Regarding Investigative Practice and Methods

In this, my Midterm Essay, I will answer a series of questions regarding investigative practice and methods, explaining the answers to each, as well as providing some examples of how each makes sense in practical application. The questions cover elements of investigation that we discussed in Criminal Investigation class during the first 5 weeks of the semester. The textbook reading, seminars, and discussion board conversations all helped me learn this material, so without further ado, here are the questions, as well as my answers to them.

1. What are methods of inquiry and how are they used in criminal investigation?

The methods of inquiry, at their most basic level, include Interviews and Interrogations, and on a crime-scene specific level also includes Canvassing, which involves going through the neighborhood, often door to door, to find witnesses who hopefully will give the investigators information on what they saw transpire at the scene of the crime. Interviews are non-custodial, and are the common way to gather information from crime victims and witnesses, or even from Informants who might possess further information to help shed light on the facts of the case. Interrogations, on the other hand, are custodial, meaning they are conducted on people who have been arrested as suspects who may have perpetrated a crime, when an investigator is seeking a testimony, if not an admission of guilt or a statement of innocence. While Interviews and Interrogations are two different methods of information gathering, each with its own purpose, they can easily shift from one to the other. For instance, if an interviewee gives information that would lead the investigator to believe that the interviewee may be a suspect of the crime, the investigator can arrest them, converting the Interview into an Interrogation. When this happens, it would be a good idea to read the suspect their Miranda Warnings, so that any testimony that ensues would be admissible as evidence in a court of law, and would not violate the terms of the Miranda Decision (Miranda v. Arizona). Conversely, if during an Interrogation, the investigator finds reason to believe the suspect is being detained in error, the investigator can at their discretion consider reversing the Interrogation to an Interview.

2. What is the optimal mindset of an investigator and how are the concepts associated with the optimal mindset of an investigator manifest?

The investigator has to be sober-minded, inquisitive, and physically able to do his or her job of collecting and analyzing evidence. They have to have a sense of fidelity, ensuring that they act honestly in their job as an investigator, that they will not tamper with the evidence, and thus not commit perjury. They have to show the character trait of bravery, not being frightened by the duties of their job. They have to exercise regularly to maintain their physical health, so that they are fit enough to do the investigative work they are called to do, and also need to be able to relax and stay calm, so they don’t become overburdened with the stressors that come along with their investigative job. They have to have a thorough knowledge of the criminal justice system, including the branches of the criminal justice system, how they interrelate, and the intricacies within the system which the investigator needs to know to excel with their investigative prowess. They need to show a natural integrity, a firm ethical background, and a propensity to only work for the benefit of society at large and not for its degradation.

Here are a few examples of how these traits can be used in practical situations. The investigator can work out daily at the gym before going to work, and they can go to a daily yoga or tai chi class after work, in order to relax. In regard to their personal fidelity, they can refuse to accept bribes from criminals who ask the investigator to discard evidence that could possibly lead to their conviction at a later trial. If the investigator needs to use firearms on the job, they need to show a natural bravery to do their job and not let the perpetrator who attacked them overtake them. Regarding their personal integrity, they would have to be kind to the victims and witnesses they interview, and show patience when conducting interviews. These are a few examples although there are many other ways that the investigator could use these traits while on the job.

3. What is the scientific method and how is it applied to criminal investigation by criminal investigators?

The scientific method means to carefully analyze evidence, to examine a case from every possible angle, to not cease the investigation until all the angles are covered, and to not let personal emotions cloud their mind with bias. Here are several practical applications of how an investigator would use the scientific method while on the job. When they arrive to the scene of the crime for investigation, they would have to scan the area around the scene for clues as well, since there may be footprints around the general area of the crime, not only within the yellow tape. They would have to search for trace evidence, as well as the more traditional forms of evidence, since trace evidence can provide DNA evidence which can also prove who the perpetrator is, when the case is taken to trial. If there is a broken window that the perpetrator came in through, there may be blood near the window which contains DNA evidence; if no blood is present, there may be skin cells near the window which can provide DNA evidence. These are a few examples, but in practical application of investigative practice, there are many different avenues for the investigator to analyze before the case can be closed.

4. Discuss the three primary sources of information for criminal investigators and provide detailed practical examples of each source listed.

The primary three sources of the information investigators need are People, Physical Evidence, and Records (Documentary Evidence). The people investigators would look to for information include Witnesses for interview, Victims for interview (if they are still alive), and of course Suspects for interrogation. An interview could become an interrogation if the witness becomes hostile and leads the investigator to believe that they are a suspect; in the case of a rape victim, the investigator needs to show extreme courtesy, while still proving they understand the sexual jargon they speak with. The type of Evidence (Physical Evidence) an investigator would use as information include Fingerprints, Firearm Evidence, Evidence of Breaking and Entry at the Point of Access, DNA Evidence, Biological Evidence such as what Forensic Pathologists would analyze, and more. For instance, the investigator would have to carefully preserve all the evidence at the scene of the crime, in order to prevent degradation and contamination on its way to the lab for further analysis, and later on the way to the trial where it will be presented as courtroom evidence after the opening statements of the Prosecutor and defense. Documentary Evidence (Records) include identification records such as social security cards, drivers’ licenses, and passports; bank statements, letters of correspondence, receipts, press releases, and more. For example, in practical application an investigator would have to examine these soberly, taking into account any tears, wrinkles, or erasures that would make portions unreadable; if portions are indeed unreadable, they would have to transmit the records to a graphologist lab for further analysis after its careful collection and preservation.