Rd Julian

Professionalism in Crime Scene Examination: The Seven Key Attributes of Top Crime Scene Examiners

Abstract The crime scene is a critical element of criminal investigations and where forensic science begins. Inadequately managed scenes lead to poor evidence and risk of wrongful convictions. Reports from the United States and the United Kingdom highlight that some crime scene examiners (CSEs) outperform their peers, leading to less unsolved cases. What neither report explained was why some CSEs excel. We identified the attributes of top-performing CSEs using job analytical techniques with 72 police investigators, forensic scientists, senior police managers, and 18 top CSEs from across Australia. We analyzed the data and found seven distinct critical skill sets for top performance in CSE: knowledge, life experience, professionalism, approach to life, communication, cognitive abilities, and stress management. In this paper we present the critical skills and discuss the multiple ways that top CSEs positively impact the work of criminal investigators and other CSEs, as well as the impact they have upon efficiencies within forensic laboratories.

Dismantling the Justice Silos: Avoiding the pitfalls and reaping the benefits of information-sharing between forensic science, medicine and law

Forensic science is increasingly relied on by police and the courts to exonerate the innocent and to establish links to crime. With this increased reliance the potential for unjust outcomes increases, especially in serious matters for two reasons. The more serious the matter, the more likely that evidence mishandling can lead to wrongful imprisonment, and the more likely the personnel involved will be multi-disciplinary (police, medicine, law, forensic science), and multi-organisational (Health, Justice, private legal/medical, police). The importance of identifying effective multi-organisational interactions was highlighted in the recent wrongful imprisonment of an Australian male for a sexual assault he did not commit. One factor that led to this unjust outcome was the justice silo effect: where forensic practitioners from different agencies operate in isolation (rarely communicating or sharing information/knowledge). In this paper we discuss findings from the Interfaces Project designed to assess the extent of the justice silos within Australia. We interviewed 103 police, forensic scientists, lawyers, judges, coroners, pathologists and forensic physicians Australian-wide. Five main themes were identified in the data: the silo effect was only partial and in each jurisdiction some form of inter-agency communication was actively occurring; inter-agency meetings were more common in homicide than sexual assault cases; forensic physicians were semi-invisible; there had been considerable momentum over the past ten years for practice improvement groups, and; practitioners gain more benefits than pitfalls from inter-agency information-sharing. Based on these findings, five recommendations are made for improving practice.

What is the value of forensic science? An overview of the effectiveness of forensic science in the Australian criminal justice system project

Forensic science is increasingly relied upon by law enforcement to assist in solving crime and gaining convictions, and by the judicial system in the adjudication of specific criminal cases. However, the value of forensic science relative to the work involved and the outcome of cases has yet to be established in the Australian context. Previous research in this area has mainly focused on the science and technology, rather than examining how people can use forensic services/science to the best possible advantage to produce appropriate justice outcomes. This five-year project entails an investigation into the effectiveness of forensic science in police investigations and court trials. It aims to identify when, where and how forensic science can add value to criminal investigations, court trials and justice outcomes while ensuring the efficient use of available resources initially in the Victorian and the ACT criminal justice systems and ultimately across Australia and New Zealand. This paper provides an overview of the rationale and aims of the research project and discusses current work-in-progress.

Forensic scientists’ conclusions: How readable are they for non-scientist report-users?

Scientists have an ethical responsibility to assist non-scientists to understand their findings and expert opinions before they are used as decision-aids within the criminal justice system. The communication of scientific expert opinion to non-scientist audiences (e.g., police, lawyers, and judges) through expert reports is an important but under-researched issue. Readability statistics were used to assess 111 conclusions from a proficiency test in forensic glass analysis. The conclusions were written using an average of 23 words per sentence, and approximately half of the conclusions were expressed using the active voice. At an average Flesch-Kincaid Grade level of university undergraduate (Grade 13), and Flesch Reading Ease score of difficult (42), the conclusions were written at a level suitable for people with some tertiary education in science, suggesting that the intended non-scientist readers would find them difficult to read. To further analyse the readability of conclusions, descriptive features of text were used: text structure; sentence structure; vocabulary; elaboration; and coherence and unity. Descriptive analysis supported the finding that texts were written at a level difficult for non-scientists to read. Specific aspects of conclusions that may pose difficulties for non-scientists were located. Suggestions are included to assist scientists to write conclusions with increased readability for non-scientist readers, while retaining scientific integrity. In the next stage of research, the readability of expert reports in their entirety is to be explored.

Minority women and the experiences of migration

Abstract This article addresses the theme of minority relations and the intensification of gender oppression. We adopt a comparative perspective to examine women’s experiences of migration in two diverse locations. The recent focus on difference in feminist writing renders problematic such comparative enterprises through the contemporary concern with questioning the universality of the category “woman.” However, we suggest that the concept has been deconstructed to the point that it raises the possibility that feminism becomes an inadequate theory and methodology for explaining the status of women. Through a comparative analysis of minority women in different social and cultural contexts, we explore this dilemma for feminism. We examine how gender relations reconfigure in reconstituted relations of class, race, and ethnicity and emphasize the necessity of recognizing both the dynamics of migrating feminisms and the centrality of gender in structuring power relations in diverse contexts.

The readability of expert reports for non-scientist report-users: Reports of DNA analysis

DNA evidence can be extremely compelling. With ongoing scientific advances and applications of DNA evidence in the criminal justice system, it is increasingly important that police, lawyers, and judges recognise both the limitations of DNA evidence and the strength of the evidence in particular cases. Because most forensic sciences are formally communicated via expert reports, we analysed the readability of 68 such reports of DNA evidence from 6 of 8 Australian jurisdictions. We conducted content analyses using three categories: content and sequence, language, and format. Categories contained qualitative and quantitative items drawn from theory and past research. Report styles differed by jurisdiction and by main audience - police and the courts. Reports for police were brief and few links were made between sections in these reports. Reports for courts were less brief and used either legal or scientific styles. Common sections in reports for courts included: the scientists specialised knowledge; laboratory accreditation information; item list; results; and notes on interpretation. Sections were often not in a logical sequence, due to the use of appendices. According to Flesch Reading Ease scores, reports for police had language that was fairly difficult, and reports for courts, difficult. Difficulty was compounded by the use of specialist terms. Reports for police and the appendices of reports for court often used very small font and single line spacing. Many reports for court contained tables that spanned several pages. Suggestions based on theory and past research are provided to assist scientists to enhance the readability of reports for non-scientists.

Forensic science as “risky business”: identifying key risk factors in the forensic process from crime scene to court

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss key risk factors in the use of forensic science in the criminal justice system by adopting a holistic and systemic approach that examines the collection and use of forensic evidence from crime scene to court. Design/methodology/approach – The research on which the paper is based was a mixed-method five-year study of the effectiveness of forensic science in the criminal justice system in Australia using qualitative and quantitative methods. The paper draws on the in-depth analysis of qualitative data from 11 case studies of investigations of serious crime to identify key risk factors in the use of forensic science from crime scene to court. Findings – Six key risk factors in the forensic process from crime scene to court are identified: low level of forensic awareness among first responders; crime scene examiners (CSEs) as technicians rather than professionals; inefficient and/or ineffective laboratory processes; limited forensic literacy among key actors in the criminal justice system; poor communication between key actors in the criminal justice system; and, financial resources not directed at the front end of the forensic process. Overall the findings demonstrate that forensic science is not well embedded in the criminal justice system. Practical implications – The paper suggests that the risks inherent in the current practice of forensic science in the criminal justice system can be reduced dramatically through: forensic awareness training among first responders; the professionalisation of CSEs; continued improvements in efficiency and effectiveness at the laboratory with a focus on timeliness and quality; greater forensic literacy among actors in the criminal justice system; appropriate avenues of communication between agencies, practitioners and policymakers in the criminal justice system; and increased allocation of resources to the front end of the forensic process. Originality/value – By adopting a holistic, systemic approach to the analysis of forensic science in the criminal justice system, and identifying inherent risks in the system, this paper contributes to the emerging body of research on the social processes that impact on the effectiveness of forensic science.

Psychometric Evaluation Of The Level Of Service/Case Management Inventory Among Australian Offenders Completing Community-Based Sentences

Risk assessment inventories play a significant role in predicting recidivism risk and informing parole and community supervision orders. This article examines the effectiveness of the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI) in a study of Australian offenders completing community-based sentences. The study aimed to identify the internal reliability and the factor structure of the LS/CMI. The results indicated that the LS/CMI total score achieved excellent internal reliability. There is concern regarding the capacity for the subscales to function independently. A factor analysis determined a two-factor solution at a subscale level, whereas a more diverse factor solution was obtained at an item level. The LS/CMI was determined to be predictive of recidivism, but this was a weak effect. The results indicate that the LS/CMI as it is currently used in this population may not be an appropriate assessment tool, requiring further research before an international risk assessment is adopted in Australian jurisdictions.

Forensic intelligence in policing: organisational and cultural change

One outcome from a Forensic Intelligence Workshop held by Australia New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency (ANZPAA) National Institute of Forensic Science (NIFS) in Canberra in October 2011 was the identification that, generally, there is not an intelligence culture within forensic science and organisational and cultural change would be required if forensic science is to play a meaningful role in the intelligence space. Over the past decade, attempts have been made to develop a best practice Integrated Forensic Intelligence Model to improve the integration of crime scene physical evidence, intelligence, and investigative capabilities. Although there has been some progression, it has been isolated, jurisdictionally driven and rarely strategic. This paper begins by examining some of the organisational and cultural barriers to the development and implementation of ‘forensic intelligence’ models in Australian jurisdictions. It goes on to outline the progress that has been made, despite these challenges, towards the development of a forensic intelligence culture in some jurisdictions, and identifies some of the factors that have contributed to this shift. It concludes with some recommendations for a way forward.

Success in Forensic Science Research and Other Collaborative Projects: Meeting Your Partners' Expectations

Abstract Forensic science is increasingly used in civil and criminal investigations and court proceedings. Over the past decade there has been a marked increase in the number of large collaborative and interagency research projects looking at the effectiveness of forensic science. Whether these large inter- agency projects will be successful is based on two fundamentals: whether the research produces quality outputs and, more importantly, whether the outputs match the expectations of research partners and stakeholders. We discuss the importance of understanding what partners and stakeholders expect and need from projects in which they invest. We explored expectations in a large Australian project assessing ‘The Effectiveness of Forensic Science in the Criminal Justice System’. This collaboration is between two Australian police forces, the National Institute of Forensic Science, and three Australian and one European university. We found that the way stakeholders interpreted the title of the project influenced the direction they wanted the research to take and what outcomes/outputs they expected. We found five different research directions and outcomes/outputs expectations. We suggest that to avoid disappointment, stakeholders should voice their expectations and explicitly define their needs. Since expectations are rarely static, it makes sense to revisit expectations of stakeholders throughout projects.