Building Forensic Technology Capacity
Building ForensicTechnology Capacity
Building Forensic Technology CapacityByRichard Williams and Sarah HammondNational Conference of State LegislaturesWilliam T. Pound, Executive Director7700 East First PlaceDenver, Colorado 80230(303) 364-7700444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515Washington, D.C. 20001(202) 624-5400www.ncsl.orgNovember 2009Cover design: Bruce Holdeman, 601 DesignPreparation of the report was supported by Grant No. 2008-DN-BX-K175, awarded by the National Instituteof Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings and conclusionsexpressed in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position or policiesof the U.S. Department of Justice.The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureauof Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,and the Office for Victims of Crime.Printed on recycled paper 2009 by the National Conference of State Legislatures. All rights reserved.ISBN 978-1-58024-571-5Item # 111909CRJ 10
Building Forensic Technology Capacity3IntroductionAdvancements in forensic science are revolutionizing America’s criminal justice system. From collection of evidence at crime scenes to presentation ofanalyzed results in courtrooms, forensic technologyhas improved the quality and accuracy of criminalinvestigations. Forensic techniques include latentfingerprint examination, controlled substance identification and DNA analysis. Investigators who usethese tools to evaluate evidence can solve cases thatotherwise would have remained mysteries.The success of forensic analysis has prompted lawmakers to expand existing state policies. Examplesof emerging forensic applications include expansionof DNA databases, dynamic property crimes investigation and creation of cold case units.Forensics’ potential benefits for the criminal justicesystem currently are hampered by practical concernsabout lab capacity, insufficient funding and a scarcity of appropriately trained personnel. Accordingto the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), 2.7 million cases sent evidence through America’s forensiclabs in 2005. At year end, a backlog of 359,000samples existed. A sample is backlogged if it hasnot been completed within 30 days of receipt. DOJdata suggests that the problem is worsening; averagebacklogged requests nationwide increased from 86to 152 between 2004 and 2005.Two main components are at the heart of the backlog issue for crime laboratories. The first, caseworksample backlog, consists of samples collected fromcrime scenes, victims and suspects in criminal cases.Backlogged casework samples delay analysis for allkinds of forensic evidence. In 2005, controlled substance identification accounted for 51 percent of alllaboratory backlogs; DNA samples were 9 percent.Latent fingerprint examination, firearm and toolmark examination, toxicology analysis, and biologyscreenings also account for significant portions ofthe backlogged requests.The second major source of backlog results fromunder-funded efforts to expand DNA databases.According to the National Institute of Justice, theconvicted offender backlog includes as many as300,000 unanalyzed DNA samples, with more than500,000 samples yet to be taken. The convicted offender backlog consists of samples from those arrested and incarcerated for qualifying crimes. As thenumber of DNA samples submitted has increased,the ability of crime labs to analyze those samples hasnot kept pace. Backlogs of forensic samples increasewhen labs are unable to meet the demand created byexpansive policies for forensic testing. Supplementalfunding from sources such as the National Instituteof Justice has helped many states reduce—and, inVermont, eliminate—backlog. As forensic collection policies continue to expand, it is important forstate legislatures to become active partners in theintergovernmental effort to provide adequate funding for the effective application of forensic sciencein criminal justice.How States UseForensic DNATechnologiesDNA DatabasesIn 47 states, laws require collection of DNA samplesfrom all convicted felons, and all states require samples be taken from at least some felons. In a growingnumber of states, certain classes of arrestees now areNational Conference of State Legislatures
Building Forensic Technology Capacity4required to submit DNA samples. Once collected,the samples are added into databases as the law dictates.The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Laboratory’s Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) iscomputer software that allows forensic laboratoriesat the national, state and local levels to compareDNA samples. CODIS enables state and local laboratories to use the database in accordance withstate and local laws (Table 1).CODIS compares a newly secured sample of forensic evidence against two distinct indexes. Thefirst, the convicted offender index, contains DNAprofiles of people who have been convicted ofcrimes. The second, the forensic index, containsDNA profiles obtained from crime scene evidence,such as semen, saliva or blood. CODIS computersoftware searches these indexes to link new samplesto those already loaded in the database.A match to the new sample is referred to as a “hit.”These include samples that successfully match crimescenes to offenders, offenders to crime scenes, andcrime scenes to each other when the offender re-mains unknown. Each “hit” represents a new leadthat may help investigators solve a crime.The success of CODIS is evidenced by the thousands of hits it produces each year. Hits rose from731 in 2000 to 66,783 in 2008 (Table 2). CODISbecomes more effective as the number of DNAsamples in the database increase. Policies that include more convicted offenders and arrestees instate databases contribute greatly to the success ofCODIS. The benefits of broad inclusion policiesfurther highlight the need for adequate funding toreduce backlogs.Table 2. Trends in Forensic Profile InvestigationCategoriesOffender ProfilesForensic ProfilesInvestigations 82203,401248,94343,15662,05980,948Forensic 8,16343,30558,304Offender Hits Total32,43649,81366,783*Through December 2008.Source: FBI, September 2009; www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/html/codisbrochure text.htm.Table 1. CODISLDIS - Local LaboratoriesSDIS - State LaboratoriesNDIS - National LaboratoriesTypically, the Local DNA IndexSystem (LDIS) installed at crimelaboratories is operated by policedepartments or sheriffs’ offices.DNA profiles originated at the local level can be transmitted to thestate and national levels.Each state has a designated laboratory that operates its DNA IndexSystem (SDIS). SDIS allows local laboratories within each stateto compare DNA profiles. SDISalso is the communication pathbetween local and national tiers.SDIS is typically operated by theagency responsible for monitoringcompliance with the state’s convicted offender statute.The National DNA Index System(NDIS), the highest level of theCODIS hierarchy, enables qualified state laboratories that activelyparticipate in CODIS to compareDNA profiles.Source: DNA Initiative, May 2009; aid/ldisndissdis/.National Conference of State Legislatures
Building Forensic Technology Capacity5Increased DNASamplingDNA sampling laws vary from state to state andtheir breadth increases with every legislative session.California is one of many states expanding its DNAcollection policies. Voter Proposition 69, passed in2004, calls for collection of DNA samples from allconvicted felons and certain classes of arrestees. Beginning in 2009, all adults arrested or charged withany felony must submit a sample for testing.California also is among the states that are battlingbacklogs. In 2005, California completed analysis of67,000 samples, but ended the year with a backlogof 235,000. As of Nov. 30, 2008, however, California had reduced its backlog to 35,664 samples,illustrating significant progress. The effects of collecting DNA samples from all felony arrestees onCalifornia’s backlog remains to be seen.Expansive DNA collection policies in other stateshave created challenges for state and local crime labsto build commensurate capacity for sample profiling. For an overview of each states stance on DNAsampling, see the appendix.As of June 2009, laws in 21 states require DNAsamples from certain arrestees. Maryland, Michigan, South Carolina and South Dakota enactedsuch requirements in 2008, and Arkansas and Vermont, among others, have done so in 2009. Manyarrestee laws include probable cause requirementsand provide for the destruction and removal ofsamples from those whose charges are dismissed. Atthe federal level, 42 U.S.C.A. §14132 requires that,once claims against an arrestee are dismissed or heor she is otherwise found to be innocent, the DNAsample provided must be expunged from the databases. Table 3 details state arrestee sampling laws.Table 3. States That Have DNA Arrestee Collection PoliciesStateAlabamaCitationQualifyingOffensesAll felony arrests; any sex crimearrestsWhen Samples Can BeExpungedUpon order of the circuit courthandling the arrestAll felony arrests and crimesagainst a personAutomatically upon discharge ofarresting 44.41.035Arizona§A.R.S. §13-610Expunged upon request ofVarious offenses; felony andmisdemeanor includingarresteeindecent exposure, public sexualindecency, sexual abuse, burglary,etc.ArkansasHB1473/ACT 974§12-12-1006§12-12-1105Murder and sex crime arrestsExpunged upon request ofarresteeNational Conference of State LegislaturesOtherEffective Oct.1,2010
Building Forensic Technology Capacity6Table 3. States That Have DNA Arrestee Collection Policies (continued)StateCitationQualifyingOffensesWhen Samples Can BeExpungedCalifornia§§Cal. Pen. Code§296§296.1§299Certain felony offenses listedin statute; sex-related offenses,murder, manslaughter etc.When no legal basis exits formaintaining sample the personcan request his record to beexpunged upon requestColoradoS.B.09-241C.R.S. §16-23-101through105S.B. 2276Title XLVIIF.S.s.943.325§K.S.A. 21-2511All felony arrestsExpunged upon request ofarresteeAll felony arrestsExpunged upon request nnesotaOtherAll felony arrestsIf a court later determines therewas no probable cause for thearrest, the arrestee can petitionfor the sample to be expungedupon request§§LSA-R.S. §15:609 All felony arrests and some other If the arrest did not result in aconviction or plea agreement or§15:614offenses, including conspiracy,criminal solicitation, or accessory it was reversed or dismissed, thesample can be expunged uponto such offensesrequest of arresteeMd. Public SafetyAny person charged with orIf all criminal charges areCode Ann. §2-504who attempts a violent crime or unsupportable, DNA sampleburglarywill be automatically destroyed§M.C.L.A. 750.520m A violent felonyExpunged upon request ofThe directorarresteeof theDepartmentof State Policeshall reportthe rate ofDNA samplecollection,DNAidentificationprofiling, etc.§§M.S.A. §299C.155 Anyone convicted of a felony,Automatically upon discharge of§299C.11gross misdemeanor, or targeted arresting offensemisdemeanor within the 10 yearsimmediately preceding theirarrestNational Conference of State LegislaturesSamplesshall not bedestroyedpursuantto claimsupported byprobable cause
Building Forensic Technology Capacity7Table 3. States That Have DNA Arrestee Collection Policies (continued)StateCitationQualifyingOffensesWhen Samples Can BeExpungedMissouriHB 152§§Mo.Rev.Statutes650.050, 650.052,650.055.Murder, sex crime and burglaryarrestsNew Mexico§§N. M. S. A. 1978,§29-16-10§29-3-10§29-16-7§29-16-8.1Any felony from this state or any If arrest resulted in a dismissal,other jurisdictionmisdemeanor conviction oracquittal or does not result in afelony charge within one year ofarrest, then it can be expungedupon request of arresteeAll felony arrestsDisposed of upon requestif a felony conviction is notreached or the case is otherwisedismissedAll felony arrests; an offenseUpon acquittal or dismissal, thepunishable by a sentence of five DNA sample shall be destroyedyears or more; or eavesdropping, automaticallypeeping or stalkingNorth Dakota §31-13-03§31-13-07SouthCarolina§§Code 1976§23-3-620§ 23-3-630§23-3-640OtherAutomatically upon discharge ofarresting offenseSouth Dakota §S.D.C.L.§23-5A-5.2§23-5A generally§23-5B generallyAny qualifying offenseExpunged upon request ofdetermined by the supervisingarresteeagency; includes all felony arrestsTennessee§T. C. A.§40-35-321Violent feloniesTexas§V.T.C.A.,Government Code§411.1471Upon acquittal or dismissal, the A magistrateDNA sample shall be destroyed or grand juryautomaticallymust determinethat there wasprobable causefor the arrestbefore thesample is takenIf previously convicted for aUpon acquittal or dismissal, the Directorcertain class of felonies, arrestees DNA sample shall be destroyed cannotfor this class of felonies mustautomaticallyauthorizesubmit a DNA sampletaking a bloodsample tocreate a DNArecordNational Conference of State Legislatures
Building Forensic Technology Capacity8Table 3. States That Have DNA Arrestee Collection Policies (continued)StateCitationQualifyingOffensesWhen Samples Can BeExpungedVermont20 V.S.A. §1932Sec. 23 through 25All felony arrestsAutomatically upon discharge ofarresting offenseVirginia§Va. Code Ann.§19.2-310.2:1Violent felony; murder; rape;arson; breaking and enteringwith intent to commitmisdemeanorIf the arrest for which thesample was taken for isdismissed, the sample will bedisposed of automaticallyOtherA magistrateor grand jurymust determinethat there wasprobable causefor the arrestbefore thesample is takenSource: NCSL, June 2009.Dynamic Uses forForensic TechniquesIn addition to expanding their DNA collectionlaws, states have used forensic technology to makeother advancements to their criminal justice systems. Notable innovations include post-convictiontesting to exonerate the wrongly convicted, solving“cold cases”, and identifying missing persons andhuman remains.Post-Conviction TestingThe potential for forensic science to exoneratethose wrongly convicted has prompted a growingnumber of states to enact laws that allow post-conviction testing. These laws allow evidence relevantto the case to be considered even after a defendanthas been convicted and exhausted all appeals. Post-conviction testing laws also grant judges broaderauthority to order and admit forensic evidence.Most post-conviction testing laws focus on DNAevidence. As of December 2008, laws in 39 statesprovide post-conviction motions for DNA testing.Some require that a defendant simply show thatpost-conviction DNA testing could provide new,relevant evidence, while others require the defendant prove the results would conclusively demonstrate innocence. Such statutes also differ in whocan apply for post-conviction DNA testing andwho will pay for testing costs. Several laws authorize the state to pay, others require the petitionerto pay, and still others create a fund for indigentpetitioners.Related laws in states require preservation of biological evidence, which is an important aspect offorensic examination. Forensic evidence can erodeover time if not stored and cataloged properly. If ev-National Conference of State Legislatures
Building Forensic Technology Capacity9idence is lost or not preserved, then post-convictionaction becomes impossible. Many post-convictionDNA laws require states to preserve and store DNAevidence for a set time. States continue to study thisissue as they expand DNA policies. In 2008, a Missouri law created a task force to improve preservation and testing of biological evidence.Case WorkForensic technology and properly preserved evidence also are used to investigate cold cases—thosethat remain unsolved and have been shelved afterall leads have been exhausted. Advances in forensictechnology, such as the ability to test evidence onceconsidered insufficient for analysis, allows some cases to be reopened. Most big city police departmentshave units that are devoted to unsolved homicides;they boast a growing list of success stories. In Sacramento, Calif., for example, the police departmentput an offender behind bars in 2007 after reanalyzing evidence from a 2003 sexual assault. Such offenders would remain free if not for cold case investigations.Using DNA to investigate property crimes is another emerging area of forensic science; researchsupports its value. According to the FBI, propertycrimes cost Americans an estimated 17.6 billionin 2007. Those who commit property crimes oftenare serial offenders who also commit more seriouscrimes.A field experiment in five local jurisdictions, fundedby the National Institute of Justice and conductedby the Urban Institute, found that DNA collectedfrom burglary crime scenes significantly increasedsuspect identification and prosecution. Further, burglary suspects arrested as a result of DNA evidencein the field studies were twice as likely as other property crime arrestees to have a criminal history.Compared to traditional fingerprint evidence, DNAevidence more often leads to suspects and resultsin more arrests. These findings suggest that usingDNA evidence to solve property crimes is a viableway to make communities safer.The study findings prompted two of the five jurisdictions involved, Denver and Los Angeles, to appropriate state and local funds to continue usingDNA to investigate property crimes.Identification of Missingor Unidentified PersonsThe missing persons problem in the United Statesis one that cannot be ignored. Linking missingpersons to human remains provides closure for thefriends and families of the victims. DNA analysishelps technicians catalogue unidentified humanremains and link them to missing persons. At anygiven time approximately 100,000 people are reported missing in the United States. By using residual DNA on toothbrushes and cigarette buttsand collecting samples from familial DNA donors,the DNA of those reported missing can be uploadedinto the CODIS missing persons database.There also are 40,000 sets of unidentified humanremains in property rooms throughout the country, but only 6,000 of those have been analyzed andadded to the CODIS missing persons database.Some states have enhanced their ability to identifyhuman remains. Texas created a state missing persons database with heightened concern for privacyissues. The legislation requires that samples remainNational Conference of State Legislatures
Building Forensic Technology Capacity10confidential and be destroyed after positive identification.analyze backlogged forensic DNA caseworksamples.Raising funds to pay for such programs can be difficult. To meet the financial demands of its missingpersons legislation, California increased the priceof obtaining a death certificate by 2 and subsequently has raised 3 million per year.Federal funding for this program is providedthrough several sources, including the DebbieSmith Act of 2003. On May 3, 1989, DebbieSmith was abducted from her Williamsburg,Va., home and raped in a nearby wooded area.Six years after she reported the crime and forensic evidence was collected, she learned froma forensic scientist that her assailant was in aVirginia prison for a separate offense he committed only a few months after attacking her.For six years she needlessly lived in fear of herattacker returning because her rape kit wasamong the backlog at Virginia’s forensic laboratory.Federal Systemsand InitiativesReducing backlogs of convicted offender profilesand casework has been an important priority in thefield of forensic science. At the direction of the U.S.attorney general, the National Institute of Justicecommissi
Building Forensic Technology Capacity 3 In t r o d u c t I o n Advancements in forensic science are revolutioniz-ing America’s criminal justice system. From collec-tion of evidence at crime scenes to presentation of analyzed results in courtrooms, forensic technology has improved the quality and accuracy of criminal investigations.
Forensic Science is the integration of core scientific disciplines. Forensic science involves a variety of careers. 1. Students will recognize the major contributors to the development of Forensic . Worksheets Lab; Activity Project assessments Research activities such as “famous forensic scientists and their contributions” or “careers inFile Size: 444KBPage Count: 21People also search forforensic science for high school textbook pdfdo forensic criminologist investigate the cri forensic criminology bookswhat is a dental hygienisthow to check fingerprint forensic criminologyare dental hygienists and dentist same thing
Forensic science is the application of science to law. Any science can be applied into a legal situation, but some of the commonest forensic sciences include forensic biology, forensic chemistry, and forensic toxicology. The word forensic in today’s world simply
forensic science discipline (or equivalent). Experience It is essential that the post holder is an experienced forensic scientist in forensic drug analysis, forensic toxicology and preferably in forensic criminalistics, with a minimum of 10 years performing multi-disciplined forensic
Forensic Psychology Chapter ObjeCtives ·orensic Define f psychology. · Review career areas in the forensic sciences. · Distinguish forensic psychology from forensic psychiatry. · Identify and describe the major subareas of forensic psychology. · Review the educational, training, and certification requirements to become a forensic psychologist.
Delivering forensic services (Report 21: 2018-19) 4 . Summary of audit findings . Delivering forensic services . We audited four types of forensic services: fingerprints, deoxyribonucleic acid(DNA), forensic medical examinations and illicit drugs. Three of these services accounted for approximately 92 per cent of all forensic services .
Exploring Forensic Anthropology and Forensic Entomology 121 Define the terms : forensic anthropology: and : forensic entomology. 122 Differentiate between a male skeleton and a female skeleton. . Definition should include identifying forensic
Forensic Toxicology in Death Investigation Eugene C. Dinovo, Ph.D., and Robert H. Cravey Forensic toxicology is a highly specialized area of forensic science which requires exper tise in analytical chemistry, pharmacology, biochemistry, and forensic investigation. The practicing forensic toxicologist is concerned
Siklus Akuntansi Jasa BAGIAN PROYEK PENGEMBANGAN KURIKULUM DIREKTORAT PENDIDIKAN MENENGAH KEJURUAN DIREKTORAT JENDERAL PENDIDIKAN DASAR DAN MENENGAH DEPARTEMEN PENDIDIKAN NASIONAL 2003 Kode Modul: AK.26.D.2,3. BAGIAN PROYEK PENGEMBANGAN KURIKULUM DIREKTORAT PENDIDIKAN MENENGAH KEJURUAN DIREKTORAT JENDERAL PENDIDIKAN DASAR DAN MENENGAH DEPARTEMEN PENDIDIKAN NASIONAL 2003 Kode Modul: AK.26.D.2,3 .
