Overview of Criminal Investigation

AN OVERVIEW OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION
"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be true" (Sherlock Holmes)

It can be argued that the field of criminal investigation should be called applied criminology. The only better name would be criminal psychology, but psychologists call that forensic psychology. It can't be called investigative science because investigative journalism has a grip on that label, and it can't be called detective science because that refers to the "true" crime genre of fiction writing. Police science is too broad a term, as are the terms crime science or criminal science, predecessors of the field of criminal justice. There is a science called clinical criminology, but it is practiced mostly in Israel as the study of insanity. There is an unfortunate tendency in England, Australia, and Canada to attach applied criminology to what is called profiling, but those university programs are more applied social science curricula than anything else. It is only criminology, as an interdisciplinary field of study that has always incorporated anthropology, biology, psychology, and sociology, and offers hope for professionalizing criminal investigation. Criminology and criminal investigation both got their start around 1891 (Gross 1924).

It is probably true what police detectives say, that criminal investigation cannot be taught; it must be learned thru years of practice (Axelrod & Antinozzi 2003). This makes it more of an art than a science, but composed of both (Morn 2000). It is also more than a justification for the so-called "detective mystique." The 12% of police officers in America who hold detective rank (and all detectives hold rank, most at least Sergeant; in some departments, all detectives are Sergeants), are powerful, respected, and smart for some good reasons. For one thing, they're extremely good at eliciting confessions, which are the equivalent of the holy grail in law enforcement. American police detectives have an average 60% success rate in eliciting confessions, which far surpasses any other country in the world. Their clearance rate is not all that good, only 20% of all crimes are solved (70% for homicide), but given the tremendous amount of crime in America, the fact that it's the easiest country in the world to be a criminal in, and their small numbers compared to workload, it's amazing they accomplish what they do.

Police detectives do not work alone. They are aided by a variety of technical and professional specialists, such as criminalists, forensic scientists, and vocational criminologists (crime mappers, police planners, and analysts). There's also a large private security sector which is twice (2x) as large as the public sector, with four times (4x) as many personnel, and 73% more financial resources. It prevents twice as much crime as the public sector is capable of, and the Labor Department classifies it as one of the nation's fastest growing industries.

Detective designations vary. Some police departments call their detectives investigators or inspectors, and federal agencies call their investigators (all federal police are investigators) agents, special agents, or special agents in charge. Designation or rank usually signifies who takes charge of a crime scene, and carries little weight, otherwise, in the chain of command. State highway patrol (decentralized) states usually have separate state bureaus of investigators, and state police (centralized) states usually have their own state police detectives. County and municipal detectives usually work at the squad or division level, as the following breakdown indicates:

Detective units or branches may be organized on a decentralized or centralized basis. In a centralized system (like Chicago), four or five precincts equally share a detective division. In a decentralized system, each precinct will have its own detective squad. Specialization among detectives (homicide squads, gang crimes units) usually only exists in centralized systems, where all detectives work out of a building or office separate from a known police site. Some jurisdictions use both decentralized and centralized systems, however.

The general process of investigation is the systematic and thorough looking into someone or something. Dempsey (2003) adds the importance of making a report, since investigators must always have an end product. Criminal investigation has the end product of bringing someone to justice; that is, arresting, prosecuting, and convicting perpetrators of crimes. It must not usurp the role of prosecutor, judge, and jury in doing this, however, and court systems bestow a heavy presumption of truth in what criminal investigators say is the truth. That enormous responsibility is why ethics must be the first and foremost characteristic of criminal investigation (Weston & Lushbaugh 2003). Never, never, never should the wrong means be used to attain an end, no matter how good the end. Detectives get used to seeing guilty people go free, and they don't get emotionally distressed by it.

This personal characteristics approach to defining criminal investigation has some value, and ethics should not be underrated. The field's history is filled with stories about detectives being recruited from the criminal underworld, Vidocq's motto "It takes a thief to catch a thief" still has some currency today, and detectives have always stood as a kind of buffer between the politicians and police force. Being street savvy, or able to talk to people from all walks of life is an important characteristic. It helps to have some familiarity (but not too much, intimate familiarity) with the criminal underworld. It's important not to have any personal bias against any type of criminal. A detective who feels a strong sense of moral revulsion at child molesters is useless, for example. Another important skill is paperwork. Detectives duplicate a lot of paperwork in a police department, and they add some too. They're good at it. In some cases, that's how they got to become a detective. There's a kind of game played in trying to present the perfect appearance of a good crime fighter by getting recorded as "reporting officer", "complaining officer", "arresting officer", and so forth. This is known as getting credit for the collar, and there's all kinds of ways to get credit. Another important skill is presentation ability. Detectives are frequently called to testify in court, and represent the whole police department. Calm, poise, and the ability to keep cool, as well as deal with the news media are important skills. Thoroughness is the last characteristic we'll talk about. By this is meant a stubborn, bull-headed, full-speed ahead, go after every lead and follow every clue work ethic. It's this persistence, diligence, and follow-up that characterizes detectives, whether it's inborn or learned from the job. Most detectives triage their cases, however, and tackle the medium difficulty problems first. There's been research studies on it, and triage works. It's statistically significant as well as practically sound. Most detectives develop a working philosophy based on the following:

Another way of defining criminal investigation is the process approach. This involves outlining the responsibilities of an investigator as they go about performing their job duties (Osterburg & Ward 2000). There's nothing really all that wrong with using a job description to define a process, but there's an unfortunate tendency for this approach to dovetail with the purposes of crime scene reconstruction. Some would even say that the ultimate purpose of criminal investigation is to reconstruct the crime scene (Axelrod & Antinozzi 2003). Many other experts and professionals, from fields like engineering, criminology, and other behavioral sciences, are skilled at crime scene reconstruction. This makes the following investigative processes the steps of applied criminology:

It's not enough to just collect and analyze evidence. Investigators need to apply the logic of reasoning or the methodology of scientific research investigation. They need what can only be called working theories, which are sufficiently flexible to allow for new information but still demonstrate clear patterns of inference or cause and effect. These working theories are called abductions (in logical reasoning) and hypotheses (in scientific research methodology). We'll discuss logic in a later lecture, but for now abduction (as an alternative to inductive and deductive reasoning) is the process of proposing a likely explanation for an event that is then tested or followed up on, as in keyless entry probably implies the victim did not know the perpetrator (Nordby 1999). An hypothesis is an if-then statement that implies a variable level of certainty, as in if the victim was mutilated, the perpetrator is most likely disturbed. Steps of the scientific method of investigation include: 1- Identify the questions and define the key variables, 2 - Specify the simplifying assumptions, 3 - formulate a hypothesis, 4 - Test the hypothesis with data, 5 - Retest the hypothesis with additional data to validate.

The different types of investigations can be classified as proactive or reactive, and as covert or overt. A proactive investigation is usually covert (secret), and a decoy (police posing as victim) or sting (police posing as buyers or sellers) operation. A reactive investigation is usually based on a citizen complaint, and involves a preliminary and follow-up (or latent) investigation. A preliminary investigation is the early reporting of all known facts, usually done by the patrol officer or first responder. A follow-up investigation is always done by detectives, and generally involves one of three (3) activities: (1) a walk-through of the crime scene, not so much to gather evidence, but to think about and refine one's theory about a specific suspect; (2) where-are-theys, where the detective uses sources of information to find the location of any and all suspects; and (3) and whodunits, where the detective is developing suspects from where there are none apparent (Kuykendall 1989). The following are some oversimplified examples of preliminary and follow-up reports (Examples of more NIBRS-compliant forms can be seen at search.org):

PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION FORM

FOLLOW-UP INVESTIGATION FORM

Anytown Police Department
INCIDENT/OFFENSE REPORTING FORM

INCIDENT # CASE NUMBER #
Report Date Patrol Zone Officer Reporting Badge Number

Type of Crime Date and Time Occurred
Date and Time Reported

Location of Incident (Address) Business Name

VICTIM #1 Phone #
Address City State Zip Code
________________________
Occupation Race Sex D.O.B. Business Address Phone
_________________________________
Victim's Behavior and Activity Prior to Offense
___ Calm ___ Absent for one day or more ___ Hitchhiking
___ Upset ___ Walking in area ___ Routine Activities
___ Under Influence ___ Driving or riding in area ___

Victim Injured ___Yes ___No Extent of injury____ Hospital/Clinic______

WITNESSES CODE V=VICTIM O=OWNER
W=WITNESS R=REPORTING PERSON
CODE Name (Last, First Middle) Race Sex D.O.B. Phone(Res.)(Bus.)
___ _________________
Address City State Zip Code
____________________
CODE Name Race Sex D.O.B. Phone(Res.) Phone (Bus.)
Address City State Zip Code
____________________
CODE Name (Last, First Middle) Race Sex D.O.B. Phone(Res.)(Bus.___ __
Address City State Zip Code
____________________
CODE Name Race Sex D.O.B. Phone(Res.) Phone(Bus.)
____ _______________
Address City State Zip Code
___________________

M.O. INFORMATION
OBJECT/PLACE OF INCIDENT LIGHTING CONDITIONS WEATHER
____Structure ___Dawn ___Daylight ___Dusk ___Clear
____Vehicle ___Dark (Streetlights on) ___Cloudy
____Street/Alley ___Dark (Streetlights off) ___Foggy
____Park/Yard ___Dark (Moonlight) ___Rain
____Parking Lot
____Woods
TYPE OF STRUCTURE TARGETS POINT OF ENTRY METHOD ____Conv./Fast Food ___Cash Reg./Drawer ___Front ___Attempt
____Restaurant/Bar ___Owner/Employee ___Rear ___No Force
____Drug/Medical ___Vending Machine ___Side ___Key/Slip
____Gas Station ___Safe Box ___Lower level ___Force
____Retail Establishment ___Display Items ___Upper Level ___Saw/Drill/Burn
____Financial Institution ___Traffic Rooms ___Door ___Hiding
____Public Building ___Storage Rooms ___Window ___Tool

NARRATIVE: (write clear, concise, and complete account of what happened)

From: Detective To: Commanding Officer

Subject: INVESTIGATION RELATIVE TO CASE NUMBER #
(ILLEGAL DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS, ASSAULT AND ROBBERY)

1. At approximately 2312 hours, Thursday, January 15, 1998, Suspect John Doe, social security number xyz of 123 E. Cherry St., Anytown, fired one shot at Ray Mallard, a black male, 36 years of age, of 1212 1st St, Anytown, which struck him in the left buttocks and leg as he attempted to stab Suspect John Doe with a knife while on the sidewalk in front of Anytown Furniture, located at 123 Main Street. At the same time, another Suspect, Bill Jones, social security number ZYX of 128 E. Cherry St., Anytown, fired one shot in air in an attempt to terminate the assault on John Doe. Ray Mallard repeatedly struck John Doe with his fists and managed to run off.

2. Investigation discloses that John Doe and Bill Jones were returning home from the Anything Goes Tavern and were walking South on Main Street when Ray Mallard jumped out from a dark alley and said "Give Me Your Money, or I'll cut you up". The three then moved into the darkness of the alley, where a disagreement and struggle broke out. As Ray Mallard attempted to stab John Doe for not giving him more than his watch, the latter pulled out a 25 caliber handgun and managed to shoot the former while blocking the attack with the other arm. Bill Jones, in an attempt to assist John Doe, also pulled out a 38 caliber handgun, but fired it into the air in an attempt to scare away Ray Mallard, who fled the scene limping. Both John Doe and Bill Jones then continued walking to their homes where they called the police.

3. The scene was processed by Patrol Officer J. Smith, badge number 456, who was unable to locate any witnesses who heard the shots. No shell casings were found, and there were no blood stains at the location. A canvass of the area the next morning revealed one witness, a Mary Rose, who lives upstairs in Apartment 6A of 123 Main St., who claimed to hear one or two shots the night in question. She was asleep at the time, and did not look out the window. Her statement appears consistent with the stories by John Doe and Bill Jones. Reinterviewing John Doe and Bill Jones separately appear to support their story.

4. The firearms were confiscated; a 25 caliber Raven automatic, serial number 012389, and a 38 revolver, serial number 894356, which were traced and showed proper ownership to John Doe and Bill Jones. Ballistic examination of the automatic revealed one shot had been recently fired. Another search of the scene failed to locate the spent bullet or casing. Criminal records were checked on John Doe and Bill Jones, who had no major offenses against them except for DUI charges.

5. Hospital records were checked which led to suspicion against Ray Mallard, who checked in at approximately 0314 on Friday, January 16 with what hospital authorities described as a gaping hole in his buttocks/leg area. Apparently, Ray Mallard had tried to remove the bullet himself, was successful at this, but needed medical attention to close the wound. A Criminal Records check revealed Ray Mallard to have been recently paroled for Armed Robbery and lived at 1212 1st St. in Rocky Mount. Detectives J. Blue and myself visited Ray Mallard at this address, and when he answered the door, he was in his shorts with a dressing on his upper leg. When asked how he hurt himself, he said he tripped over the kitchen table. Since this did not correspond with the reason in hospital records, the subject was immediately Mirandized and arrested.

6. At the station, a one-hour questioning of Ray Mallard by myself and Detective Blue resulted in a signed confession about the robbery of the watch and attempted robbery. Ray Mallard fully cooperated, thinking he could sue John Doe for shooting him in the leg. The stolen watch was found in a dresser drawer at Ray Mallard's residence where he said it would be.

7. The following forms were prepared:
Complaint Reports #98-134 and #98-135 Robbery and Attempted Robbery against Ray Mallard
Complaint Reports #98-136 and #98-137 Illegal Discharge of Firearms against John Doe and Bill Jones

8. This investigation disclosed that when John Doe and Bill Jones feared for their life due to an attack by Ray Mallard, both pulled their firearms, with John Doe shooting Ray Mallard and Bill Jones firing into the air. Since Ray Mallard confessed to Robbery and Attempted Robbery, he was charged with these crimes. Since discharging firearms is prohibited by city ordinance, we charged John Doe and Bill Jones with these crimes. We recommend no further prosecutorial action be taken against John Doe and Bill Jones.

Preliminary investigations are normally done by the first responder, usually the patrol officer, but there may be times when the detective is involved in a preliminary investigation. First responders should rush to the crime scene, and in doing so, should remain vigilant for any getaway vehicle or other suspicious things along the way. BOLO, or Be on the Lookout, orders may be given at this time. The first responder should assist in preservation of the crime scene, separation of witnesses, and requests for warrants. All this in addition to any crime scene analysis (photographing, sketching, searching) responsibilities that the first responder might have, but generally, these duties are assigned by the superior officer at the scene. The acronym, PRELIMINARY, summarizes most of the duties expected at a preliminary investigation:

Follow-up investigations usually begin by reading over all the original reports and paperwork, and looking for leads. Secondly, the evidence is gone over and subjected to every kind of analysis necessary. Thirdly, victims, witnesses, and suspects are contacted to see if their story changes. Fourthly, a stakeout or surveillance technique may be used on a suspect. Finally, a meeting is scheduled with the prosecuting attorney to make sure everybody's on the same page with this case. If a citizen-initiated case is to be dropped, the investigator is usually the one who calls the citizen. There are at least six major pieces of police paperwork involved in a follow-up investigation:

Agency procedures for case management or computer programs known as Records Management Systems (RMS) will assign a Case Code to the case, and there are numerous other codes, such as the many codes found on rap sheets (computerized criminal histories which investigators run on all principle parties in a case). There are also a variety of forms, based primarily on what large departments used to call turn-back sheets. These forms usually require detectives, by a certain time such as seven days, to indicate the status of the investigation. There are three general categories of codes:

When the follow-up investigation is coming near an end, the Case File (folder or dossier) will be prepared for the purpose of turning it over to the prosecutor. It will contain the following components from front to back:

When something is both an art and science, it's usually called a craft, implying skillfulness and room for individuality. While some creativity is encouraged in detective work, most individuality is constrained by the policies and procedures of police departments. The following terms are rather consistently used by detectives because of those policies.

Case file -- a binder or dossier of material about a criminal case that contains notes, sketches, reports, photographs, or videotapes, among other things. Each case file may have one or more unique identifiers because each agency involved will assign its own code
Chain of custody -- documents that indicate who collected, handled, or transferred evidence
Class characteristics -- evidence that allows the examiner to say similarities outweigh differences
Close-up photograph -- a photograph taken without regard to the scale of measurement
Comparison standard -- when objects from a crime scene (unknown or questioned sample) are compared to objects from a known sample (suspect, standard, or exemplar source)
Contamination -- the transfer of material from a known sample to an unknown sample
Control sample -- when a sample is taken from a crime scene near the location of the unknown sample, such as an unstained piece of fabric six inches away from the bullet hole
Cross-contamination -- the transfer of material between two or more items of evidence
Elimination sample -- when a sample is taken from known, non-suspect sources, such as the footprints of officers who have worked the scene
Exemplar -- a representative portion of a known sample, such as the suspect's handwriting
Individual characteristics -- evidence that allows the examiner to say there's a match
Investigative clue -- evidence that is consistent with the corpus delecti or elements of the crime
Investigative leads -- clues or breaks that help move an investigation forward toward a solution
Investigative patterns -- similarities that indicate a suspect or modus operandi
Investigative theories -- beliefs that take you in one direction, mostly excluding other directions
Linkage -- the connecting of a suspect to the victim or crime scene
Match -- the legally admissible standard of proof that known and unknown items are the same
Pathway -- the indirect route in and out of crime scenes for first responders and other personnel
Presumptive test -- a non-confirmatory field test for the presence of something, such as drugs
Questioned (unknown) sample -- samples taken from the crime scene or other places the suspect might have been
Reconstruction -- an interpretation of what took place based on the evidence
Reference sample -- samples kept on file, or in a lab, as typical exemplars of particular crimes
Sketch -- a diagram or drawing with or without attention to scale of measurement
Standard sample -- samples obtained in a lab on evidence similar to a known sample, such as a bullet fired from a gun similar to the one that cannot be found
Transient evidence -- evidence that will lose its value unless collected quickly
Zones of possibility -- areas of the crime scene where significant elements of the crime most probably occurred

PRINTED RESOURCES
Axelrod, A. & G. Antinozzi. (2003). The Complete Idiot's Guide to Criminal Investigation. Indianapolis: Alpha Books.
Bailey, W. (Ed.) (1989). The Encyclopedia of Police Science. NY: Garland.
Beavan, C. (2001). Fingerprints: The Origins of Crime Detection. NY: Hyperion. [Sample Pages]
Conklin, B., D. Shortelle & R. Gardner. (2002). Encyclopedia of Forensic Science: A Compendium of Detective Fact and Fiction. NY: Oryx Press.
Dempsey, J. (2003). Introduction to Investigations. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Edwards, S. (1977). The Vidocq Dossier: Story of the World's First Detective. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Greenwood, P. & J. Petersilia. (1975). The Criminal Investigation Process. Santa Monica: RAND.
Gross, H. (1891) (1924). Criminal Investigation. translation from System Ker Kriminalistik. NY: Sweet & Maxwell.
Gross, H. (1909) (1968). Criminal Psychology. 4th edition translation. Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smith. [Project Gutenberg Etext]
Kadish, S. (Ed.) (1983). The Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice. NY: Free Press.
Kuykendall, J. (1989). "The Municipal Police Detective." Pp. 88-91 in D. Kenney (Ed.) Police and Policing. NY: Praeger.
McKenzie, I. (1996). The History of Criminal Investigation. NY: Thomson Learning.
Morn, F. (1982). The Eye That Never Sleeps: A History of the Pinkerton National Detective Agency. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.
Morn, F. (2000). Foundations of Criminal Investigation. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.
Nordby, J. (1999). Dead Reckoning: The Art of Forensic Detection. Boca Raton: CRC Press. [Sample Pages]
Osterburg, J. & R. Ward. (2000). Criminal Investigation. Cincinnati: Anderson.
Sanders, W. (1977). Detective Work. Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smith.
Stead, Philip (Ed.) (1978). Pioneers in Policing. Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smith.
Thorwald, J. (1965). The Century of the Detective. NY: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Vollmer, A. (1949). The Criminal. NY: Foundation Press.
Weston, P. & C. Lushbaugh. (2003). Criminal Investigation. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Last updated: Sept. 30, 2006
Not an official webpage of APSU, copyright restrictions apply, see Megalinks in Criminal Justice
O'Connor, T. (Date of Last Update at bottom of page). In Part of web cited (Windows name for file at top of browser), MegaLinks in Criminal Justice. Retrieved from http://www.apsu.edu/oconnort/rest of URL accessed on today's date.

ORGANIZATION OF A POLICE DEPARTMENT
Department level	the whole force
Precinct level	HQ, command personnel
Division level	functional area you can't do without
Bureau level	a unit that has needs to be large
Section or Squad	specialized crime fighting unit
Watch or Shift	a time-based group of people