Sally F. Kelty

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.

You Have to Hit Some People! Measurement and Criminogenic Nature of Violent Sentiments in Australia

Criminal sentiments are the highest risk factor for recidivism. Although criminal sentiments have been reliably measured, there are few scales measuring violent sentiments. The aim of this study was to report on three studies exploring the theory and psychometrics of a new Justification for Violence Scale (JFV). The JFV items have high ecological validity in that they were drawn from in-depth interviews with violent men. Psychometric analysis showed that the JFV was unifactorial with high criterion-related validity differentiating three distinct groups (sample N = 530): male offenders, men and women from the community, and university undergraduates. In a further study of 250 community adults, high correlations with self-reported physical aggression and violent fantasies, and negative correlations with social desirability supported the JFVs convergent and discriminant validity. The JFV can be used by researchers or clinicians as a single measure or the items can be inserted into the Criminal Sentiments Scale to enhance the measurement of violent and criminal attitudes and beliefs.

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.

Professionalism in Crime Scene Examination: Recruitment Strategies Using the Seven Key Attributes of Top Crime Scene Examiners

Abstract Hiring well is crucial for law enforcement/forensic science agencies. Recruiting high-caliber forensic personnel, such as effective crime scene examiners (CSEs), is no exception. This is the second of a series on professionalism in CSEs. The first paper identified the key attributes that set top CSEs apart from their peers. Given the importance placed on accurate crime scene processing and having identified what attributes underpin top CSEs, the next stage is to consider how to recruit personnel with the potential to become top-performing CSEs. The aim of this paper is to provide law enforcement and forensic science agencies with evidence-based recruitment guidelines that could assist them in selecting personnel with the potential to excel in their roles. In this paper, a multi-source recruitment strategy is discussed that utilizes focused psychometric assessment, targeted selection criteria, key interview questions, medical assessment, and collection of information from referees.

No Burnout at this Coal-Face: Managing Occupational Stress in Forensic Personnel and the Implications for Forensic and Criminal Justice Agencies

Working as a police officer, psychiatric intern, crime scene expert or forensic physician can be stressful and these occupations have high burnout rates. Almost 20% of police officers and other justice-related emergency management personnel develop heightened occupational stress. In some Australian law-enforcement agencies, attrition rates of close to 50% over 3 years have been reported for forensic practitioners and crime scene examiners (CSEs). Included in these rates are a large number of CSEs who report long-term psychological injury due to their exposure to serious crime scenes. We interviewed 19 CSEs designated by their workplaces as performing at a high level to determine how they manage this stressful occupational. The CSEs were aware of the potential stress of their occupation and actively engaged in self stress-management strategies. In this article, we overview the results with attention given to why forensic organizations should invest in promoting stress-management strategies in their employees.

Response to Recommendation 2 of the 2009 NAS Report—Standards for Formatting and Reporting Expert Evaluative Opinions: Where Do We Stand?

ABSTRACT Over four years ago, the 2009 US National Academy of Sciences report on forensic science was published, revealing that few formal standards existed in the forensic sciences. The second recommendation of the NAS report related to the language of reporting. This two-fold recommendation urged that templates for expert reports be developed and that the language and terminology of the reports and related expert testimony be standardized. This paper offers a response to Recommendation 2 of the NAS report and a research update. Since the release of the NAS report, Standards Australia has developed a set of forensic standards, including one for reporting. In light of Recommendation 2 of the NAS report and the Australian Standard for reporting, we outline current reporting practices of forensic science in the Australian context, and review research about the communication of forensic science, highlighting recent Australian research undertaken at two universities. We discuss the progress made to date in the development of best practice in expert reports and language use, introduce new directions for developing communicative excellence amongst forensic scientists, and suggest future research directions.

You Have to Hit Some People! Endorsing Violent Sentiments and the Experience of Grievance Escalation in Australia

Criminal justice statistics show that Australia is the fourth highest nation for non-sexual violent assault and that most assaults are not random events. We investigated how grievances escalate into violence in a series of in-depth interviews with male maximum security prisoners who had a record of violent offences. Our analyses focused on the experience of grievance escalation and the justifications offered for the use of violence. We found that grievances were often triggered by psychological harm (broken promises, insults, inconsiderate behaviour) and that, although most of the men thought about the grievances only in terms of themselves and one other person, significant others, such as girlfriends or friends, on occasions provided weapons or encouraged violence. The involvement of significant others in escalating grievances suggests that violence prevention programs should include training in impression management and in skills to counter the insistence of girlfriends, family, and others for an aggressive response.