Solid Communication In Criminal Justice

The most important thing to remember when called to a crime scene is that no situation is textbook. Guidelines may be in place to help investigators get started, but the methods of securing and processing will vary by crime scene. Outside factors may make it hazardous for investigators to do their job – inclement weather, safety hazards such as a downed power line, fire hazards, etc. These factors will dictate how investigators approach the scene, so they must remember to be adaptable and willing to compromise when needed. They may also have to wait until the scene is safe to approach before examining it.

Locard’s exchange principle states that whenever a person enters a location, they both add and subtract material from the crime scene that indicate their presence there (National Forensic Science Technology Center, n.d.). For this reason, it is very important to secure the area as quickly as possible. Unnecessary disruption from outside forces can destroy evidence and disturb the investigation, which in the end may cause problems for investigators. Cases can be thrown out of court due to evidence contamination – and the initial crime scene is often where this happens.

Solid communication is important in any job, but it is especially important in the criminal justice sector. One

person cannot investigate a crime scene alone. So the lead investigator must make an effort to keep others who are involved well informed about the facts of the case, information obtained from witnesses and evidence, and how the investigation is progressing, among other things. A lack of communication can cause some people to act without being fully aware of the potential consequences. In this line of work, it can prove seriously detrimental to the prosecution’s case.
Whenever there is an indication of firearm evidence at a crime scene, it can manifest in a number of ways.

The most easily recognized forms of firearm evidence could include the weapon itself, bullets, and cartridge casings. These alone can tell investigators the gauge of the gun, the manufacturer or marketer, and unique individual characteristics that can identify a particular firearm (Firearms evidence, n.d.). By looking a little closer at the bullet wounds themselves, investigators may also be able to find gunshot residue and gunpowder patterns. All guns are engraved with the serial number, and even if it has been filed away, it can be restored and identify the owner of the

firearm.
Whenever there are more bullet casings than bullet wounds, it means there are additional expended bullets elsewhere on the premises. Those extra shots may have been fired into any object of the environment or even into the shooter himself. In this case, it was found to have been fired into a nearby sofa. Investigators, then, should expand the area of examination in search of that projectile. If they can find those extra bullets, they can begin a ballistics analysis that much sooner. Every piece of evidence is substantial in piecing together what happened, even when that value is not immediately apparent. Extra bullets can tell just as much of the story as the bullets that killed the victims.
In this case, the recovered projectile in the sofa did not match the bullets found in the victims. This can only mean one thing. The two sets of projectiles came from different firearms. This in turn means that there were at least two different weapons present at the scene at the time of the murder. More often than not, this will also indicate that there were two separate shooters – not always, but often. Sometimes this may be an indication that the victim fired back at their assailant in an attempt of self-defense, if there is a weapon with the victim.
In the given example, the woman found dead at the scene did not have powder burns anywhere on her person. While the distance at which a firearm is able to project residue varies by the weapon, the lack of residue on an individual is an indication that the gun was not fired at close range. This rules out the possibility on the perpetrator being close enough to have inflicted any further harm. This is also an indication that the woman was not handling the firearm herself, meaning that – at least on her part – this was not a murder-suicide. She did not handle a weapon and neither was she in immediate proximity to one.