Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 25, 2024 Mon
Time: 8:26 pm
Time: 8:26 pm
Results for evidence
11 results foundAuthor: Strom, Kevin J. Title: NIJ Controlled Substances Case Processing Study Summary: The processing and analysis of controlled substance evidence accounts for a significant proportion of the work performed by forensic crime laboratories. Crime laboratories are faced with ever-increasing caseloads and demands for prompt analytical information, and the impact of drug chemistry analysis on laboratory backlogs has been largely overlooked. RTI International was funded by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to conduct the Controlled Substances Case Processing Study. The primary objectives of the study were to (1) gain an improved understanding of how controlled substances cases are processed, from the point of collection (law enforcement) through analysis (forensic laboratories) to subsequent criminal justice processes (prosecution), including factors that influence decision making at different stages in the process; (2) describe the role that controlled substances evidence plays in charging decisions by prosecutors, pretrial plea negotiations, and posttrial convictions; and (3) gather descriptive information from a range of U.S. jurisdictions that could be used to identify problems and develop systemic solutions to case backlogs and other inefficiencies in these forensic systems. Data were collected from a purposive sample of 10 jurisdictions, which represented a wide variation of different law enforcement and laboratory arrangements within state and local systems. Other selection criteria included jurisdiction size, rural or urban location, and differences in legal processes. Site visits to each of the selected jurisdictions were typically conducted over a 2-day period using semistructured interviews. Basic metrics associated with case processing statistics were also collected. Overall, a total of 38 agencies and 60 respondents were interviewed. The findings from this study demonstrate that jurisdictions vary considerably in terms of how they process and analyze controlled substance evidence. Laboratory drug analysis results were not often used (or required) as part of the charging process; in many jurisdictions the charging decisions were tied to the field test result and not to the presence of a confirmatory analysis result. In only one jurisdiction did the prosecutor require that the confirmatory analysis be conducted before the grand jury process (and before any plea negotiation discussions). However, although laboratory analysis was not required for plea negotiations in most sites, some still submitted all drug evidence directly to the laboratory regardless of whether it would ultimately be needed. In terms of barriers and challenges identified, from a laboratory perspective, there is an acute need for more uniform procedures and processes for submitting and analyzing drug evidence, including prioritization based on factors such as case seriousness. From a law enforcement perspective, the findings suggest that more systematic policies and resources need to be in place for evidence retention and storage. Improved communication was identified as an area of need by all the sites; however, some sites had more effective crossagency communication than others. A key for improving coordination was the presence of effective laboratory submission guidelines. In three jurisdictions, the implementation of a case submission policy was attributed to significant reductions in both the number of controlled substance cases pending analysis and the time to turn around cases. Case tracking systems that promote information sharing and monitoring across the different stages of the process were also highly effective. For example, a limited number of sites reported that prosecutors proactively provided information on cases resolved either by plea bargaining or dismissal — cases that, study participants estimated, represented 50–75% of the drug case “backlog.” Details: Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, 2010. 103p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 29, 2011 at: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/233830.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/233830.pdf Shelf Number: 121187 Keywords: Crime LaboratoriesDrug OffensesEvidenceForensicsPlea BargainingProsecutionProsecutorial Discretion |
Author: Dharmapala, Dhammika Title: Do Exclusionary Rules Convict the Innocent? Summary: Rules excluding various kinds of evidence from criminal trials play a prominent role in criminal procedure, and have generated considerable controversy. In this paper, we address the general topic of excluding factually relevant evidence, that is, the kind of evidence that would rationally influence the jury’s verdict if it were admitted. We do not offer a comprehensive analysis of these exclusionary rules, but add to the existing literature by identifying a new domain for economic analysis, focusing on how juries respond to the existence of such a rule. We show that the impact of exclusionary rules on the likelihood of conviction is complex and depends on the degree of rationality exhibited by juries and on the motivations of the prosecutor. Details: Chicago: Law School, University of Chicago, 2011. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: U of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin Working Paper No. 569 Illinois Program in Law, Behavior and Social Science Paper No. LBSS11-30, Accessed November 1, 2011 at: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/569-rma-innocent.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/569-rma-innocent.pdf Shelf Number: 123210 Keywords: Criminal TrialsEvidenceExclusionary RuleInnocenceJuries |
Author: United States. Postal Service. Office of Inspector General Title: Postal Inspection Service Mail Covers Program Summary: In fiscal year 2013, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service processed about 49,000 mail covers. A mail cover is an investigative tool used to record data appearing on the outside of a mail-piece. Law enforcement agencies use this information to protect national security; locate fugitives; obtain evidence; or help identify property, proceeds, or assets forfeitable under criminal law. A mail cover is justified when it will further an investigation or provide evidence of a crime. The U.S. Postal Service is responsible for recording and forwarding the data to the Postal Inspection Service for further processing. Postal Service and law enforcement officials must ensure compliance with privacy policies to protect the privacy of customers, employees, and other individuals' information. Our objective was to determine whether the Postal Service and Postal Inspection Service are effectively and efficiently handling mail covers according to Postal Service and federal requirements Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Postal Service, 2014. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: Audit Report No. HR-AR-14-001: Accessed April 23, 2015 at: https://www.uspsoig.gov/sites/default/files/document-library-files/2014/hr-ar-14-001.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.uspsoig.gov/sites/default/files/document-library-files/2014/hr-ar-14-001.pdf Shelf Number: 135373 Keywords: Crime PreventionEvidence National SecurityPostal Inspection (U.S.) |
Author: Goodison, Sean Title: Digital Evidence and the U.S. Criminal Justice System: Identifying Technology and Other Needs to More Effectively Acquire and Utilize Digital Evidence Summary: The field of digital evidence is new and rapidly expanding. Potentially, digital evidence offers an important new source of information that will help prosecutors win more convictions. Using GPS data to place suspects at or near the scene of a crime, analyzing text messages and email to corroborate charges, capturing incriminating photos from social media sites, and gathering information on criminal associates from cell phone address books or social media metadata are just a few of the ways in which electronic data provides police and prosecutors with a source of information that was previously unavailable. As the types and sophistication of electronic media from which digital evidence can be gleaned increase, this type of evidence will become an essential part of investigating and prosecuting most crimes. However, while the potential is great, there are significant challenges in exploiting digital evidence including: - Educating prosecutors to make more-focused use of digital evidence. - Educating judges to better understand the issues surrounding use of digital evidence in the courtroom. - Enabling first-responding patrol officers and detectives to be better prepared for incident scenes where digital evidence might be present. - Providing better prioritization and triage analysis of digital evidence given scarce resources. - Developing regional models to make digital evidence analysis capability available to small departments. - Addressing concerns about maintaining the currency of training and technology available to digital forensic examiners. These top-tier needs highlight a path for innovation, through funding and training at all levels of the criminal justice system that can allow digital evidence to reach its full potential for law enforcement and courts. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2015. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2015 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248770.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248770.pdf Shelf Number: 136334 Keywords: Digital EvidenceEvidenceGlobal Positioning SystemsLaw Enforcement Technology |
Author: Cocq, Celine C. Title: The Use of Technologies for the Prevention, Investigation and Prosecution of Serious Crime Summary: This Working Paper is based on two research reports that were the outcome of the research carried out by the team of the Universite Libre de Bruxelles within the FP7 project SURVEILLE. Such research focused on the use of surveillance technologies for the prevention, investigation, and prosecution of serious crime. Taken together, the two reports developed a comparative analysis of a number of surveillance technologies and techniques used at different stages of the criminal procedure within selected national jurisdictions. The first project deliverable, finalised in October 2012 and entitled "The use of surveillance technologies for the prevention and investigation of serious crime" (D4.1), addressed the use of the interception of telecommunications and video-surveillance in three countries, namely France, Italy and the United Kingdom. The second deliverable, finalised in April 2013 and entitled "Comparative law paper on data retention regulation on a sample of EU Member States" (D4.3), examined the rules governing the retention of data by telecommunications companies and internet service providers for criminal justice purposes in nine countries (i.e. Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Spain and the United Kingdom). The two reports test the existence of what the authors call a double shift: the means at the disposal of competent national authorities (intelligence services and law enforcement agencies) in the fight against serious crime are evolving in such a way that the share of tasks and competences is now increasingly blurred. The fundamental rights dimension was the normative background of the legal dimensions of the SURVEILLE project as a whole, and thus also of the present work. The impact of evolving trends in the use of surveillance upon the right to privacy and the right to the protection of personal data are at the core of this research undertaking. The authors wish to highlight that legislation is changing very quickly in this domain both at the national level and at the EU level. In particular, the January 2015 attacks in Paris against Charlie Hebdo, the February 2015 attacks in Copenhagen and the increasing threat resulting from the foreign fighters phenomenon are significantly challenging the effectiveness of means used by States to prevent, investigate, detect and prosecute terrorist offences. Recent legislative developments deepen the blur between the tasks and functions of intelligence services and law enforcement agencies as well as the blur between administrative and criminal law measures. Furthermore, with the ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union on 8 April 2014 in the Digital Rights Ireland case -- partially reaffirmed in Schrems, EU Member States together with EU institutions have to rethink the legal framework concerning the use of surveillance technologies and techniques in order to ensure a coherent relationship between on the one hand safeguarding the right to privacy and the protection of personal data, and on the other hand developing effective means to prevent, investigate, detect and prosecute serious crime. Despite the fact that the two papers were written at least two years ago, the information remains largely up to date. These papers analyse a trend that has been occurring for some years and that is not over yet: a massive use of surveillance technologies and techniques by an increasing number of competent authorities leading to an exponential gathering of information by EU Member States aiming to fight more effectively against serious crime -- often at the expense of fundamental rights. Details: European University Institute, Department of law, 2015. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: EUI Department of Law Research Paper No. 2015/41: Accessed September 9, 2017 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2695091 Year: 2015 Country: Europe URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2695091 Shelf Number: 147203 Keywords: Crime Prevention Criminal Investigation EvidenceSerious Crime Surveillance Video Surveillance Video Technology |
Author: Strom, Kevin J. Title: Efficiency in Processing Sexual Assault Kits in Crime Laboratories and Law Enforcement Agencies Summary: Unsubmitted sexual assault kits (SAKs) that accrue in U.S. law enforcement agencies (LEAs) have been the subject of increasing attention for the past decade, as have untested SAKs pending analysis in crime laboratories. The field needs a research-informed approach to identify the most efficient practices for addressing the submission of SAKs in LEAs and the testing of SAKs in laboratories. This approach would also determine whether specific policies or characteristics of a jurisdiction result in more efficient processing outcomes. This mixedmethods study examines intra- and interagency dynamics associated with SAK processing efficiency in a linked sample of crime laboratories (N = 145) and LEAs (N = 321). Relying on responses to a national survey of laboratories and a matched sample of LEAs, researchers at RTI International used regression analysis and stochastic frontier modeling to assess how labor and capital inputs, evidence policies, evidence management systems, and models of cross-agency coordination affect SAK processing efficiency. Semistructured interviews with personnel from forensic laboratories, LEAs, and prosecutor's offices in six jurisdictions were used to elaborate on critical themes relating to SAK processing efficiency. Research Questions Research questions are organized into four sections: Submission and Testing Rates addresses whether laboratory or LEA characteristics are associated with efficiency at laboratory, LEA, and jurisdiction levels and includes one research question: - What laboratory or LEA characteristics (e.g., size of agency, use of technology) are associated with SAK testing or submission rates? Production Functions estimates the productivity of laboratory and LEA processing inputs and provides each unit with a technical efficiency score. Research questions include these: - How productive are laboratory DNA processing inputs and LEA labor inputs? - Do resource utilization inefficiencies contribute to the accumulation of SAKs in LEAs or laboratories? If so, what would be the impact if all inefficiencies were eliminated? Case Closure Rates investigates relationships between LEA submission rates and case closures and between laboratory testing rates and case closures. This section has the following research question: - Do testing or submission rates affect the number of cases that can be closed? Perceptions of Efficient Practices examines qualities or practices of agencies that are perceived to enhance efficiency. This section includes the following research question: - From the perspective of LEAs, laboratories, and prosecuting attorneys, what qualities or practices are most important for efficiency in SAK processing? Study Design and Methods To address the aforementioned research questions, RTI project staff conducted a 2-year mixed-methods study in three phases: - In Phase I, a national survey was administered to state, county, and municipal laboratories that conduct biological forensic analysis, and an additional survey was given to a sample of LEAs that submit SAK evidence to these laboratories. Questions were designed to assess SAK outputs (e.g., submission/testing rates) and inputs (e.g., labor, capital, policies, interagency communication). - In Phase II, production functions were estimated to examine effects of labor and capital inputs, in addition to policies, management systems, and cross-agency coordination on efficiency. - In Phase III, six jurisdictions were recruited for site visits, and qualitative methods were used to understand how LEAs, laboratories, and prosecutors implement practices that affect efficiency. Details: Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, 2017. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 18, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250682.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250682.pdf Shelf Number: 147387 Keywords: Crime LaboratoriesCriminal InvestigationEvidenceRapeSexual Assault |
Author: Cross, Theodore Title: Injury Evidence, Biological Evidence, and Prosecution of Sexual Assault Summary: Injury evidence and biological evidence gained from forensic medical examinations of victims can provide evidence about the crime as well as the means of linking a suspect to the crime. Evidence from a forensic medical examination can include genital and non-genital injuries, biological evidence (including sperm or semen, blood, and amylase, an enzyme of saliva), and a DNA profile that can often be derived from the biological evidence. This DNA can be matched to a potential suspect, matched to another investigation in the FBI's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), or matched to a convicted offender in CODIS. Injury evidence can be used to establish a victim's lack of consent and could lead to physical assault charges. This project explored the use and impact of injury evidence and biological evidence through a study of the role of these forms of evidence in prosecuting sexual assault in an urban district attorney's office in a metropolitan area in the eastern United States. The research questions addressed in this summary overview are as follows: - How frequent were different forms of injury evidence and biological evidence in the sample? - Is the presence of injury evidence and biological evidence correlated with the presence of other forms of evidence? - Which types of cases and case circumstances are more likely to yield injury evidence and biological evidence? - Do the presence of injury evidence and biological evidence predict criminal justice outcomes, taking into account the effects of other predictors? - In what ways do prosecutors use injury evidence and biological evidence and what is their appraisal of their impact on case outcomes? Details: Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2017. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 19, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/251036.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/251036.pdf Shelf Number: 147400 Keywords: Criminal InvestigationEvidenceForensic EvidenceRapeSex OffendersSexual Assault |
Author: Schroeder, David A. Title: The Impact of Forensic Evidence on Arrest and Prosecution Summary: The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) grant solicitation, Social Science Research on Forensic Science (NIJ-2011-2822), was heavily reliant on the NIJ study, The Role and Impact of Forensic Evidence in the Criminal Justice Process (Peterson, Sommers, Baskin, and Johnson, 2010). The objectives of Peterson et al., (2010) were to 1) "Estimate the percentage of crime scenes from which one or more types of forensic evidence is collected;" 2) "Describe and catalog the kinds of forensic evidence collected at crime scenes;" 3) "Track the use and attrition of forensic evidence in the criminal justice system from crime scenes through laboratory analysis, and then through subsequent criminal justice processes;" 4) "Identify which forms of forensic evidence contribute most frequently (relative to their availability at a crime scene) to successful case outcomes" (Peterson et al. 2010, Pg. 11-12). Peterson, et al. (2010) analyzed crime lab, investigative, and prosecutorial case file information of crimes that fit into one of five crime categories: assault; burglary; homicide; rape; and robbery. Peterson et al. (2010) concluded their analysis by making ten recommendations regarding future research on the utility of forensic evidence. The current study, The Impact of Forensic Evidence on Arrest and Prosecution, addressed several of these recommendations via a methodology that informs the four research objectives listed above. The first Peterson et al. (2010) recommendation is generally related to simple replication - refining and performing a similar analysis in another jurisdiction. This study addressed this recommendation by mimicking the methodology used by Peterson et al. (2010). Variables, crime categories, sample size, and analytical models were all borrowed from Peterson et al. (2010). Another recommendation of the Peterson et al. (2010) makes clear the need for a more detailed assessment of how the mere existence of available forensic evidence affects the arrest and prosecution of offenders. A major finding of Peterson et al. (2010) stated most evidence goes unexamined, but its presence in cases was associated with arrest and movement of cases through the justice process. As forensic evidence moves through the criminal justice system, less and less evidence makes it to the next stage. This movement resembles a funnel or an inverted pyramid (Peterson, 1974). Added studies are needed to review how unexamined forensic and tangible evidence teams with other conventional investigative procedures to lead to arrests (page 9). The same phenomenon has also been discovered in another recent analysis of the use of one type of forensic evidence, namely DNA. Schroeder (2007) discovered that among his sample of homicide cases from the City of New York (1996 - 2003) the group of cases that had the highest clearance rate was the group in which evidence for DNA analysis was collected from the scene but never analyzed. There are three general areas of explanation for why unexamined evidence is associated with higher clearance rates. First, the collection of forensic evidence from crime scenes has become so commonplace that its collection is not contingent upon the needs of the investigation, but simply a matter of protocol. Therefore, when cases present non-forensic evidence (e.g. suspect interrogations, witness statements and identifications) sufficient to advance the case through the system the byproduct is a great deal of collected, but unanalyzed forensic evidence. Second, the analysis of forensic evidence is so time-consuming as to influence its utility. Details: New Haven, CT: University of New Haven, Henry C. Lee College of Criminal Justice and Forensic Sciences, 2017. 101p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 2, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250721.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250721.pdf Shelf Number: 147524 Keywords: Criminal EvidenceDNA TypingEvidenceForensic Evidence |
Author: Big Brother Watch Title: Careless Whispers: How speech is policed by outdated communications legislation Summary: The social media revolution has changed the way people communicate with each other. Yet, whilst our communications have evolved the way crimes are dealt with has not and so we find ourselves using archaic legislation to police modern day crimes. Without exception, the laws that regulate what is said on social media platforms were passed before companies such as Facebook, Twitter and Ask FM became widely used. The laws used to police our communications are woefully out of date. As this report shows, there has been an increase in charges and convictions and cases involving the use of social media. It is therefore important that the legislation which is used by police and prosecutors is examined to ensure it doesn't become obsolete in light of new technology. The outdated nature of the legislation is evident when you examine its history. Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 can be seen as the successor to a litany of legislation started by the Post Office (Amendment) Act 1930. The Act focused on stopping abuse towards telephone operators. It was followed by the Telecommunications Act 1984, which contains very similar wording to Section 127. This legislation enables a court to convict you based on whether it deems a message to be "grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character". It is arguable that the outdated nature of the law is why we are seeing an increase in legal cases involving comments made on social media. The most notorious example is the case of Chambers v DPP, also known as the "Twitter joke trial". This case saw Paul Chambers convicted of using a "public electronic communication network" to send a "message of menacing character". Specifically he stated: "Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!!" The conviction was later overturned by the High Court, stating that "there was no evidence to suggest that any of the followers of the appellant's "tweet"... found it to be of a menacing character or, at a time when the threat of terrorism is real, even minimally alarming." Paul Chambers and his legal team attracted high profile support from public figures like Al Murray and Stephen Fry who Tweeted their support. Murray Tweeted: "In 100 years there will be an operetta about this - about how ridiculous we were at the start of the 21st century. I'm a big fan of absurdity but this is taking the biscuit." Arguably it was these high profile legal cases, and the fact that none of the legislation deals with social media cases directly, which led to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) publishing guidelines in June 2013 on how to prosecute cases which involve social media.3 However, these guidelines have been subject to criticism. In a submission to the CPS's public consultation on the guidelines Big Brother Watch highlighted a number of concerns, including the failure of the guidelines to address the problems that the relevant legislation already faced; that it had effectively been rendered obsolete by the advent of social media. Little has changed since these guidelines were produced. It is therefore the view of Big Brother Watch that there needs to be serious reform in this area, to ensure that the laws are brought up to date. Alongside this, it is now vital that the police begin to adopt a standardised approach to recording and combating social media crime. It is imperative that a clear evidence base is established so that the use of these powers can be properly scrutinized. If these policy recommendations are not achieved, then it is almost inevitable that there will be further individuals who are arrested, charged and prosecuted unnecessarily under these laws. Details: London: Big Brother Watch, 2015. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed Mary 3, 2018 at: https://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Careless-Whisper.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Careless-Whisper.pdf Shelf Number: 150030 Keywords: CommunicationsEvidenceSocial Media |
Author: Big Brother Watch Title: Police Access to Digital Evidence: The powers of the Police to examine digital devices and how forces are training staff Summary: Police Access to Digital Evidence reveals that 93% of UK police forces are extracting data from digital devices including mobile phones, laptops, tablets and computers which are seized as evidence from suspects, victims and witnesses. As mobile phones and other connected devices are now ubiquitous, it should come as no surprise that such technologies can play a significant role in committing or assisting a crime. The data held on digital devices can give a detailed insight into people's lives, communications, contacts, friends, family and acquaintances. Extracting and interrogating evidence such as location data, photos, messages or internet searches can therefore be beneficial in assisting the police with criminal investigations. Nevertheless, whilst the investigation of crime is important, ensuring that the law is comprehensive and up to date is equally important. Based on Freedom of Information requests and research we have conducted, we are concerned that the seizure of devices and extraction of digital evidence is being undertaken using laws that were established in a pre-digital age. Rather than updating the existing laws to adequately address the complexities of new technology and data, the Government have merely amended them, creating a patchy and far from technically detailed framework. But it is not just the laws which are complex and unclear. The details about how the police acquire, interrogate and retain data is also opaque. The majority of UK police forces failed to respond to our FOI request asking for detail on how many devices have been seized, how many have been interrogated and how many officers have been trained. 32 police forces cited that the data was not held centrally or was not easy to retrieve. Such responses are simply not acceptable and undermine the key principle of transparency which the Police's own 'Good Practice' guidance recommends. Rethinking how our data can be used in all aspects of life, including law enforcement, is necessary if we are all to live in a just and fair connected society. If law enforcement is to continue to police in line with the Peelian principle of consent then up-to-date laws, training practices and actively working towards establishing systems for transparency are essential. In light of this Big Brother Watch make three recommendations: 1. Review of legislation. The legislative process for extraction and interrogation of data from seized devices, in relation to a criminal act, needs urgent re-examination to ensure it is clear, concise and fit for modern policing. 2. Police must be transparent regarding digital evidence gathering. Police forces must adhere to good practice guidance on transparency. Records of the number of seized devices, the number of devices subject to data extraction and details regarding how long data is held for must be kept and made available for audit. 3. Training in digital evidence gathering for all officers. Improvements need to be made to the training of police officers in the handling, interrogation and retention of data extracted from devices. Any front-line officer whose role may involve the handling of digital evidence should be able to prove a high level of competence and understanding of the technical process and data protection. Details: London: Big Brother Watch, 2017. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 3, 2018 at: https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Police-Access-to-Digital-Evidence-1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Police-Access-to-Digital-Evidence-1.pdf Shelf Number: 150031 Keywords: Digital EvidenceEvidenceGlobal Positioning SystemsLaw Enforcement TechnologyPolice Training |
Author: Cross, Theodore Title: Forensic Evidence and Criminal Justice Outcomes in a Statewide Sample of Sexual Assault Cases Summary: Sexual assault is a heinous crime that as much as a quarter of women nationally experience in their lifetime. Not only do victims suffer the terror and degradation of the assault, but they are further at risk of injury and a range of difficulties with mental health and functioning. Survivors are also at risk of re-victimization from informal and professional responses that question their credibility and in effect blame them for the assault. Only a small proportion of sexual assaults are prosecuted; only a subset of assaults are reported to police, only a portion of those cases reported to police result in arrest, and only small percentage of those arrested are ultimately prosecuted. When prosecution does ensue, enormous demands are placed on victims; they must testify in court about the traumatic events of the crime and face assaults on their credibility both in and outside the courtroom. In this difficult context, investigative methods that increase evidence against assailants while decreasing the burden on victims are especially important, and advances in the technology and expertise of collecting and analyzing injury and forensic evidence offer promise. Victims undergo difficult forensic medical examinations with the hope of contributing evidence that can help bring assailants to justice. The research community has a responsibility to develop a better understanding of how this information is used and actually relates to criminal justice actions. This study explores the role of injury evidence and forensic evidence in sexual assault cases using data from medical providers, crime laboratories and police. The study: - Examines the frequency of injury and biological evidence in sexual assault cases; - Identifies case factors associated with the presence of injury and biological evidence; - Analyzes how often biological evidence is processed prior to versus after arrest; - Explores how injury and biological evidence as well as other factors are related to arrest; and - Examines results for key comparisons thought to be salient for forensic evidence: Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners vs. other medical examiners; strangers vs. known suspects; child victims vs. adults and adolescents. Details: Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, 2014. 220p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 31, 2018 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248254.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248254.pdf Shelf Number: 150411 Keywords: Criminal InvestigationEvidenceForensic EvidenceRapeSex OffendersSexual Assault |