SPECIAL REPORT Proper Handling of Evidence
Handling evidence under a buddy system is ideal.
Two offi cers testifying the same gives the defense little wiggle room. All scenes are different, so an offi cer must ask how he/she can best paint a detailed description of the scene for the jury and others. Diagraming the scene is very important for reconstruction pur- poses. Offi cers want to put the jury at the scene when explaining it on the stand. By giving them a detailed diagram with measurements not to scale, they can put the scene in better perspective. What can go wrong, may indeed go wrong. Unfortunately, everyone is a de- tective in today’s “CSI” rage. Potential ju- rors are not only educated on the different types of potential evidence, they are aware of the terminology too. As for the actual handling of evidence, it is vital that cross- contamination does not occur. Not only should each piece of evidence be properly documented, but handled as its own entity. They make gloves every day, so use them. Keep in mind, what you think is a small case could catch national atten- tion. Don’t be that offi cer left to explain why contaminated fi ngerprint or DNA evidence came from the scene. Great documentation is needed when anything whatsoever is taken from the scene. Precise documentation is critical when seizing evidence at the scene. From location to bagging, to transport vehicle, everything is photographed or videotaped with an accurate time stamp. At this point, it is also good practice for the second offi cer to play devil’s advocate. After each piece of evidence is located and seized, constantly asking if every “I” was dotted and every “T” was crossed is important. There are many offi cers out there sitting
38 LAW and ORDER I June 2015
Proper documentation is a non-negotiable.
on the stand kicking themselves for some- thing they could have done better. It’s a much safer avenue taking all the time needed to document seized evidence. The offi cer’s time on the stand should be spent explaining the evidence, not how the process was improperly handled. The less doubt for the jury, the better. Due diligence pays off when the evi-
dence is where it should be. Once the evidence is transported back to the de- partment, it should be under the same magnifying glass as it was at the scene. The offi cer must precisely follow the de- partment’s evidence intake policy and procedures. It is also good protocol to have logs showing offi cers are periodi- cally trained in the department’s evidence collection process. Ignorance is no excuse when handling key pieces of evidence. There are a number of records manage- ment systems out there to streamline this process. Anything to make sure the chain of custody is not broken reaps benefi ts in the end and if a digital system prevents er- rors, then cost should not be an issue. There are many departments still rely- ing on the trusted paper method. If this is a fi ne-tuned procedure, then great, but a fail-safe system (if there is such a thing) could be a great addition to this process. From here, the property control offi cer should have specifi c procedures in place for proper documentation and placement purposes. Mistakes at this level are just as important as the actual seizing process. Lost evidence is not an option. Can you imagine what could happen if defense attorneys found out the property control offi cer left the evidence room door open? This small mistake could be detri-
mental to every case and the department’s reputation. This is a small example why a buddy system can help to eliminate small but potentially critical mistakes. Documenting digital evidence is no dif- ferent. In the digital world, it is required to show the evidence was not altered in any way, i.e., Photoshopped. The “originated” and “last modifi ed” labels attached to the photo are important, but there are many other tools to prove the integrity of a photo. In a case where digital evidence, i.e., photos, computers, etc. play a major role, the prose- cutor should seek testimony from an expert. When taking hundreds of photos at the scene, the offi cer is bound to experience fl ash or lighting issues. Should the un- readable photos be deleted? Absolutely not. If the defense notices missing or out- of-sequence photos, it’s likely red fl ags are raised. No investigation is perfect, but any opportunity to quash doubt is ideal. Because of the possibilities for error, evidence collection and chain of custody are two of the most highly criticized pro- cedures in law enforcement. This is only a fragment of ways to seize and docu- ment evidence, but if offi cers are prop- erly trained in department protocol, use a buddy system, and constantly question every piece of seized evidence, the room for error is minimal.
J L Sumpter, M.S. is a retired detective sergeant and a current deputy with the Charlevoix County Sheriff’s Office. J L is a full-time freelance writer and public speaker. He can be reached at
jsump@me.com.
LaO Post your comments on this story by visiting
www.lawandordermag.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68