergency care
ene, including
•Assessing
search
theconsiderations
scene, including
and
search
dealing
considerations
with chemical
and
and
dealing with chemical and
ds bioterror hazards
otography,
•Crime
sketching,
scene photography,
mapping, and sketching,
notes and mapping,
reports and notes and reports
and preserving
•Light technology
fingerprint
andand
preserving
impression
fingerprint
evidence and impression evidence
documentation
•Shootingandscene
reconstruction
documentation and reconstruction
rn analysis
•Bloodstain
and the pattern
body asanalysis
a crime and
scene
the body as a crime scene
onsiderations,
•Specialincluding
scene considerations,
fire, buried bodies,
including
and entomological
fire, buried bodies,
evidence
and entomological evidence
e scene•The
analysis
roleand
of crime
reconstruction,
scene analysis
with step-by-step
and reconstruction,
procedures
with step-by-step procedures

rovide additional
Two appendices
information
provide
onadditional
crime sceneinformation
equipmentonand
crime
riskscene
management,
equipment and risk management,
is enhanced
and each by chapter
a succinct
is enhanced
summary, by suggested
a succinct
readings,
summary, andsuggested
a series of readings, and a Second
series of
ssimilation
questions
of the to
material.
test assimilation
Using thisofbook
the material.
in your investigations
Using this book
willinhelp
youryou Edition
investigations will help you
pened and
find who
out what
is responsible.
happened and who is responsible.
K12444 K12444

6000 Broken Sound Parkway, NW 6000 Broken Sound Parkway, NW

Suite 300, Boca Raton, FL 33487 Suite 300, Boca Raton, FL 33487
711 Third Avenue 711 Third Avenue
iness New York,anNY 10017 business
informa New York, NY 10017
2 Park Square, Milton
c r c pPark 2 Park Square, Milton Park
ss.com w w w. ress.com
Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN, UK w w w . c r c p r e s s . cw
Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN, UK owmw . c r c p r e s s . c o m