Supreme Court Will Decide on Collection of DNA
In 2013, the Supreme Court will decide whether it is legal for law enforcement to collect DNA samples from people under arrest, but not yet convicted of the crime. There are currently 27 states and the federal government that have laws allowing these laws as they help to solve old cases and provide public safety. But, justices will review a verdict made in Maryland court in which law enforcement could not collect DNA from suspects who have not yet been convicted of a crime. In 2009, Maryland began collect samples from those arrested for violent crimes. Alonzo King Jr. was arrested during that time for assault and police collected his DNA. Kings DNA matched the DNA of a rapist from a rape, which took place in 2003. As a result, King was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison. However, King stated that the collection of his DNA before conviction violated the Fourth Amendment. The highest court agreed with Kings views and his conviction was overturned. Jesse Holland of the Associated Press stated “The federal appeals courts have so far side with the police on this issue, who say the samples contribute to a database that helps law enforcement.” State of Maryland has appealed the courts decision and the Supreme Court will review the case in 2013.
Check out the full article here.
Date of Article: November 12, 2012
[Abstract by David Miller, ForensIQ Intern, December 5, 2012]
Citation
Holland, Jesse. “Supreme Court Will Decide on Collection of DNA Samples.” Forensic Magazine. 12 Nov. 2012. Web. 05 Dec. 2012.
Police Adopt Cellphone Forensic Technology
Local law enforcement agencies will now be equipped with mobile forensic technology in which allows them to instantly access information on cell phone calls, text messages, and photos of those suspected to be involved in criminal activity. The device is called Cellebrite and will significantly assist officers during investigations. This device allows officers to receive information immediately, which previously took weeks to receive. Officer Joe Harris, member of the FBI Cyber Crime Task Force, said “the equipment will extract and decode digital evidence and download it using software into a readable report. He said the information can be obtained on existing, hidden and deleted phone data, including call history, text messages, contacts, images and geotags” (Ellis). The device will be of assistance in various types of crimes and significantly helps in seizing, securing, and analyzing digital evidence. Furthermore, it will be useful in the early stages of investigations and will be of assistance in the courtroom. “According to Cellebrite, the device works on 3,000 phone models and even can defeat password protections. The analyzer allows visualization of both existing and deleted locations on Google Earth, as well, and location information from GPS devices and image geotags can be mapped on Google Maps” (Ellis). You can learn more about this technology by going to www.cellebrite.com.
Check out the full article here.
[Abstract by David Miller, ForenIQ Student Intern, December 5, 2012]
Date of Article: November 12, 2012
Citation
Ellis, Cynthia M. “Police Adopt Cellphone Forensic Technology.” Officer.com. N.p., 12 Nov. 2012. Web. 05 Dec. 2012.
The forensicweek.com Webcast Show – Thursday, 7:00 to 8:00 PM (EST) Schedule of Guests
The November 29th premier of forensicweek.com on November 29th was a success with over 200 views watching the first show. The schedule of special guests and forensic subjects that will be discussed are as follows:
December 6 – Marilyn London – Forensic Anthropologist – Forensic anthropology is concerned with the scientific recovery, analysis and identification of human remains.
December. 13 – Dr. Priya Banerjee, Assistant Medical Examiner for the State of Rhode Island – Forensic Pathologist – Forensic Pathology is the study of the causation of suspicious, unexpected or unusual death.
Forensicweek.com is webcast every Thursday from 7:00 PM to 8:00 PM (EST) with new and exciting guests each week.
To view The forensicweek.com Show LIVE or watch a past recorded show, just go to forensicweek.com.
ForensIQ in the News, “Descendants seek clues in 1919 in Westmoreland double murder.”
ForensIQ’s Tom Mauriello and his University of Maryland student intern investigative team visited Westmoreland County PA this past week, November 19 and 20, 2012. The Westmoreland County PA Greensburg Tribune Review Newspaper published a feature story today, Sunday November 25, 2012, about the 1919 “cold case” and the efforts of ForensIQ and the University of Maryland Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Read the article here…
ForensIQ 1919 “Cold Case” Investigation Team Visiting Jeannette PA
Tom Mauriello and his student interns are continuing their investigation into the double murder case that occurred in Jeannette, PA on December 15, 1919. On November 19 and 20, 2012, the team will be visiting the area of the murders and meeting with Westmoreland County’s Coroner, District Attorney and Sheriff’s Offices, in an attempt to find documentation of the murders. See more…
Discovery’s ID Channel Airing “Forensic You Decide: Caught On Tape” Show
For those of you who haven’t had the opportunity to view one of the forensic documentaries featuring Tom Mauriello, then tune in on August 3rd, 2012 at 10:00 PM, ET/PT, to the Forensic You Decide series, Episode 5, “Caught On Tape.” This show is a Murder/Arson case committed in Baltimore City in 2006 that has some interesting turns of events. Learn more about the show…
Tattoos Finally Have A Purpose – FBI Adding Them to Identification Database
Anyone who knows Tom Mauriello knows what he thinks of tattoos on people’s bodies. Well he has changed his mind. He believes they finally have some utility. The FBI’s Biometric Center of Excellence (BCOE) is gathering information regarding tattoos to add more identifying factors to their database. Researching extremist and gang-related tattoos across the country will allow the FBI to use these permanent marks to identify people beyond using just DNA, fingerprints, or mug shots. In the future, scars and other skin marks will be included, as well as developments in voice, iris and even footprints.
Find out more now.
Date of Article: July 19, 2012
[Abstract by Carrie Wells, ForensIQ Student Intern, July 21, 2012]
Cable TV Documentary “Lizzie Borden Had An Ax” showing again!
For those of you who have not seen the TV documentary I did in 2004, “Lizzie Borden Had An Ax,” you have several more chances to do just that in the next few weeks. Discovery Channel’s new cable network, Destination America is showing it next Tuesday, July 24th at 10:00 PM and Friday, August 3rd at 9:00 PM. Click here to see highlights of the show.
Justice Dept., FBI to review use of forensic evidence in thousands of cases.
The Justice Department and the FBI have launched a review of thousands of criminal cases to determine whether any defendants were wrongly convicted or deserve a new trial because of flawed forensic evidence, officials said Tuesday.
The undertaking is the largest post-conviction review ever done by the FBI. It will include cases conducted by all FBI Laboratory hair and fiber examiners since at least 1985 and may reach earlier if records are available, people familiar with the process said. Such FBI examinations have taken place in federal and local cases across the country, often in violent crimes, such as rape, murder and robbery. Read more…
By Spencer S. Hsu, Published: July 10 – The Washington Post
“Convicting the Innocent” not just a title of a book – Its happening too often!
Brandon L. Garrett in his book, “Convicting the Innocent,” examines the first 250 innocent people exonerated by postconviction DNA testing. It was not until Sir Alec Jeffreys developed the first DNA profiling test in 1984, that we ever realized that our system of justice in America may be convicting innocent people. Today, we have DNA to thank for throwing this failure in our faces,… and rightfully so. But I do not see anyone asking the hard questions like, …Why is this happening? What went wrong? What is going wrong? What can we do to fix it? Garrett found that of the 250 exonerees, 76% (190) were misidentified by an eyewitness. Are we placing too much credence in eyewitness testimony? You bet ya! Most recently, the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Forensic Science has disclosed DNA test results for more than 70 persons where testing of biological evidence discovered in forensic case files from 1973 to 1988, failed to identify the convicted person. Read more on this issue.
It is my opinion that there is a significant lack of training for police investigators (not mandated in most states, if any at all); the pressure for them to clear cases; forgetting that they should be looking for the truth, not simply finding evidence that satisfies their initial beliefs in an investigation; not treating the investigation as a process involving multiple players; and prosecutors not willing to admit maybe they were wrong about a case, has caused this travesty to have been brought to the forefront by the advent of DNA. Was this happening before Dr. Jeffreys’ DNA profiling turned the investigation process upside down? I believe so. It was easy to remain pompous when all you had to do was accept the decision of the 12 people not smart enough to get out of jury duty (the jury) as being infallible.
Killer Insects or Humans?
Dr. Stefano Vanin is focused on being able to pinpoint whether damage to a dead body was caused by the killer during the attack or by insects after the crime. Insects can disturb the crime scene by leaving marks on the body that can mimic bruises and other injuries, which can affect the investigation. Dr. Vanin is studying the effects that insects can have on dead bodies and is reporting his findings in Forensic Science International.
Check out the full article.
Date of Article: May 9, 2012
[Abstract by Carrie Wells, ForensIQ Student Intern, June 12, 2012]
Detroit PD Crime Lab Cleaning Up
Fifteen years after a woman was raped, the crime may finally be solved. Believe it or not, there are over 10,000 “rape kits” in the Detroit Police Department Crime Lab property room and a random 400 of them are being studied to try and close some cases. The first case of the 400 random samples is finally going to trial.
To learn more, read the full article here.
Date of Article: May 1, 2012
[Abstract written by Carrie Wells, ForensIQ Student Intern, June 11, 2012]
Sandusky Jury Selected
10 of the 12 people not smart enough to get out of jury duty for the Sandusky trial have direct ties to Penn State. How will this effect the outcome? Remember students, its not whether he did it or not, it is what side will present the best case to sway the jury, a group of people selected by the adversaries because they believe they can be swayed.
Evaluating Crime Scenes
This is a famous quote made by Sherlock Holmes in response to Dr. Watson being amazed at his ability to evaluate a crime scene by just looking at it.
“I see no more than you,…but I have trained myself to notice what I see.”
— Sir Arthur Conan Doyle – The Case Book of Sherlock Holmes – “The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier”
