Search

Police investigators increasingly make use of forensic science in the investigation of crime. While there is considerable research on case outcomes following the use of forensic identification evidence (fingerprint and DNA evidence), few studies have explored how police investigators use these evidence types in their investigations. This study aimed to examine police investigators' reasoning processes about the use of forensic identification evidence in volume crimes, such as burglary, to develop a decision-making framework that can be applied to the investigation of such crimes. Twenty-four police officers from three Australian police jurisdictions participated in semi-structured interviews that centred around a case scenario. Data were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. The findings highlight that police investigators' decision-making is influenced by the requirement to meet the rules of evidence. Further, participants' own experience and mentoring by more experienced colleagues influenced not only the decisions made in a case, but also the development of decision-making skills in the use of forensic evidence more broadly. A decision-making framework is proposed to explain and guide the use of forensic evidence in volume crime investigations. Overall, the findings suggest that the effective use of forensic identification evidence in volume crime investigations requires that police investigators engage actively in the decision-making process. Further research can explore ways to integrate the findings from this research into police practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forensic science is a topic of fascination and intrigue, yet popular understandings do not always accord with the realities. Trenchant critiques of forensic science – and how it is used in the criminal justice system – highlight a need for greater forensic literacy amongst criminal justice practitioners. Drawing on 15 years of unit outlines, 10 years of student evaluations and recent reflections by the teaching team, this article documents the development of a suite of forensic studies units at one Australian university. Discussed chronologically, the findings show how the content of units has been shaped over time by critical social sciences research, while their form and intended student body has been influenced by institutional change. Student evaluations consistently noted the benefits of forensic practitioners' contributions and increases in skills of critical analysis. These findings augment arguments for including forensic studies in the criminology curriculum to best equip practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Crime scene examination is uniquely positioned at the nexus of policing and forensic science. Although women are under-represented in policing organizations and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) careers, they are reportedly well-represented in certain forensic disciplines. As a forensic discipline located within policing organizations, crime scene examination offers an interesting case study for an exploration of gender in the organizational context. In this exploratory study, in-depth interviews were undertaken with five male and four female crime scene examiners (CSEs) from two Australian policing organizations. Participants provided insights on various aspects of their work. Gender differences were evident in nuanced ways in some of these aspects. Female CSEs reported the importance of rank in circumventing differential treatment by colleagues outside the crime scene team. The uptake of part-time and flexible work arrangements differed in ways that reflect broader social trends, with negative impacts on careers borne by women with caring responsibilities. The findings highlight the gendered nature of organizations. Although some important steps have been made, gender equity is yet to be achieved. The article contributes to understanding the complexity of CSEs' role and the impacts of gendered organizations. It identifies areas in need of further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The provision of forensic science services in volume crime investigations works most successfully as a partnership between police agencies and external forensic laboratories as opposed to a client/provider model where unlimited demand ignores finite resources. The principles of Lean Six Sigma have been applied in various laboratories to improve workflow through identification of wasteful work practices. These strategies are aimed at process optimisation through the application of triaging, a concept that has rarely been studied yet referenced strongly in the literature. The South Australia End to End 90-Day Trial: facilitating quicker justice through timely evidence processing, is a collaborative approach between South Australia Police and Forensic Science South Australia. This trial applied evidence-based policing principles, a law enforcement philosophy that uses research undertaken with scientific processes to inform law-enforcement decision-making. The results demonstrate how a review of processes and the removal of non-value adding activities can improve service delivery while not exhausting those ‘finite resources’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forensic science is increasingly used to help exonerate the innocent and establishing links between individuals and criminal activities. With increased reliance on scientific services provided by multi-disciplinary (police, medicine, law, forensic science), and multi-organisational in the private and government sectors (health, justice, legal, police) practitioners, the potential for miscommunication resulting unjust outcomes increases. The importance of identifying effective multi-organisational information sharing is to prevent the 'justice silo effect'; where practitioners from different organisations operate in isolation with minimal or no interaction. This paper presents the findings from the second part of the Interfaces Project, an Australia-wide study designed to assess the extent of the justice silos. We interviewed 121 police, forensic scientists, lawyers, judges, coroners, pathologists and forensic physicians. The first paper published in 2013 presented two key findings: first investigative meetings were rare in adult sexual assault cases; second many medical practitioners were semi-invisible in case decision-making with this low level of visibility being due to lawyers, forensic scientists or police not being aware of the role/expertise medical practitioners offer. These findings led to the development of a flowchart model for adult sexual assault that highlights the range of agencies and practitioners typically involved in sexual assault. The rationale for the flowchart is to produce a visual representation of a typical sexual assault investigative process highlighting where and who plays a role in order to minimise the risk of justice silos. This is the second paper in a series of two. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One outcome from a Forensic Intelligence Workshop held by Australia New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency (ANZPAA) National Institute of Forensic Science (NIFS) in Canberra in October 2011 was the identification that, generally, there is not an intelligence culture within forensic science and organisational and cultural change would be required if forensic science is to play a meaningful role in the intelligence space. Over the past decade, attempts have been made to develop a best practice Integrated Forensic Intelligence Model to improve the integration of crime scene physical evidence, intelligence, and investigative capabilities. Although there has been some progression, it has been isolated, jurisdictionally driven and rarely strategic. This paper begins by examining some of the organisational and cultural barriers to the development and implementation of ‘forensic intelligence’ models in Australian jurisdictions. It goes on to outline the progress that has been made, despite these challenges, towards the development of a forensic intelligence culture in some jurisdictions, and identifies some of the factors that have contributed to this shift. It concludes with some recommendations for a way forward. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In this paper we critically examine the current status of the crime scene examiner within the broader context of forensic science as a profession. Crime scene examination is often not included in reports dealing with forensic science such as the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report, and this has implications for the professional status of crime scene examiners. We propose that crime scene examination is an integral part of forensic science and that crime scene examination is part of the forensic science profession. However, the lack of professional structures and some key elements of a “profession” work against general acceptance by the relevant community. We argue that in order for crime scene examination as a discipline to achieve this level of recognition and acceptance, it will need to address issues of entry qualification, training, regulation, and develop a research culture to improve its knowledge base. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

DNA evidence can be extremely compelling. With ongoing scientific advances and applications of DNA evidence in the criminal justice system, it is increasingly important that police, lawyers, and judges recognise both the limitations of DNA evidence and the strength of the evidence in particular cases. Because most forensic sciences are formally communicated via expert reports, we analysed the readability of 68 such reports of DNA evidence from 6 of 8 Australian jurisdictions. We conducted content analyses using three categories: content and sequence, language, and format. Categories contained qualitative and quantitative items drawn from theory and past research. Report styles differed by jurisdiction and by main audience - police and the courts. Reports for police were brief and few links were made between sections in these reports. Reports for courts were less brief and used either legal or scientific styles. Common sections in reports for courts included: the scientist's specialised knowledge; laboratory accreditation information; item list; results; and notes on interpretation. Sections were often not in a logical sequence, due to the use of appendices. According to Flesch Reading Ease scores, reports for police had language that was fairly difficult, and reports for courts, difficult. Difficulty was compounded by the use of specialist terms. Reports for police and the appendices of reports for court often used very small font and single line spacing. Many reports for court contained tables that spanned several pages. Suggestions based on theory and past research are provided to assist scientists to enhance the readability of reports for non-scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forensic science is increasingly relied on by police and the courts to exonerate the innocent and to establish links to crime. With this increased reliance the potential for unjust outcomes increases, especially in serious matters for two reasons. The more serious the matter, the more likely that evidence mishandling can lead to wrongful imprisonment, and the more likely the personnel involved will be multi-disciplinary (police, medicine, law, forensic science), and multi-organisational (Health, Justice, private legal/medical, police). The importance of identifying effective multi-organisational interactions was highlighted in the recent wrongful imprisonment of an Australian male for a sexual assault he did not commit. One factor that led to this unjust outcome was the justice silo effect: where forensic practitioners from different agencies operate in isolation (rarely communicating or sharing information/ knowledge). In this paper we discuss findings from the Interfaces Project designed to assess the extent of the justice silos within Australia. We interviewed 103 police, forensic scientists, lawyers, judges, coroners, pathologists and forensic physicians Australian-wide. Five main themes were identified in the data: the silo effect was only partial and in each jurisdiction some form of inter-agency communication was actively occurring; inter-agency meetings were more common in homicide than sexual assault cases; forensic physicians were semi-invisible; there had been considerable momentum over the past ten years for practice improvement groups, and; practitioners gain more benefits than pitfalls from interagency information-sharing. Based on these findings, five recommendations are made for improving practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines a number of critical issues associated with the collection of forensic evidence at the crime scene. It argues that the crime scene is one of the most crucial aspects of an investigation and that the scene of the crime is where good forensic science begins. The article begins by demonstrating that high quality and useful evidence leading to accurate and fair criminal justice outcomes can only occur if the scene is processed effectively and professionally. Reducing risk of unjust outcomes is especially important in serious matters, such as homicide and sexual assault, for two reasons. First, the more serious the matter, the more likely that evidence mishandling can lead to wrongful imprisonment. Second, the more serious the matter, the more personnel will be involved, and the more likely that these personnel will be multidisciplinary (law enforcement, medicine, law, forensic science) and multi-organisational (health, justice, private legal/medical, police). Many of these personnel will have divergent work practices and divergent views about what their role is, or should be, during investigations and court trials. Drawing on empirical data from interviews with crime scene examiners, police, forensic scientists, lawyers and judges in a number of Australian jurisdictions, the article discusses the management of the crime scene as a critical issue in the justice process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editors discuss the focus of the special issue of the periodical which aims to demonstrate the significance of forensic science in stages of criminal justice process and to show the value of social science research in the forensic science field.

Forensic science is increasingly used in civil and criminal investigations and court proceedings. Over the past decade there has been a marked increase in the number of large collaborative and interagency research projects looking at the effectiveness of forensic science. Whether these large inter- agency projects will be successful is based on two fundamentals: whether the research produces quality outputs and, more importantly, whether the outputs match the expectations of research partners and stakeholders. We discuss the importance of understanding what partners and stakeholders expect and need from projects in which they invest. We explored expectations in a large Australian project assessing ‘The Effectiveness of Forensic Science in the Criminal Justice System’. This collaboration is between two Australian police forces, the National Institute of Forensic Science, and three Australian and one European university. We found that the way stakeholders interpreted the title of the project influenced the direction they wanted the research to take and what outcomes/outputs they expected. We found five different research directions and outcomes/outputs expectations. We suggest that to avoid disappointment, stakeholders should voice their expectations and explicitly define their needs. Since expectations are rarely static, it makes sense to revisit expectations of stakeholders throughout projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is limited information available about the impact of chemical trace evidence and it has tended to be anecdotal and mostly pertaining to court outcomes. Very little is known about the use of chemical trace evidence by police investigators or the impact that this evidence form has on criminal investigations. This survey, which was conducted in Victoria, Australia, was aimed at addressing these inadequacies by capturing information from police investigators about: (i) the purpose of using chemical trace and other forensic services; (ii) the expectation of what value forensic services would provide; (iii) the actual impact of forensic evidence in specified cases; and (iv) the general perceptions of forensic science. Police officers who were the lead investigators in a sample of criminal investigations were selected as the subjects for this survey. Each of the sample cases included chemical trace evidence and many of the cases also included other forms of forensic evidence. The police investigators indicated that they use chemical trace evidence with the expectation that it will assist decision-making in their investigations and contribute to building a case for court. Survey responses indicated that chemical trace evidence can impact on multiple stages of a case and that this form of evidence can play a part in guiding police investigators in making decisions about how their cases progress through the criminal justice system. It was found that an important aspect of the impact of chemical trace evidence can involve connections with other forensic and non-forensic evidence in the cases. The provision of preliminary results, prior to the formal written reports that are issued for use in court, enables chemical trace evidence to contribute timely support to investigations. The findings of this survey study contradict prevailing perceptions that the contribution of chemical trace evidence is limited to the presentation of evidence in court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The focus of this research was to examine the contribution chemical trace evidence makes to criminal justice outcomes. The aim of this work was to place the discipline of chemical trace evidence under the spotlight as there is a dearth of robust research on the impact of this discipline. In this study, data relating to the forensic examinations in a sample of 238 cases which included chemical trace evidence, was collated with data from police investigations and court processes. The findings show that chemical trace evidence is frequently used in combination with other forensic disciplines to support the progress of high-level criminal cases through the justice system. Due to characteristics of how the criminal cases in the dataset were investigated and prosecuted, in combination with the methodology applied in this study, the impact of forensic evidence on the decision to charge suspects could not be analysed quantitatively. However, the impact of forensic evidence on court outcomes in the sample of cases was analysed using methodology that considered the results of the examinations, and the ability of the evidence to provide support for the inclusion or exclusion of persons of interest. The possibility of chemical trace evidence having impact when applied in combination with other forensic disciplines was also examined. It was found that biological examination results was a significant standalone predictor of court outcomes. In contrast, chemical trace examinations did not predict court outcomes when considered as a standalone predictor but examination results of chemical trace evidence in combination with ballistics/tool marks was significantly associated with court outcomes. The findings of this research indicate that, to assess the full impact of any discipline of forensic evidence on the criminal justice system, the analysis must take into account the potential for important synergies that may exist with other forensic and non-forensic evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific language contains features that may impede understanding for non-scientists. Forensic scientists'written reports are read by police, lawyers, and judges, and thus assessment of readability is warranted. Past studies of readability differed in background theory and approach, but analysed one or more of: content and sequence; language; and format. Using a holistic approach, we assessed the readability of expert reports (n = 78) of forensic glass comparison from 7 Australian jurisdictions. Two main audiences for reports were relevant: police and the courts. Reports for police were presented either as a completed form or as a brief legal-style report. Reports for court were less brief and used either legal or scientific styles, with content and formatting features supporting these distinctions. Some jurisdictions prepared a single report to satisfy both the courts and police. In general, item list, analytical techniques, results, notes on interpretation, and conclusions were included in reports of all types. However, some reports omitted analytical techniques, and results and conclusions were sometimes combined. According to Flesch Reading Ease, language was difficult, with a Flesch-Kincaid grade level of university undergraduate. Sentences were long and contained undefined specialist terms. Information content per clause (lexical density), was typically high, as for other scientific texts. Uncertainty was expressed differently by jurisdiction. Reports from most jurisdictions were cluttered in appearance, with single-line spacing, narrow margins, and gridlines in tables. Simple suggestions, based on theory and past research, are provided to assist scientists to enhance the readability of expert reports for non-scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientists have an ethical responsibility to assist non-scientists to understand their findings and expert opinions before they are used as decision-aids within the criminal justice system. The communication of scientific expert opinion to non-scientist audiences (e.g., police, lawyers, and judges) through expert reports is an important but under-researched issue. Readability statistics were used to assess 111 conclusions from a proficiency test in forensic glass analysis. The conclusions were written using an average of 23 words per sentence, and approximately half of the conclusions were expressed using the active voice. At an average Flesch-Kincaid Grade level of university undergraduate (Grade 13), and Flesch Reading Ease score of difficult (42), the conclusions were written at a level suitable for people with some tertiary education in science, suggesting that the intended non-scientist readers would find them difficult to read. To further analyse the readability of conclusions, descriptive features of text were used: text structure; sentence structure; vocabulary; elaboration; and coherence and unity. Descriptive analysis supported the finding that texts were written at a level difficult for non-scientists to read. Specific aspects of conclusions that may pose difficulties for non-scientists were located. Suggestions are included to assist scientists to write conclusions with increased readability for non-scientist readers, while retaining scientific integrity. In the next stage of research, the readability of expert reports in their entirety is to be explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]