Addressing the Future Research Challenges in Forensics Tuesday 11th September 2018, 10.00 am – 3.00 pm West Park Conference Centre, Dundee GROUP DISCUSSION NOTES Summary of ‘Regulation and Legislation’ Group Discussion • Nature of crime changing and sources of evidence need to change too. • Need to have public support and confidence in forensic science. • Legislation/regulation needs to be transparent particularly in relation to data protection. • Sharing of data (intra and inter nationally, across different agencies/organisations both public and private. • Independent Advisory Group on use of biometric data in Scotland convened by Scottish Government (SG). Recommendations reported in March 2018. All recommendations supported by SG. • Current SG public consultation paper on oversight of biometric data – closing 1st October. • Concerns about loss of currently identifiable digital evidence from scenes due to lack of clarity around legality of such data use. • Lack of understanding of value of evidence, including biometrics, to criminal justice system. • Difficult to identify what ‘value’ is and how to measure it however need to know as critical to convincer when proposing regulation/legislation. • Need to develop framework which could be used to assess emerging technologies. Would include aspects such as testing, scrutiny and consultation. Needs to be broad enough to encompass all future ‘techniques’. • Need to demonstrate impartiality. ‘Sterile corridor’ between police and labs demonstrable however less so between COPFS and labs, especially as requested work comes as an ‘instruction’. • Different requirements for evidence to be used as intelligence v criminal proceedings. • Whether Scottish regulation/legislation should converge with or diverge from that of England & Wales. • Differences between legally and ethically acceptable practices. • Ethical considerations for use of phenotypic characteristics derived for biometric data. Suggested Research Project Themes : 1. Creation of Regulatory Framework to apply to both emerging (and where necessary historic) techniques to provide assurance in relation to aspects such as academic rigor, validation, accreditation, evidential value, legal and legislative impact and assurance of impartiality. To include consultation with appropriate stakeholders. Essentially a comprehensive ‘checklist’ for techniques prior to implementation into casework. May be split into 2 categories of technique – probabilistic and pattern recognition although acknowledged that some may not fit into those categories. _______________________________________________________________________________ Business & Knowledge Transfer Manager ● Tim Heilbronn ● +44 (0) 1382 384205 www.sipr.ac.uk Supported by investment from Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority SIPR is a consortium of Abertay Dundee, Dundee, Edinburgh, Edinburgh Napier, Glasgow, Glasgow Caledonian, Heriot-Watt, Queen Margaret, Robert Gordon, St Andrews, Stirling, Strathclyde and the West of Scotland Universities, and the Open University in Scotland 2. Comparison of available regulation and legislation in other countries (UK, Europe, North America) to inform drafting of future Scottish legislation. May include focus on compatibility with emerging and future technologies, public confidence in forensic science, value of evidence. 3. Investigation into the conflicts/inconsistencies/gaps between/within regulatory and legislative documentation. Need for clear, complete, concise and complementary guidance. Summary of ‘Capture and Communication’ Group Discussion Capture and communication relates to how we can develop enhanced methods of capturing evidence and communicating it effectively and efficiently at all stages of the investigation and prosecutorial pathway. For example, how can we use drones and robotics at scene for image and evidence capture? What opportunities are there for increasing automated pattern recognition and communication technologies? Capture _______________________________________________________________________________ Business & Knowledge Transfer Manager ● Tim Heilbronn ● +44 (0) 1382 384205 www.sipr.ac.uk Supported by investment from Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority SIPR is a consortium of Abertay Dundee, Dundee, Edinburgh, Edinburgh Napier, Glasgow, Glasgow Caledonian, Heriot-Watt, Queen Margaret, Robert Gordon, St Andrews, Stirling, Strathclyde and the West of Scotland Universities, and the Open University in Scotland Issue – Volume Crime vs Serious Crime • Academic research appears to be focussing mainly on serious crime issues • The Forensic 2026 Strategy is to improve volume crime provision – faster, more efficient provision of intelligence and identifications to speed up the Police investigation • Volume crime is not considered a ‘sexy’ research topic, but the reality is that volume crime has the most significant impact on local communities, and there is the potential to ‘catch a burglar, prevent a murder’ Potential Solution • There needs to be a clear demarcation between volume and serious crime approach; academics should be aware that volume crime methods do not necessarily need to have 100% scientific rigour • Volume crime research approach needs to be focussed on achieving more at the scene and removing the burden on lab work Issue – Automated Pattern Recognition • We need to carefully consider what value automated pattern recognition brings to the investigation – in terms of weighing up expertise vs efficiency, and issues with presentation of evidence in court Communication Issue – Data Protection / Information Security • Data Protection / Information Security leads to interoperability within and between SPA Forensic Services and partner agencies, including forensic research experts in academic institutions, e.g. o Sharing of crime scene images o No single reference number in a case o In future, the use of handheld devices for rapid identification at scene / remote expert via AR will be limited if we are prohibited from transferring such data over existing networks! Potential Solutions • A single over-arching secure network for sharing information more efficiently • Investment in basic IT equipment to avoid resorting to ‘work-arounds’ • This needs addressed by strategic leadership within the relevant organisations Issue – Communication with Public • There needs to be more appreciation amongst the public for the science behind all forensic evidence types. DNA and Fingerprints are perceived as being ‘robust but other types of evidence are considered ‘flimsy’ (e.g. facial recognition) • Different agencies within the Criminal Justice System have different approaches to social media – its use is prohibited within SPA Forensic Services, leading to the perception that it is a ‘secretive’ organisation • Some forensic providers are spreading fake news about forensics (e.g. super-recognisers), which is widely reported in the media and accepted as fact by the public _______________________________________________________________________________ Business & Knowledge Transfer Manager ● Tim Heilbronn ● +44 (0) 1382 384205 www.sipr.ac.uk Supported by investment from Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority SIPR is a consortium of Abertay Dundee, Dundee, Edinburgh, Edinburgh Napier, Glasgow, Glasgow Caledonian, Heriot-Watt, Queen Margaret, Robert Gordon, St Andrews, Stirling, Strathclyde and the West of Scotland Universities, and the Open University in Scotland Potential Solution • SPA Forensic Services should be more open about what it does and about the importance of forensic science regulation. Issue – Graduate employment prospects / Training • Opportunity exists to collaborate with academic institutions to train students in SPA FS procedures to ensure graduates are ready to enter our workforce Summary of ‘Delivering forensic science at source’ Group Discussion Delivering forensic science at source relates to how we can advance technologies for utilizing forensic science at source - capturing evidence, interpreting it and communicating it directly from there. For example, how can we develop miniature and hand held technologies for use at scene that can connect directly with police intelligence databases for immediate interpretation and action? Initial discussion about what we mean by ‘source’, is this the first point of contact with a piece of evidence, or just at crime scenes? For example, if police recover items, or samples are taken by the FME. General consensus was that we are principally talking about evidence recovered at scenes, particularly given that portability and mobile implementation are key issues for Strategy 2026. Everyone wrote down up to three key issues on post-it notes, relating to what they wanted from ‘delivering forensic science at source’, and what they thought needed improving in this context. Some general themes came out of these post-it notes so the discussion continued by examining these in more detail, with particular focus on themes that might be of interest to both practitioners and academics, and that might be framed into a potential project. Many of the issues raised related to increasing speed, efficiency, timeliness, responsiveness etc. and this was a key topic of discussion. However, a number of participants raised the issue that effectiveness also needs to be considered and not sacrificed in the name of efficiency. One topic that the discussion focussed on was the issue of scene examination, and the potential for using technology to allow scene examiners to capture