SAMPLE ASSIGNMENTS FOR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION
Please hit your browser's "REFRESH" button each time you visit this page to be certain you are viewing the most current version of this page.

"REPORT CARD" TEMPLATE
(A guide to the document each student creates and turns in over each reading assignment to satisfy the writing assignment)

Give a letter grade score (either A, B, or C) across seven categories of evaluation (see rubric) with a short commentary explaining any B or C scores. Do not give all A grades.  Then, immediately under your scores, include a paragraph or two (250 words minimum - by doing enough of these, they will add up to eight pages of writing) providing grammatically correct commentary which fully explains and justifies your overall evaluation as well as demonstrates what you've learned or understood from reading the material.  A sample appears below, but please remember it's a sample and you should come up with your own version.

To: instructor
From: name of student (use full name as enrolled in course)
Assignment: be sure to name the lecture note you're evaluating (e.g., Asymmetric War lecture)

        1. B --- the writing used too many weasel words...
        2. A
        3. B --- a chart or diagram would have helped my understanding...
        4. A
        5. B --- there should have been more coverage of the current crisis in Iran...
        6. A
        7. C --- this lecture was useless to me as I don't really care about anything asymmetric... 
        Comments:  I give this lecture note a B+ overall because it's informative, even though some of the material is confusing and over my head.  It seems to go into theoretical or definitional matters too deeply.  The author convincingly says that certain things are important, like as one line reads "IPsec protocol can subsume VPN privileges" but I'm not all that interested in the techno-geek details as well as theoretical debates over the definition of asymmetric warfare.  I expected or would have preferred to learn about which countries were attacking us with computers and what can be done about it.  Don't get me wrong; the lecture note was useful in other ways. It helped me understand the full scope of the problem, such as the fact I learned that 50 countries have advanced cyberwarfare units.  It would have been helpful to have some images or pictures in some places to better understand some ideas.  My biggest critique, however, is that the reading was lengthy and a chore to read.  I think it also lacked a "voice" or strong author opinion in some places because they seemed to skirt away on some issues or sit on the fence.  One thing I've learned from this and other readings is that without considering the personal element, one can easily get bogged down in a bunch of relativism where anything goes theoretically.  I clicked on and followed some of the web links in the reading, and the one I found most interesting led to the Council on Foreign Relations.  I might also mention that the link to Korean Hacker Quarterly is broken and doesn't work.  I tried searching for where that website might have gone, but couldn't find anything.  In terms of suggested printed resources in the bibliography, I think the book entitled "Crusaders, Criminals, and Crazies" looks the most interesting to me for possibly read later on.  I think this lecture ought to be required reading for this course and others.  I certainly could have used it when I was working on a term paper in a class I had last semester....
    Another thing I learned from this lecture was...[second paragraph optional]       

This has been an illustration of how easy it is to do the writing assignments by demonstrating reading comprehension.

#1: Deductive Thinking Assignment Instructions: Utilize the Primer on Logical Reasoning contained in Lecture #3, An Introduction to Crime Reconstruction, and any other resources available, except having someone do the assignment for you, and then turn in your answers to the following before the announced deadline.

    Identify each of the following as either: (A) the fallacy of Affirming the Consequence or (B) the fallacy of Denying the Antecedent. Only one choice is correct.
    1. If my boyfriend is dating my best friend on the sly, then my best friend, feeling guilty will be particularly nice to me.  My best friend has been particularly nice to me lately.  So I know that my boyfriend has been dating her on the sly.
    2. If the robbery suspect exited the city to the North, then they must have traveled by car.  It is certain now that they did not exit to the North.  So they must not have traveled by car.
    3. The U.S. is the world's major superpower.  If the U.S. does not disarm, then World War III is inevitable.  Unfortunately, no major superpower will choose to disarm by itself.  We therefore have no choice but to move toward a world government.  Because the possibility of world government exists, World War III is not strictly inevitable, even if it remains very likely.

    Identify each of the following as either: (A) a Modus Tollens, (B) a Modus Ponens, (C) Universal Instantiation, or (D) Disjunctive Syllogism. Only one choice is correct.
    4. If the murderer had to have a key, then the butler did it.  The murderer did have to have a key. Therefore, the butler did it.
    5. Either the butler or the chambermaid committed the murder.  We can prove that the chambermaid did not do it.  Therefore, it must be the butler who did it.
    6. If the butler committed the murder, he must have had a motive.  If the butler had a motive, then like anyone else, that motive must have been greed.  The butler did commit the murder. Thus, we can conclude that the butler's motive was greed.
    7. The escape route of the robbers was either thru Whitakers to the North or Wilson to the South.  If they took the route toward Wilson, then they had to proceed thru Sharpsburg and Elm City, either of where they could have double backed toward Nashville.  The Wilson police tell us they have not been spotted in Wilson, and the County police tell us the roads to Nashville were washed out.  Therefore, they must have proceeded North toward Whitakers.

    Identify each of the following as involving: (A) Hasty Generalization, (B) Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc, (C) Emotional Reasoning, or (D) False Dilemma. Only one choice is correct.
    8. Criminals are free to choose to do good or evil, just like the rest of us.  But unlike the rest of us, they willfully and maliciously choose to do evil.
    9. Criminals do what they do because they believe they can get away with it.  Of course, this means they aren't too different from the rest of us.
    10. If the chauffeur committed the murder, then the murder weapon was a 38 and the murder must have been committed before noon -- since he left the premises at that time.  Ballistics reports that a 38 bullet killed the victim and the coroner reports that death occurred around 11:30 A.M.  We can therefore conclude that the chauffeur definitely committed the murder.
    11. The murder was committed by either the mistress or the chambermaid, of that we are certain.  We know that if the mistress did it, then the murder had to take place in the bedroom.  But it has been determined the murder could not have possibly been committed in the bedroom.  On the other hand, if the murder was committed by the chambermaid, then it could have been committed elsewhere in the house.  We have determined that the murder could have been committed in a number of places around the house.  So, we are certain that the chambermaid did it.
    12. People on welfare are encouraged not to work.  Certainly you cannot motivate persons to be industrious by paying them to be idle.  We all know that welfare is grossly inefficient and wasteful.  The consequence is that a certain number of welfare cheats can be expected.

PRACTICUM #2: (SP 03 & SP 04 - this assignment consisted of a crime scene search pattern assignment) 

PRACTICUM #3: Interrogation Exercise Instructions: Break up into groups of 4 with three people playing the role of investigator and one person playing the role of suspect.  Cards will be handed out in class stating what each suspect is accused of and facts of suspicion.  The suspect role involves saying as little as possible that will incriminate themselves, but with no strict silence or demanding a lawyer allowed.  The interrogator roles involve trying to get the suspect to self-incriminate without giving away what the suspect is suspected of having done.  I want you to use the following checklist for at least some of the questions you ask (work them in in any order), and use your knowledge of body language and psycholinguistics to determine if they are telling the truth or lying.  If they are lying, record what makes you suspicious, and what kind of lie it is, if you can.

1. Have you always been a law-abiding person?
2. Give me an example of something you're not so proud of.
3. Let's talk about a time when you felt you were treated unfairly.
4. Do you always work well under pressure?
5. I'm curious to know what you think of yourself.
6. I've always felt that people are basically good inside. Don't you?
7. What would it take for you to be completely satisfied?
8. Why did you involve others in what you did?
9. Don't you feel sorry for what you did?
10. Do, what do you think of the interrogation so far?

PRACTICUMS #5: Mock Crime Scene Scenarios: Break up into teams of 7-8 people, and assign each person one or two of the following duties: preliminary investigator; lead investigator; investigator in charge; scene security, sketch preparer, photographer, criminalist, and forensic scientist.  The entire group is responsible for producing a final report. The instructor is responsible for putting together each crime scene.  ACJA/LAE rules and grading criteria apply, except hotel rooms are not used.  

 Your assignment is to process the crime scene (utilize both textbook and lecture notes on crime scene processing), take make-believe photographs, draw a real sketch of the crime scene, conduct real questioning of any witnesses, manipulate objects in the crime scene, lay down real evidence markers, order imaginary tests that you think are necessary (and get results immediately), pretend to bag & tag evidence, and prepare a final report documenting your actions, your observations, your conclusions (Who, What, When, Where, How, and Why), the evidentiary support for your conclusions, and your recommendations for further action (please be sure you know what a professional looking final investigative report looks like).

   It is possible to solve the crime scene scenario within the 15 minutes you and your team will have to work it. This would normally require an excellent job of processing, asking the right questions, ordering the right tests, and recommending the right immediate action, like the arrest or search warrant of somebody (please use the bases for arrest and search warrants). The referee will not abide by your requests for arrest or warrant unless you have probable cause. More likely is the fact that you will solve or come close to solving the crime scene scenario in your final report, which is due a week after your team works the scene.

More Detailed Procedures:
    Report to the classroom, look on the board for instructions, and then go to the designated outdoor or indoor simulation area as indicated for your team. Pick up a copy (if you haven't already received them) of any preliminary reports. Assemble your team, approach the crime scene line when ready, establish your command post, and divide up your duties. When you are ready, draw a sketch, establish and make your search pattern, make your pretend photographs, and plant your evidence markers. Canvass the area. Reassemble and write your report.

You will only have about 15-20 minutes to do all this. Be sure to plan your actions carefully. Make judicious use of any preliminary information given to you. A referee (law enforcement professional or criminal justice professor) will be present with your team at all times during your time. Whenever, during processing of the scene, you would normally want a lab test or (medical) examiner report on something, ask the referee (verbalize while working), and they will tell you immediately what the test results would be. The referee may also assist you with "Warm" or "Cold" comments as you get closer or further away from the eventual solving of the scenario. Excessive use of the referee (as well as any unnecessary tests being ordered) will be held against you as an indicator that you can't solve anything yourself. The referee does not have any other investigatory powers or information other than those outlined here. Not ordering the appropriate tests AND ordering unnecessary tests will deduct from your score as well as any other deficiencies in your planning, processing, thinking, verbalizing, or behavioral processes while you are working.

Grading criteria:

Practicum  (Hybrid crime investigation):

A. Mary Jones, an eighteen-year old, had a quarrel with her fiance, Thomas Smith. At 3 a.m. following the evening of their quarrel, Mary went to Smith's house to return his engagement ring. Smith stated that after receiving the ring, he went back to sleep and awoke about 8 a.m.  When he looked out the window, he saw Mary's car still out front. Looking into the car, he discovered Mary sitting erect behind the steering wheel, shot thru the chest, a .38 revolver lying beside her on the front seat. She was dead -- apparently a suicide. the revolver had been a gift to her from her father. Smith called the police to report the incident.
    Mary had been shot once. The bullet entered just below her left breast and lodged near her heart. The medical examiner theorized that she did not die immediately. When found, she was sitting upright in the car, her head tilted slightly backward, her left hand high on the steering wheel, and her right hand hanging limp at her side.
    When questioned, Smith steadfastly denied any knowledge of the shooting. Mary's clothing, the bullet from her body, and the gun were sent to the crime lab for examination. None of her clothing had enough powder residue on it for useful analysis. The bullet was identified as coming from the gun found next to her body.
    1. What evidence, facts, and inferences suggest this is a suicide?
    2. What evidence, facts, and inferences suggest this is a homicide?
    3. What steps would you take to confirm it one way or the other?

B. Two janitors were met at the door of a restaurant they were cleaning by two armed men. One janitor was tied up inside and blindfolded; the other escaped and notified the police. When police arrived, two suspicious-looking suspects were apprehended outside the building in different areas. Both claimed to know nothing of a crime being committed. Inside, the safe had been ripped open, and the other janitor was unharmed. A substance believed to be safe insulation, along with paint chips, was found on the shoes of the two suspects. Laboratory analysis on the suspects' clothing and shoes matched a comparison sample of the safe insulation, and the paint chips matched the top two layers of paint on the safe. The suspects were charged with burglary.
    1. Was the apprehension and charging of the two suspects legal (constitutional)? Why or why not?
    2. What additional evidence should have been located and seized? List all the evidence.
    3. How would you conduct a follow up investigation to confirm or deny the charges?

C. A cash box was left on top of a desk at a university office with receipts of about $600 from student registrations. The box was closed, but not locked. The office manager went to lunch, leaving a student worker in charge. The student took a telephone call in a nearby office, and was away from the desk for about five minutes. Later, she heard a noise in the hallway. She went out to see what had happened and discovered a student had been accidentally pushed through a glass door at the end of the hallway. She observed the scene for about five minutes and then went back to her desk where she did not notice anything out of order.
    After about a half an hour, the office manager returned and helped register two students at the front counter. When she went to the cash box to make change, she found that about $600 was missing. She immediately notified the controller's office. the controller conducted a brief investigation and then notified the police. You are the police investigator arriving at the scene.
    1. What steps need to be taken immediately at the scene? When leaving the scene?
    2. What evidence and comparison samples would you collect? Weigh the evidence.
    3. List your suspects in priority order and what questions you would ask them.

SPRING 2006 -- CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION "LAB" EXERCISES TO CHOOSE FROM: (Choose 1 only)

#12/Lab3 -- Read the following case study and answer the questions given:
Case study: The body of a 14 year old girl is found...
Questions:
1. What is the modus operandi?
2. What physical evidence should be collected?
3. What is the motive for the crime?
4. What is the "window of death"?
5. Who would you interrogate?
6. Where should fingerprints be sought?
7. Is there a primary suspect? Who and why?
8. Are there any witnesses?

#15/Lab1 - Find a parked car and pretend it was used in a robbery-kidnapping, and then...
1. Examine the exterior and interior (without breaking in)
2. Measure and record the location of pertinent items
3. Prepare a sketch of the scene.
4. Prepare a investigative report

#16/Lab3 -- Using transparent tape about 2 inches wide and about 10 inches in length, take a sample of fibers, hairs, and everything else from a couch or piece of furniture.  After taking the sample, put the tape on a piece of paper (sticky side down) and then write up an analysis of what you can see (with a magnifying glass).
1. What fibers were discovered? Describe and analyze.
2. What hairs were discovered? Describe and analyze.
3. What else? Describe and analyze.
4. Include a chain of custody report

#17/Lab3 -- Find a footprint (a good imprint of one), and then write up the following:
1. What distinguishing features are evident? (Try to find almost twelve)
2. Identify which features you would look for in the matching shoe.
3. Explain what the next step is in your investigation at this point.

#20/Lab1 -- Assume a group of terrorists have taken over a building... and that the perimeter has been established and you are the lead negotiator.  Describe how you would conduct your negotiations.

 #21/Lab1 -- Prepare a strike force plan (with both short-term and long-term objectives) to deal with an organized criminal motorcycle gang that is planning to have a rally in your hometown.

#22/Lab2 -- Have somebody attempt to forge something, and compare the handwriting between a genuine sample of their writing

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.