DOCSLIB.ORG

Crime Scene Investigation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Crime Scene Investigation A Guide for Law Enforcement research report U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street N.W. Washington, DC 20531 Janet Reno Attorney General Daniel Marcus Acting Associate Attorney General Laurie Robinson Assistant Attorney General Noël Brennan Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jeremy Travis Director, National Institute of Justice Department of Justice Response Center 800–421–6770 Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice World Wide Web Site World Wide Web Site http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij Cover photograph of man on the ground by Corbis Images. Other cover photographs copyright © 1999 PhotoDisc, Inc. Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for Law Enforcement Written and Approved by the Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation January 2000 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Jeremy Travis, J.D. Director Richard M. Rau, Ph.D. Project Monitor This document is not intended to create, does not create, and may not be relied upon to create any rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by any party in any matter civil or criminal. Opinions or points of view expressed in this document are a consensus of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. NCJ 178280 The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Jus- tice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Message From the Attorney General ctions taken at the outset of an investigation at a crime scene can Aplay a pivotal role in the resolution of a case. Careful, thorough investigation is key to ensure that potential physical evidence is not tainted or destroyed or potential witnesses overlooked. While many agencies have programs in crime scene processing, the level of training and resources available varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, as does the opportunity to practice actual investigation. To help these agencies, the National Institute of Justice supported the development of this guide. I commend the hard work of the 44 members of the technical working group that created this guide. They are representative of law enforcement, the prosecution, the defense, and forensic science, and their collective expert knowledge, experience, and dedication to the task made this effort a success. The guide is one method of promoting quality crime scene investigation. The type and scope of a crime scene investigation will vary from case to case. Jurisdictions will want to carefully consider the procedures in this guide and their applicability to local agencies and circumstances. Janet Reno Attorney General iii Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation he Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation T (TWGCSI) is a multidisciplinary group of content-area experts from across the United States, from both urban and rural jurisdictions, each representing his or her respective agency or practice. Each of these individuals is experienced in the area of crime scene investigation and evidence collection in the criminal justice system from the standpoints of law enforcement, prosecution, defense, or forensic science. At the outset of the TWGCSI effort, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) created a planning panel—composed of distinguished law enforce- ment, legal, and science professionals—to define needs, to develop initial strategies, and to steer the larger group. Additional members of the technical working group were then selected from recommendations solicited from the planning panel, NIJ’s regional National Law Enforce- ment and Corrections Technology Centers, and national organizations including the American Academy of Forensic Science, National District Attorneys Association, National Association of Criminal Defense Law- yers, National Legal Aid and Defender Association, International Asso- ciation of Chiefs of Police, National Sheriffs’ Association, International Association for Identification, and the American Association of Crime Laboratory Directors/Laboratory Accreditation Board. Collectively, over a 1-year period, the 44 members of TWGCSI listed below worked together to develop this guide, Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for Law Enforcement. National Crime Scene Planning Panel (NCSPP) Dr. Jose R. Almirall Susan Ballou Paul Carroll Associate Director and Forensic Scientist Sergeant (Ret.) Assistant Professor Montgomery County Police Chicago Police Department International Forensic Research Department Big Pine Key, Florida Institute Crime Laboratory Department of Chemistry Rockville, Maryland Florida International University Miami, Florida v Elizabeth Farris Larry McCann Ann Talbot Chief Trial Counsel Senior Special Agent (Ret.) ASCLD/LAB Hampden County District Virginia State Police Albuquerque Police Department Attorney’s Office Richmond, Virginia Albuquerque, New Mexico Springfield, Massachusetts Dr. Joseph L. Peterson James T. “Tom” Thurman Jo Ann Given Department of Criminal Justice Associate Professor ASCLD/LAB University of Illinois College of Law Enforcement Naval Criminal Investigative Chicago, Illinois Eastern Kentucky University Service Richmond, Kentucky Norfolk, Virginia Elliot B. Spector Director Marjorie Harris Center for Police and Security Forensic Scientist, Senior Training Department of Criminal Justice Suffield, Connecticut Division of Forensic Science Richmond, Virginia Additional Technical Working Group Members Hal R. Arenstein James Estrada Robert Mullins Attorney at Law Detective Investigator Detective Law Offices of Hal Arenstein Homicide Unit Investigative Services Cincinnati, Ohio San Antonio Police Department New Haven Police Department San Antonio, Texas New Haven, Connecticut Dexter J. Bartlett Inspector Drew Findling Steve Nash Illinois State Police Attorney Detective Crime Scene Services Command Atlanta, Georgia Marin County Sheriff’s Joliet, Illinois Department Nan Horvat/John Sarcone San Rafael, California Eric Buel Assistant Polk County Attorney/ Director Polk County Attorney Kathryn Normington- Department of Public Safety Des Moines, Iowa Hollenbach Crime Laboratory Senior Forensic Scientist Waterbury, Vermont N. Michael Hurley Wyoming State Crime Regional Director Laboratory Jeff Cover Oregon State Police Cheyenne, Wyoming Supervisor, Crime Scene Unit Forensic Services Division Anne Arundel County Police Springfield, Oregon Galen Paine Department Assistant Public Defender Millersville, Maryland Gary L. Kaldun Public Defender’s Office Forensic Scientist, Crime Sitka, Alaska Elizabeth Devine Scene Coordinator Supervising Criminalist Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Michael J. Rafferty Scientific Services Bureau St. Paul, Minnesota Chief of Forensics Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Florida Department of Law Department Joe Marchan Enforcement Los Angeles, California Supervising Criminalist Fort Myers Regional Operations Texas Department of Public Center Henry Escobar Safety Crime Laboratory Fort Myers, Florida Detective McAllen, Texas San Antonio Police Department Eugene Rifenburg San Antonio, Texas Joseph John Moseley, II Senior Investigator (Ret.) Detective New York State Police Jerry N. Estes Central Homicide Evaluation Investigator (current) District Attorney General Support Squad Oneida Nation Police 10th Judicial District Chicago Police Department Munnsville, New York Athens, Tennessee Chicago, Illinois vi Gary A. Rini Clarene Shelley Stephen Weichman Police Commander (Ret.) Lieutenant County and Prosecuting Director Lakewood Police Department Attorney The American Institute for Lakewood, Colorado Teton County Police Science Jackson, Wyoming Elkhorn, Nebraska Gregory Smith Assistant County Prosecutor James Wiser Heidi Robbins Office of the County Prosecutor Crime Scene Investigator/ Supervising Criminalist Camden County Evidence Custodian Scientific Services Bureau Camden, New Jersey Mount Pleasant Police Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Department Richard Stanek Mount Pleasant, South Carolina Los Angeles, California Captain Minneapolis Police Department Larry Wood Darrell Ryan Minneapolis, Minnesota Detective Lieutenant Major Case Unit Nashville Police Department Brad Townsend Smyrna Police Department Nashville, Tennessee Sergeant Smyrna, Georgia Corona Police Department Norman Shapiro Corona, California John Yarbrough Vice President, New York Sergeant State Defender’s Association Larry Turner Homicide Bureau Counselor at Law Director of Forensic Services Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Law Offices of Norman Shapiro Jackson Police Department Department Middletown, New York Crime Laboratory Commerce, California Jackson, Mississippi vii Acknowledgments he National Institute of Justice (NIJ) wishes to thank the Technical T Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation (TWGCSI) for their dedication and endurance. This 44-member network of experts from a variety of backgrounds gave their time to draft and review the guide, providing feedback from all areas of the Nation. The true strength of this document is derived from the commitment of the TWG members to produce a guide that could be implemented across the country, from small, rural townships to large, metropolitan areas. In addition, the agencies and organizations that employ each member of the group share
Recommended publications
  • Fire and Arson Scene Evidence: a Guide for Public Safety Personnel

    Fire and Arson Scene Evidence: a Guide for Public Safety Personnel

    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice FireFire andand ArsonArson SceneScene Evidence:Evidence: A Guide for Public Safety Personnel Research Report U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street N.W. Washington, DC 20531 Janet Reno Attorney General Daniel Marcus Acting Associate Attorney General Mary Lou Leary Acting Assistant Attorney General Julie E. Samuels Acting Director, National Institute of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice World Wide Web Site World Wide Web Site http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij Fire and Arson Scene Evidence: A Guide for Public Safety Personnel Written and Approved by the Technical Working Group on Fire/Arson Scene Investigation June 2000 NCJ 181584 Julie E. Samuels Acting Director David G. Boyd, Ph.D. Deputy Director Richard M. Rau, Ph.D. Project Monitor Opinions or points of view expressed in this document represent a consensus of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Message From the Attorney General ctions taken at the outset of an investigation at a fire and Aarson scene can play a pivotal role in the resolution of a case. Careful, thorough investigation is key to ensuring that potential physical evidence is not tainted or destroyed or potential witnesses overlooked.
  • Criminal Procedure in Perspective Kit Kinports

    Criminal Procedure in Perspective Kit Kinports

    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 98 Article 3 Issue 1 Fall Fall 2007 Criminal Procedure in Perspective Kit Kinports Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Kit Kinports, Criminal Procedure in Perspective, 98 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 71 (2007-2008) This Criminal Law is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091-4169/07/9801-0071 THE JOURNALOF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY Vol, 98, No. I Copyright 0 2008 by Northwestern University, School of Law Printed in U.S.A. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE IN PERSPECTIVE KIT KINPORTS* This Article attempts to situate the Supreme Court's constitutional criminal procedure jurisprudence in the academic debates surrounding the reasonable person standard, in particular, the extent to which objective standards should incorporate a particular individual's subjective characteristics. Analyzing the Supreme Court's search and seizure and confessions opinions, Ifind that the Court shifts opportunisticallyfrom case to case between subjective and objective tests, and between whose point of view-the police officer's or the defendant's-it views as controlling. Moreover, these deviations cannot be explained either by the principles the Court claims underlie the various constitutionalprovisions at issue or by the attributes of subjective and objective tests themselves. The Article then centers on the one Supreme Court opinion in this area to address the question of "subjective" objective standards, Yarborough v.
  • Forensic Biology 205 Administration Building • 419-372-2015

    Forensic Biology 205 Administration Building • 419-372-2015

    Fall 2020 Bachelor of Science in Forensic Science Specialization in Forensic Biology 205 Administration Building • 419-372-2015 BG Perspective (BGP) Requirements FSCI Major Core Requirements (38 Hrs.) Must complete at least 1 course in each of the following: Hrs Grade English Composition and Oral Communication 4 BIOL 2040 Concepts in Biology I Course Credits 4 BIOL 2050 Concepts in Biology II 4 BIOL 3310 Human Anatomy & Physiology Quantitative Literacy 4 BIOL 3320 Human Anatomy & Physiology II _____________________________ ________ 3 CHEM 1770 Intro to Forensic Science 3 CRJU 4400 Law, Evidence, & Procedures in Must Complete at least 2 courses in each of the following: Forensic Science Humanities and the Arts 3 CRJU 4510 Criminal Justice Ethics 3 MATH 2470 Fund. of Statistics 5 PHYS 2010 or 2110 University Physics I 5 PHYS 2020 or 2120 University Physics II Natural Sciences - at least one Lab Science required FSCI Forensic Biology Specialization Requirements (16 hrs.) Social and Behavioral Sciences 4 BIOL 3500 Genetics 3 BIOL 4080 Molecular Biology 3 BIOL 4230 OR FSCI 4230 Forensic Biology Complete total required BGP credit hours by selecting courses from any 3 BIOL 4240 OR FSCI 4240 Forensic DNA Analysis of the above categories: 3 FSCI 4890 Internship OR FSCI 4990 Capstone Additional Requirements (25-26 Hrs.) These courses also fulfill the requirements for a minor in chemistry. Consult with an advisor about declaring the minor. University Requirements Designated courses in Humanities and the Arts and the Social and Behavorial Sciences
  • Cognitive Human Factors and Forensic Document Examiner Methods and Procedures Author(S): Mara L

    Cognitive Human Factors and Forensic Document Examiner Methods and Procedures Author(S): Mara L

    The author(s) shown below used Federal funding provided by the U.S. Department of Justice to prepare the following resource: Document Title: Cognitive Human Factors and Forensic Document Examiner Methods and Procedures Author(s): Mara L. Merlino, Chandler Al Namer, Taleb Al Namer, La’Quida Smith, Veronica Blas Dahir, Charles Edwards, Derek L. Hammond Document Number: 254581 Date Received: March 2020 Award Number: 2015-DN-BX-K069 This resource has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. This resource is being made publically available through the Office of Justice Programs’ National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Cognitive Human Factors and Forensic Document Examination Methods and Procedures 1 Cognitive Human Factors and Forensic Document Examiner Methods and Procedures Final Summary Overview NIJ Award Number 2015-DN-BX-K069 Principal Investigator: Mara L. Merlino Research Assistants: Chandler Al Namer, Taleb Al Namer, La’Quida Smith Kentucky State University Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 Subaward Principal Investigator: Veronica Blas Dahir Research Assistants: Charles Edwards University of Nevada, Reno Reno, Nevada 89557 Expert Consultant: Derek L. Hammond U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory Forest Park, Georgia Acknowledgements: Bryan J. Found, Victoria Police Forensic Services Department Adrian Dyer, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology Kentucky State University: Piarre Easley, Robert Olson University of Nevada, Reno: Mauricio Alvarez, J. Guillermo Villalobos, Denise Schaar Buis, Emily Wood, Chris Swinger, Chris Sanchez, Katherine Caufield Submitted to the U.S.
  • Factsheet: Pre-Trial Detention

    Factsheet: Pre-Trial Detention

    Detention Monitoring Tool Factsheet Pre-trial detention Addressing risk factors to prevent torture and ill-treatment ‘Long periods of pre-trial custody contribute to overcrowding in prisons, exacerbating the existing problems as regards conditions and relations between the detainees and staff; they also add to the burden on the courts. From the standpoint of preventing ill-treatment, this raises serious concerns for a system already showing signs of stress.’ (UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture)1 1. Definition and context 2. What are the main standards? Remand prisoners are detained during criminal Because of its severe and often irreversible negative investigations and pending trial. Pre-trial detention is effects, international law requires that pre-trial not a sanction, but a measure to safeguard a criminal detention should be the exception rather than the procedure. rule. At any one time, an estimated 3.2 million people are Pre-trial detention is only legitimate where there is a behind bars awaiting trial, accounting for 30 per cent reasonable suspicion of the person having committed of the total prison population worldwide. They are the offence, and where detention is necessary and legally presumed innocent until proven guilty but may proportionate to prevent them from absconding, be held in conditions that are worse than those for committing another offence, or interfering with the convicted prisoners and sometimes for years on end. course of justice during pending procedures. This means that pre-trial detention is not legitimate where Pre-trial detention undermines the chance of a fair these objectives can be achieved through other, less trial and the presumption of innocence.
  • Handbook of Forensic Services 2003 Table of Contents

    Handbook of Forensic Services 2003 Table of Contents

    14a forensic covers c1-c4 2/9/2004 2:35 PM Page c1 U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory Division Revised 2003 14a forensic covers c1-c4 2/9/2004 2:35 PM Page c2 Handbook of Forensic Services (revised 2003) Editor Colleen Wade Associate Editor Yvette E. Trozzi An FBI Laboratory Publication Federal Bureau of Investigation Quantico, Virginia ISBN 0-932115-18-7 Handbook of Forensic Services 2003 Table of Contents Introduction 3 Submitting Evidence 7 Evidence Examinations 13 Crime Scene Safety 133 Crime Scene Search 155 Index 169 1 Handbook of Forensic Services 2003 Introduction The purpose of the Handbook of Forensic Services is to provide guidance and procedures for safe and efficient methods of collecting, preserving, packaging, and shipping evidence and to describe the forensic examinations performed by the FBI’s Laboratory Division and Investigative Technology Division. FBI Forensic Services The successful investigation and prosecution of crimes require, in most cases, the collection, preservation, and forensic analysis of evidence. Forensic analysis of evidence is often crucial to determinations of guilt or innocence. The FBI has one of the largest and most comprehensive forensic laboratories in the world. The forensic services of the FBI Laboratory Division and the Investigative Technology Division are available to the following: ■ FBI field offices and Legal Attachés. ■ U.S. attorneys, military tribunals, and other federal agencies for civil and criminal matters. ■ State, county, and municipal law enforcement agencies in the United States 3 Handbook of Forensic Services 2003 and territorial possessions for criminal matters. All forensic services, including expert witness testimonies, are rendered free of cost; however, the following limitations apply: ■ No examination will be conducted on evidence that has been previously subjected to the same type of examination.
  • CHAPTER 83 COLLECTION and PRESERVATION of EVIDENCE DISCUSSION: This Chapter Addresses the Function of the Hattiesburg Police D

    CHAPTER 83 COLLECTION and PRESERVATION of EVIDENCE DISCUSSION: This Chapter Addresses the Function of the Hattiesburg Police D

    CHAPTER 83 COLLECTION AND PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE DISCUSSION: This chapter addresses the function of the Hattiesburg Police Department in collecting and preserving evidence. Often, in today's court environment, it is the evidence, its collection and storage that appears to be on trial rather than the defendant. This chapter provides tried and proven guidelines for the field officer and the seasoned investigator to insure that evidence is accepted by the court. This in turn strengthens the Justice System by allowing the court and/or jury to make a determination utilizing a complete set of facts. 83.1 ADMINISTRATION 83.1.1 Availability of a Crime Scene Investigator on a 24 Hour Basis A Criminal Investigator or trained crime scene investigator will be available on a twenty- four hour basis. In determining if a criminal investigator or a crime scene specialist is needed, the following sequence should be adhered to: B. If a crime scene or a potential crime scene is encountered, the responding officer should attempt to process the scene or collect evidence if he/she has the skills and equipment. If the officer feels that additional supplies/expertise is required, his/her immediate supervisor should be contacted. C. If, in the opinion of the supervisor, that a Criminal Investigator or Crime Scene Specialist is needed; the Criminal Investigator or Crime Scene Specialist who is either on duty or on call shall be notified and briefed on the situation. If a Criminal Investigator or Crime Scene Specialist is to be called after hours, the dispatcher will call the one assigned to that particular time.
  • Questioning a Charged Suspect

    Questioning a Charged Suspect

    QUESTIONING A CHARGED SUSPECT "The police have an interest in investigating new or additional crimes after an individual is formally charged with one crime."(1) After a suspect has been arrested for one crime, officers who are investigating another crime may want to question him. In fact, this happens a lot because for some people committing crime is a way of life. They may be career criminals, they may have gone on a crime spree, or they may just commit crimes whenever it suits their purposes. In any event, when they are eventually arrested for one of their crimes, officers who are investigating other crimes may be lined up, waiting to question them. Can they lawfully do so? The answer depends mainly on whether the suspect has been charged with the crime that will be the subject of interrogation. If not, officers will ordinarily be free to question him so long as they comply with Miranda. On the other hand, if the suspect has been charged, officers must also comply with a set of rules that come from an area of law known as the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Under the Sixth Amendment a suspect has a right to have counsel present whenever he is questioned about a crime with which he has been charged.(2) As we will explain, the suspect may, however, waive this right or he may invoke it. Although this may sound a lot like Miranda, it is quite different. For example, Miranda and Sixth Amendment rights attach at different times during an investigation, they are invoked in different ways, and the consequences of an invocation differ.
  • If You Are Suspected of a Criminal Offence If You Are Suspected of a Criminal Offence

    If You Are Suspected of a Criminal Offence If You Are Suspected of a Criminal Offence

    If you are suspected of a criminal offence If you are suspected of a criminal offence Contents About this brochure 3 Arrest and questioning 3 Police custody 3 Your lawyer 4 The Probation Service 5 Rights and restrictions 5 Appearance before the Officer of Justice 6 What happens next? 6 Detention 7 Remand 7 Release 8 Preliminary hearing 9 Prosecution 10 Dismissal 10 In court 10 Compensation 11 Assistance 12 Other brochures 13 Further information 13 2 If you are suspected of a criminal offence About this brochure This brochure provides information about what to expect if you have been arrested for a criminal offence. It explains the role of the various people involved in the criminal justice system, how long you can be held in custody or on remand, and sets out your rights and responsibilities. It also tells you where you can obtain further information at each stage of the procedure. You can also contact your own lawyer or the local office of the Juridisch Loket (Legal Advice Centre). Details of other brochures and useful addresses are given at the rear of this brochure. Arrest and questioning You have been arrested on suspicion of having committed a criminal offence. The police may wish to question you further at the police station. If so, they are entitled to hold you for up to six ‘working’ hours. The hours between midnight and 9 am do not count towards this period. For example, if you are taken to the police station at 9 o’ clock in the evening, the police can detain you for questioning until 12 noon the following day.
  • 2020 Annual Report MISSION in Support of the Port of Seattle’S Mission, We: • Fight Crime, • Protect and Serve Our Community

    2020 Annual Report MISSION in Support of the Port of Seattle’S Mission, We: • Fight Crime, • Protect and Serve Our Community

    PORT OF SEATTLE POLICE 2020 Annual Report MISSION In support of the Port of Seattle’s Mission, we: • fight crime, • protect and serve our community. VISION To be the nation’s finest port police. GUIDING PRINCIPLES • Leadership • Integrity • Accountability Port of Seattle Commissioners and Executive Staff: It is my pleasure to present to you the 2020 Port of Seattle Police Department Annual Report. This past year was challenging in unprecedented ways. COVID-19 significantly impacted our day-to-day operations and our employees and their families. National civil unrest and demand for police reform led to critique and an ongoing assessment of the department. Changes in leadership, ten retirements, and a hiring freeze compounded the pressures and stress on your Police Department members. However, despite these challenges, I am proud to say that the high caliber professionals in the department stepped up. They adapted to the new environment and continued to faithfully perform their mission to fight crime, and protect and serve our community. Port employees, business partners, travelers, and visitors remained safe yet another year, because of the teamwork and outstanding dedication of the people who serve in your Police Department. As you read the pages to follow, I hope you enjoy learning more about this extraordinary team. On behalf of the exemplary men and women of this Department, it has been a pleasure to serve the Port of Seattle community. - Mike Villa, Deputy Chief Table of Contents Command Team . 6 Jurisdiction .........................................7 Community Engagement ...........................8 Honor Guard .......................................9 Operations Bureau .................................10 Port of Seattle Seaport . 11 Marine Patrol Unit .................................12 Dive Team .........................................12 SEA Airport .
  • Pre-Trial Detention Addressing Risk Factors to Prevent Torture and Ill-Treatment

    Pre-Trial Detention Addressing Risk Factors to Prevent Torture and Ill-Treatment

    Detention Monitoring Tool Second edition FACTSHEET Pre-trial detention Addressing risk factors to prevent torture and ill-treatment ‘Long periods of pre-trial custody contribute to overcrowding in prisons, exacerbating the existing problems as regards conditions and relations between the detainees and staff; they also add to the burden on the courts. From the standpoint of preventing ill-treatment, this raises serious concerns for a system already showing signs of stress.’ (UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture)1 1. Definition and context 2. What are the main standards? Remand prisoners are detained during criminal Because of its severe and often irreversible negative investigations and pending trial. Pre-trial detention is effects, international law requires that pre-trial detention not a sanction, but a measure to safeguard a criminal should be the exception rather than the rule. procedure. Pre-trial detention is only legitimate where there is a At any one time, an estimated 3.2 million people are reasonable suspicion of the person having committed behind bars awaiting trial, accounting for 30 per cent of the offence, and where detention is necessary and the total prison population worldwide. In some countries, proportionate to prevent them from absconding, pre-trial detainees reportedly constitute the majority of committing another offence, or interfering with the course the prison population, and in some settings even over of justice during pending procedures. This means that 90 per cent of detainees.2 They are legally presumed pre-trial detention is not legitimate where these objectives innocent until proven guilty but may be held in conditions can be achieved through other, less intrusive measures.
  • Testing the Capability of Close-Range Photogrammetry to Document Outdoor Forensic Scenes with Skeletal Remains Using Mock Scenarios

    Testing the Capability of Close-Range Photogrammetry to Document Outdoor Forensic Scenes with Skeletal Remains Using Mock Scenarios

    University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2018 Testing the Capability of Close-Range Photogrammetry to Document Outdoor Forensic Scenes With Skeletal Remains Using Mock Scenarios Kevin Gidusko University of Central Florida Part of the Anthropology Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Masters Thesis (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Gidusko, Kevin, "Testing the Capability of Close-Range Photogrammetry to Document Outdoor Forensic Scenes With Skeletal Remains Using Mock Scenarios" (2018). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 6026. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/6026 TESTING THE CAPABILITY OF CLOSE-RANGE PHOTOGRAMMETRY TO DOCUMENT OUTDOOR FORENSIC SCENES WITH SKELETAL REMAINS USING MOCK SCENARIOS by KEVIN A. GIDUSKO BA Anthropology University of Central Florida, 2011 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of Anthropology in the College of Science at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Summer Term 2018 Major Professor: John J. Schultz © 2018 Kevin A. Gidusko ii ABSTRACT More rigorous methodological protocols are needed to document outdoor forensic scenes containing skeletal remains. However, law enforcement protocols rarely provide specific guidelines for processing these scenes. Regardless, the need to preserve contextual information at crime scenes is of paramount importance and it is worth exploring new technological applications that will allow for better documentation.