**CHAPTER 400 -- INVESTIGATIONS**

**(400)-200** **[TIGTA Forensic Science Laboratory
Procedures]{.underline}**

200.1 [Overview.]{.underline}

The Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) is the scientific investigative
arm of TIGTA. Its primary responsibility is the forensic evaluation of
physical evidence encountered by Special Agents (SAs) conducting
criminal investigations on behalf of TIGTA. Another major role is the
formulation of sound scientific policies and procedures as they relate
to forensic aspects of physical evidence (e.g., its handling,
collection, chain of custody issues) and analysis using valid protocols.

This section contains information related to the following:

-   [TIGTA Forensic Science Laboratory](#TIGTAForensicScienceLaboratory)

-   [Laboratory Evidence Submission
    Policy](#LaboratoryEvidenceSubmissionPolicy)

-   [Protecting the Integrity of Digital Image Evidence (Non-Video
    Format)](#ProtectingIntegrityDigitalImageEvidence)

-   [Inked Prints](#InkedPrints)

-   [Known Exemplar Writing](#KnownExemplarWriting)

-   [Questioned Documents](#QuestionedDocuments)

-   [Latent Prints](#LatentPrints)

-   [Digital Image Processing -- Non-Video
    Formats](#DigitalImageProcessingNonVideoFormat)

-   [Other Services](#OtherServices)

-   [Laboratory Reports of Examination](#LaboratoryReportsOfExamination)

-   [Expert Opinions](#ExpertOpinions)

-   [Expert Testimony](#ExpertTestimony)

-   [Forensic Science Laboratory Web Page](#ForensicScienceLabWebPage)

200.1.1 [Acronyms
Table.](../../../../../../../../I:/chapter400-inv/acronyms-table/acronyms-table.doc)

200.2 []{#TIGTAForensicScienceLaboratory .anchor}[TIGTA Forensic Science
Laboratory.]{.underline}

In addition to conducting scientific examinations of physical evidence,
the FSL's technical staff:

-   Offers expert advice and assistance in processing crime scenes,
    documenting and collecting physical evidence;

-   Provides expert testimony before judges, juries and other
    adjudicative bodies

-   Advises and assists the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) in the
    evidentiary significance and presentation of expert testimony; and

-   Instructs in basic and advanced investigative aspects of the
    forensic sciences.

Staff examiners maintain close liaisons with other Department and TIGTA
components, federal law enforcement agencies, and professional forensic
organizations to:

-   Stay abreast of the latest advances in equipment, techniques and
    methods adopted for the evaluation of physical evidence; and

-   Identify sources to help SAs with the examination of physical
    evidence beyond current FSL capabilities, e.g., deoxyribonucleic
    acid (DNA) testing, explosives, arson, firearms, trace evidence, and
    narcotics.

The FSL conducts impartial, scientific evaluations of physical evidence
that independently support or refute allegations and witness statements.
As indicated by the results of examination, the FSL redirects
investigative resources. By conducting its scientific investigations
in-house, the FSL retains independent control over evidence, the quality
of technical work products, and the expert testimony it provides.

200.2.1 []{#ForensicLaboratoryCapabilities .anchor}[Forensic Laboratory
Capabilities.]{.underline} Current FSL capabilities address the majority
of physical evidence encountered in TIGTA investigations. Laboratory
capabilities include forensic expertise in the specialties of:

-   Questioned documents;

-   Latent prints;

-   Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) entry
    and search;

-   Graphics preparation;

-   Digital photography;

-   Digital image processing; and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   General crime scene processing.

200.2.1 [Specialty Areas and Typical Analyses Performed.]{.underline}
Typical analyses performed by the FSL are briefly described in the chart
below.

+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| **Specialty       | **Typical Analyses Performed**                   |
| Area**            |                                                  |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| Questioned        | -   Evaluate handwriting, signatures, and hand   |
| Documents         |     printing to establish authorship of          |
|                   |     questioned writing.                          |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Detect and decipher alterations, erasures    |
|                   |     and obliteration of entries.                 |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Compare, classify and identify sources of    |
|                   |     printed matter (e.g., typewriters, laser,    |
|                   |     dot matrix, ink-jet printers).               |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Establish a link or common source between    |
|                   |     questioned and known materials (e.g.,        |
|                   |     photocopies, writing inks, papers, printers, |
|                   |     typewriters, torn documents).                |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Conduct or arrange for physical or chemical  |
|                   |     analysis of inks and paper.                  |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| **Specialty       | **Typical Analyses Performed**                   |
| Area**            |                                                  |
|                   | **(continued)**                                  |
| **(continued)**   |                                                  |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| Questioned        | -   Reconstruct or piece together cut, torn or   |
| Documents         |     shredded documents.                          |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Preserve and enhance burnt or water-soaked   |
|                   |     documents.                                   |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Determination of genuine vs. counterfeit     |
|                   |     documents.                                   |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Evaluate items for investigative lead        |
|                   |     information, e.g., anonymous note            |
|                   |     investigations for indented writing          |
|                   |     impressions.                                 |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Decipher original text from single-strike,   |
|                   |     carbon film printer ribbons.                 |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Determine toner code sources through U.S.    |
|                   |     Secret Service laboratory.                   |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| Latent Prints     | -   Evaluate evidence for the presence of        |
|                   |     patent/visible prints.                       |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Evaluate and process evidence for            |
|                   |     latent/invisible prints.                     |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Compare patent/latent prints with known      |
|                   |     10-print, palm, writer's palm, etc., print   |
|                   |     cards to establish identity.                 |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Compare known 10-print to known 10-print to  |
|                   |     establish common identity.                   |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Evaluate patent/latent prints for            |
|                   |     suitability of IAFIS entry and search.       |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| IAFIS Entry &     | -   Conduct IAFIS searches of unidentified       |
| Search            |     latent/known prints determined to be of      |
|                   |     suitable search quality.                     |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Download criminal Federal Bureau of          |
|                   |     Investigation (FBI) fingerprint records for  |
|                   |     comparison purposes.                         |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| Digital Image     | -   Examine, evaluate and process non-video      |
| Processing        |     formats (e.g., photographs, photographic     |
|                   |     negatives, damaged documents, deteriorated   |
| #                 |     documents, video still prints, and burned    |
| Non-Video Formats |     documents) for purposes of enhancing the     |
|                   |     visual appearance and readability of the     |
|                   |     evidence.                                    |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Image processing as a secondary technique to |
|                   |     enhance developed fingerprints,              |
|                   |     detect/decipher alterations, erasures and    |
|                   |     obliterated entries.                         |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Create digital image files of evidence,      |
|                   |     record results of examination for courtroom  |
|                   |     testimony and/or inclusion in laboratory     |
|                   |     reports.                                     |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| **Specialty       | **Typical Analyses Performed**                   |
| Area**            |                                                  |
|                   | **(continued)**                                  |
| **(continued)**   |                                                  |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| Graphics          | -   Create courtroom demonstration charts,       |
| Preparation       |     photographs, enlargements, etc.              |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Create training materials.                   |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Create web graphics.                         |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Prepare briefing materials.                  |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | ```{=html}                                       |
|                   | <!-- -->                                         |
|                   | ```                                              |
|                   | -   Prepare materials for presentation before    |
|                   |     professional organizations and/or journal    |
|                   |     publications.                                |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| General Crime     | -   Conduct a walk-through and evaluate the      |
| Scene Processing  |     crime scene for physical evidence.           |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Photograph crime scenes.                     |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Process crime scenes for the presence of     |
|                   |     latent prints.                               |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Collect and properly package physical        |
|                   |     evidence for submission to the laboratory.   |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| High-Resolution   | -   Capture record-copy images of physical       |
|                   |     evidence.                                    |
| Digital           |                                                  |
| Photography       | -   Duplicate photographs, standard size         |
|                   |     negatives.                                   |
|                   |                                                  |
|                   | -   Record results of laboratory examinations.   |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+

200.3 []{#LaboratoryEvidenceSubmissionPolicy .anchor}[Laboratory
Evidence Submission Policy.]{.underline}

All physical evidence, which requires a forensic analysis for latent
prints, handwriting, typewriting, other related document examinations,
etc., must be hand-delivered or submitted via overnight courier to:

TIGTA Forensic Science Laboratory

> Attn: Custodian
>
> 12119 Indian Creek Court
>
> Beltsville, MD 20705
>
> Monday -- Friday
>
> 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM
>
> Telephone Numbers:
>
> Director: (301) 210-8713

For submission of physical evidence, see also [Section
200.3.10](#SubmissionOfPhysicalEvidence).

**The use of other Federal, State or local laboratories is not
authorized except**:

-   When another laboratory previously examined evidence in the
    investigation and a supplemental examination becomes necessary,
    submit this supplemental request to this same laboratory;

-   In joint agency investigations in which TIGTA is not the lead, the
    lead representative can engage the services of another laboratory;
    and

-   If the FSL is unable to accommodate the time constraints imposed by
    circumstances of the investigation or required capabilities.

-   If the forensic request falls outside of current FSL capabilities,
    DNA , firearms, explosives, etc.

SAs must obtain specific permission from the Laboratory Director, FSL to
employ the services of other laboratory systems.

All physical evidence submitted to the FSL is accepted with the
understanding that it has not been, nor will be, examined for the same
purpose by another laboratory system on behalf of TIGTA. The FSL
reserves the right to refuse to examine physical evidence that has been
evaluated by another laboratory for the same purpose except under
compelling circumstances. The FSL may also refuse to examine evidence
for any reason that compromises the quality of an examination or the
exercise of professional duty by its laboratory personnel.

All physical evidence, which is potentially contaminated by unknown
biological, chemical, or other hazardous materials, will not be
forwarded to the FSL. See Section 120 of this chapter for information on
responding to critical incidents. Once the substance is identified as
non-hazardous, the SA can forward the evidence to the FSL for forensic
testing. A copy of the testing lab's report must be submitted to the FSL
with the Request for Laboratory Services.

200.3.1 [Investigative Advantages to Early Forensic Science Laboratory
Involvement]{.underline}. Early FSL involvement benefits the SA and the
investigation in a number of ways. FSL examiners:

-   Ensure the "best forensic evidence" is collected and submitted for
    evaluation;

-   Identify forensically significant evidence;

-   Determine the suitability of evidence for a scientific evaluation;

-   Process crime scenes using proven techniques for collecting,
    packaging and preserving fragile evidence from further
    deterioration;

-   Ensure new techniques or methods are not employed for the evaluation
    of physical evidence until adequately tested and verified by
    scientific methods;

-   Develop evidence to its fullest evidentiary potential;

-   Redirect investigation resources when evidence clearly refutes an
    allegation or witness statement;

-   Direct SAs to accredited laboratories for evidence testing beyond
    current FSL capabilities; and

-   Educate the law enforcement community in the significance of
    forensic examinations, current capabilities and procedures for the
    collection of appropriate exemplar materials.

200.3.2 [Classes of Physical Evidence.]{.underline} Common articles are
not elevated to the status of \"physical evidence\" until they possess
legal or investigative significance. Forensic evidence encompasses a
broad spectrum and is too lengthy to list here.

Traditional classifications of forensic evidence include:

-   Questioned documents;

-   Latent prints;

-   Firearms/Ballistics;

-   Tool marks;

-   Arson/Explosives;

-   Trace evidence such as hairs and fibers, materials of unknown
    origin;

-   Biological material such as blood, semen, saliva, etc.;

-   Drug Analysis;

-   Photography;

-   Digital images; and

-   DNA.

Although the majority of evidence evaluated by the FSL is documentary in
nature, the FSL examines a wide variety of items, such as:

-   Firearms;

-   Ammunition;

-   Stolen articles;

-   Currency, boxes;

-   Wallets;

-   Computers and computer diskettes;

-   Credit cards;

-   Razor blades;

-   Knives;

-   Printers;

-   Typewriters; and

-   Labels.

For consistency in reporting its results, the FSL classifies all
evidence evaluated into two categories:

-   **Questioned** -- those items for which a legal and/or investigative
    question has been posed; and

-   **Known** -- those items for which the sources is known and are
    submitted for purposes of comparison with questioned items.

200.3.3 [Authentication of Known Handwriting and
Fingerprints.]{.underline} When obtaining/collecting known handwriting
and fingerprints, SAs must keep in mind the legal requirements of
authentication. [Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE)
901(a)](http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm) requires that
the proponent of evidence must present proof that the item is what the
proponent claims it is. Thus, known handwriting and/or fingerprints must
be sufficiently proven as being from a particular person before the
trial judge will allow their admission into evidence. FRE 901(b)
outlines, the procedure for determining authenticity. The showing of
authentication represents a special aspect of relevancy, a dependency
upon a condition of fact. Title [28 U.S.C. §
1731](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1731.html) also governs the
admissibility of handwriting for purposes of comparison.

Where an SA personally obtains handwriting exemplars or inked
fingerprint impressions directly from a particular individual, the SA\'s
testimony as a witness with knowledge will satisfy FRE 901(a). See [FRE
(b)(1)](http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm).

If the SA collects other writings, such as those written in the course
of a person\'s everyday activities, authenticity must be established
circumstantially. The legal test is whether there is sufficient evidence
to support a rational finding that the collected writing is that of a
particular person. Thus, the collection of such writings must be
carefully considered. It is the SA\'s responsibility to obtain the
foundational information and/or testimony necessary for proof of
authorship. There are a number of well-settled approaches to
circumstantially establishing authenticity. See FRE 901(b) (2), (4), (7)
and (10), and [28 U.S.C. §
1731](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1731.html), including
interpretive notes and decisions.

Many times an official of the agency which obtained and stored the
records may testify to their authenticity, even if the writing was not
witnessed by that official.

Fingerprint cards are authenticated only through the testimony of the
person who actually took the inked impressions. The mere fact that a
fingerprint card is indexed and retained in an agency\'s official
repository, including those from the FBI, is not proof of authenticity.

200.3.4 [Protecting the Integrity of Physical Evidence.]{.underline}
Protecting the integrity of physical evidence encompasses two equally
important concepts: the first is do not "add" anything to evidence after
it is recovered, and the second is do not "destroy", "remove" or
contribute to the "deterioration" of potential evidence once it is in
the investigator's possession.

SAs must protect physical evidence within the legal context of their
investigations as soon as possible and adopt procedures that protect it
within its forensic context accordingly. A good rule of thumb is to
treat all physical evidence as if a forensic laboratory will conduct an
examination at some future date during the investigation.

It is a sound practice to collect and package known and questioned items
separately. If nothing else, this practice avoids confusion by all
parties with access to the evidence. This practice is extremely
important for some classes of physical evidence (e.g., arson,
explosives, trace hairs and fibers). The SA must protect evidence
against cross-contamination.

SAs must conscientiously evaluate the potential value of physical
evidence, including documents, and protect it accordingly. This is
accomplished by adopting the following practices:

-   Wear gloves when handling evidence;

-   Make copies of evidence documents and use these for review rather
    than handling original evidence;

-   Do not write on top of evidence or complete evidence envelope
    entries after enclosing evidence items;

-   Do not fold, staple, or otherwise mutilate evidence;

-   Do not circle areas of interest on original evidence;

-   Protect paper documents in archival quality (polypropylene) document
    protectors; protect magazine stock paper in paper folders; and
    protect non-porous items of evidence in small boxes (NOT PLASTIC);

-   Always store evidence at standard temperature and humidity (office
    environment); and

-   Always store evidence out of direct sunlight; UV rays cause
    significant damage.

Evidence such as coated, shiny paper (e.g. magazine paper) and
non-porous items such as glass, metal, or plastic must not be preserved
in plastic. Plastic creates static that contributes to the deterioration
of latent/patent prints.

Archival quality document protectors are especially important for
preserving photocopies and laser printed evidence. Copier and printer
toners stick to non-polypropylene plastics and can damage the "original"
evidence item. If SAs do not have access to archival quality document
protectors, they should use heavy stock paper folders instead.

If SAs encounter original thermal facsimile copies as evidence, they
should immediately photocopy the facsimiles to preserve both text and
its readability. Over time and with exposure to extremes in temperature
and humidity, older technology thermal facsimiles will deteriorate, some
to the point where original text is no longer visible.

SAs may encounter miscellaneous types of physical evidence in which
special collection and handling procedures apply. Below are "general"
suggestions for protecting the integrity of biological evidence. SAs are
advised to contact FSL personnel for additional guidance.

Biological evidence (e.g., blood, semen, saliva, DNA, urine, hair, skin
cells) is particularly susceptible to contamination and degradation
unless it is properly preserved and stored. Time is of the essence with
biological evidence. Heat and moisture contribute to the bacterial
degradation and contamination of suspected biological stains and can
destroy their evidentiary value. When this type of evidence is
encountered, contact the FSL for advice regarding the examination of
physical evidence for serological and/or DNA characterization. SAs are
advised that laboratories, including the FBI, will not conduct
examinations of unknown stains for DNA typing without known
comparison/elimination samples from both the victim and suspect. The
following options are available to obtain testing services:

-   Contact State/local forensic laboratories and find out if they will
    accept Federal evidence for analysis. State laboratories may refuse
    Federal casework.

-   Contact the FBI for their current policy for submitting
    DNA/serological evidence. The FBI periodically publishes an evidence
    collection guidebook which should be available at the local field
    office.

-   Contact the FSL for commercial DNA laboratories that will analyze
    DNA samples for a fee. Coordinate approval through the FSL prior to
    incurring costs for analysis.

200.3.5 [Marking Physical Evidence.]{.underline} SAs are advised to
adopt uniform practices when marking physical evidence for
identification. Such practices not only address legal requirements but
also ensure that markings do not interfere with subsequent laboratory
testing. Place initials, date, or other identifying marks in an
inconspicuous location on the item. For documentary type evidence, the
reverse lower right hand corner is a suitable location.

Use indelible inks such as ballpoint pens or fine-tip markers in blue or
black. Do not use unusual colors (e.g., pink, red, green) or markers
that can bleed-through paper. If an item is not amenable to ballpoint
pens or fine-tip markers, use fine-tipped permanent markers; scratch
non-porous items with a diamond pencil; or place a small label on the
item and enter identifying information.

Unless necessary, do not use exhibit numbers. The FSL often changes
exhibit numbers when it conducts its examinations. The FSL uses a
standard numbering system that ensures consistency in reporting and
allows for the addition of supplemental exhibit numbers as necessary.
The court will assign its own exhibit numbers.

200.3.6 [Best Forensic Evidence Rule.]{.underline} SAs consider physical
evidence within a legal context. The FSL evaluates the same evidence
within a scientific context to establish its forensic significance.

When latent print processing is performed prior to evaluating items for
trace materials, significant evidence is destroyed and/or lost. Trace
evidence (e.g., indented handwriting impressions, hairs, fibers) often
offers circumstantial leads to suspect identity. Forensic laboratories
follow a strict analysis sequence for the examination of physical
evidence to preserve all trace evidence for subsequent laboratory
testing.

SAs must submit original evidence when available. Do not submit copies
and retain originals in evidence vaults. An examination of copies may
result in less than definite conclusions.

When a photocopy, microfilm or fax copy constitutes "original" evidence,
submit it as an original and identify it as the best available \"copy\".
Do not photocopy evidence copies and submit these. SAs are advised to
make every effort to locate and submit the earliest generation copy for
analysis. Evidence that is repeatedly photocopied loses details and/or
introduces defects. Both situations hinder laboratory examinations and
contribute to less than conclusive opinions.

Laboratory opinions are wholly dependent upon the quality and/or
quantity of evidence, questioned and known, submitted for evaluation.
Therefore, quality examinations are dependent upon the SA\'s efforts to
locate, identify and submit the best available evidence.

200.3.7 [Packaging Physical Evidence for Submission to the Forensic
Science Laboratory.]{.underline} When packaging items for submission to
the FSL, SAs are advised to follow procedures which protect the
evidence\'s integrity and that clearly identify the articles for
technical examiners. When appropriate, place evidence in evidence
envelopes and seal using tamper-proof evidence tape. Items too large for
envelopes should be packaged in suitably sized containers and sealed
using evidence tape. Attach the Evidence Custody Document (Form OI 5397)
to the exterior of the container.

When packages contain potentially hazardous materials and/or sharps, SAs
must indicate this on all packages to alert FSL examiners to the
potential hazard. Unknown spills or biological/chemical materials must
be collected and evaluated by trained specialists, at the scene.

When submitting evidence for a latent print examination, use packaging
procedures designed for the evidence type. Paper evidence (e.g.,
documents, forms, currency) must be sealed in archival quality plastic
document protectors (polypropylene). For a slick paper surface, such as
magazine stock, SAs must package these items in heavy stock paper
folders. If evidence consists of a non-porous surface (e.g., plastics,
wallets, computers, firearms, metals, razors), protect the item in a
suitably sized cardboard box and stabilize it for transit with pieces of
rolled paper.

If SAs encounter "unusual" classes of evidence, contact FSL personnel
for guidance and specific instructions for packaging and protecting the
items during transit.

200.3.8 [Request for Laboratory Services.]{.underline} SAs should
provide laboratory examiners with sufficient case background for the
examiner to understand the evidence within the context of the
investigation.

SAs must submit a Request for Forensic Laboratory Services ([Form OI
7535](../../../../../../../../C:/Program%20Files/Microsoft%20Office/Templates/TIGTA/Investigations%20Forms/Form%20OI%207535-%20Request%20for%20Forensic%20Laboratory%20Services.dot))
to request FSL services. This form should include the following minimum
information:

-   Case title and number;

-   Description of the evidence enclosed which includes a detailed
    inventory of the evidence submitted for examination;

-   Brief synopsis of the case background;

-   Whether the evidence is a submission from a new case or is
    additional evidence in a previously evaluated case (already
    established laboratory case number);

-   Whether the evidence is grand jury material covered by [Federal Rule
    of Criminal Procedure (FRCP)
    6(e)(2)](http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/Rule6.htm);

-   Previous laboratory case number assigned;

-   Whether the evidence has been examined by another
    laboratory/examiner and for what purpose;

-   Case SA's name, return address and contact numbers;

-   Name, title contact number, signature and date of supervisory
    approval for request; and

-   Specific reasons for an expedite request, if applicable.

The FSL maintains field requests for laboratory services in a database.
To properly associate supplemental requests with previously evaluated
evidence, the FSL retains related case evidence under one common
laboratory identifier. Therefore, it is important for SAs to refer to
this unique identifier when they submit supplemental evidence referring
to the same investigation and/or field case identifier. If the field
creates a new investigative case number and submits the evidence under
this number without referencing the prior laboratory identifier, the FSL
will create a new laboratory number and not necessarily cross-reference
the two field numbers.

When packages contain potentially hazardous materials or sharp objects
(e.g., stains, sharp/jagged objects), SAs must specify this in their
transmittal letter and note the presence of a hazard on submitted
packages. This alerts laboratory personnel to implement special handling
procedures.

If the FSL receives evidence without a request, FSL personnel will
contact the SA by electronic mail and instruct the SA to complete a Form
OI 7535. The case will not be assigned to a technical examiner until it
is received. An electronic version of this transmittal letter is
acceptable.

200.3.9 [Grand Jury Materials.]{.underline} The SA must indicate in the
request letter when the evidence submitted consists of grand jury
materials covered by FRCP 6(e)(2). This ensures the FSL implements
appropriate procedures. Case records and file jackets must be clearly
marked as grand jury information. SAs are directed to place the names of
all laboratory personnel on the grand jury list. Due to assigned duties
for evidence processing, technical reviews, etc., all personnel will
have access to the evidence and information while in the laboratory's
custody.

200.3.10 []{#SubmissionOfPhysicalEvidence .anchor}[Submission of
Physical Evidence.]{.underline} SAs must employ the services of
reputable courier that provides for signature release and package
tracking (e.g., United Parcel Service). Evidence can also be
hand-delivered to the FSL. Address evidence to:

> TIGTA Forensic Science Laboratory
>
> Attn: Custodian
>
> 12119 Indian Creek Court
>
> Beltsville MD 20705

200.3.11 [Requests for Expedited Laboratory Services.]{.underline} The
FSL handles all requests and evidence using the same internal procedural
timetables to ensure that requests receive complete and thorough
attention. TIGTA investigations are often opened long before SAs request
laboratory services. The sooner the evidence can be sent to the
laboratory, the greater the chance of receiving definitive results
exists. The following are possible problems that may incur with evidence
that is sent to the laboratory late in the investigative stage:

-   The opinion is contrary to that expected by the SA and the AUSA;

-   The examination results are inconclusive due to the lack of
    sufficient known materials for comparison; or

-   The examination cannot be completed within the imposed timeframe.

When time constraints imposed by circumstances of the investigation
and/or by a trial date impact the professional duty of its examiners,
the Laboratory Director, FSL reserves the right to refuse to evaluate
evidence. Final decisions regarding acceptance and expeditious handling
are within the purview of the Laboratory Director, FSL.

If the seriousness of the allegation or the type of evidence demands
expeditious handling, the SA must forward this request in writing to the
Laboratory Director, FSL. If made on behalf of an AUSA, the SA may send
a formal request by enclosed letter or separate e-mail to the Laboratory
Director, FSL detailing the specific reasons for requesting expedited
analysis.

To request a change in case priority for an analysis that has already
been submitted, the SA must contact the Laboratory Director, FSL and
specify the reason for the request. The FSL will respond to the SA
within 72 hours. If the request is made on behalf of an AUSA, he/she
must forward a letter or e-mail to the Laboratory Director, FSL stating
why the case submission must be reprioritized.

200.3.12 [Request to Out-Source Laboratory Examinations.]{.underline}
The FSL is not a full-service laboratory and does not retain staff
expertise in all forensic specialties. Therefore, if SAs encounter
physical evidence that cannot be examined by the FSL (e.g., DNA, arson,
explosives, hazardous materials, firearms, tool marks), they should
contact the FSL for information on forwarding their evidence to
reputable forensic laboratories for evaluation or send the evidence to
the FSL so that the laboratory may facilitate the transfer of evidence
for them. SAs must notify the Laboratory Director, FSL, prior to
submitting evidence to another laboratory.

SAs are advised to discuss their cases with technical examiners who can
identify competent laboratories. The FSL can also recommend testing the
SA should request. This ensures that physical evidence is properly
tested and laboratory results will be accepted by the criminal justice
system for TIGTA prosecutions.

200.3.13 [Evidence Receipt Letter.]{.underline} Upon receipt of physical
evidence, the FSL generates an Evidence Receipt Letter and forwards it
to the SA by e-mail. This letter outlines the following case specific
information for SAs:

-   Date and how the evidence was received;

-   Specifically notes the field case number and title;

-   Provides the assigned laboratory unique identifier and submission
    number;

-   Examiner to whom the submission is assigned along with his or her
    telephone number; and

-   An anticipated date for completion.

If SAs have questions regarding their case submissions, they should
refer to this correspondence and consult the assigned examiner.

200.3.14 [Return of Evidence Unexamined.]{.underline} In instances when
analyses cannot be completed within time constraints imposed by the
investigation and/or the evidence submitted has previously been examined
by another laboratory for the same purpose, the FSL will not re-evaluate
the evidence and it will be returned unexamined. Evidence will be
accompanied by a letter stating the specific reasons for its return:

-   Evidence has already been examined by another laboratory/examiner
    for the same purpose as noted in the request letter;

-   Original evidence in this case was examined by another
    laboratory/examiner; refer the supplemental evidence to that
    office/examiner;

-   The FSL currently lacks the capability to examine this evidence;

-   The requested examination could not be completed due to time
    constraints imposed by the investigation, AUSA, trial date, etc.;
    and/or

-   Other factors (e.g., case closed at request of the S-A).

If the SA closes an investigation prior to the completion of laboratory
analyses, the SA is directed to immediately notify the Laboratory
Director, FSL so the evidence can be returned.

200.3.15 [Return of Evidence to Case Special Agent.]{.underline} Upon
completion of requested examinations, the FSL will return all evidence
to the case SA along with laboratory reports. Items will be sealed in
evidence envelopes with evidence tape.

All evidence will be returned using an overnight courier or the case SA
will be notified to pick up his/her evidence.

200.3.16 [Submission of Supplemental Evidence.]{.underline} When
supplemental evidence is located for analysis after the FSL has issued
its findings, the SA must follow all instructions outlined in this
section as they pertain to original case submissions. The SA must refer
to the previous laboratory unique identifier and submit all original
evidence along with supplemental items.

200.4 []{#ProtectingIntegrityDigitalImageEvidence .anchor}[Protecting
the Integrity of Digital Image Evidence (Non-Video Format).]{.underline}
While digital imaging technologies have been available for decades,
their application within the criminal justice system is of recent
vintage. This section provides SAs with guidelines for preserving the
integrity of image evidence created and/or stored in a digital format.
This section has been adopted from the Scientific Working Group for
Imaging Technology Guidelines, 2004 versions. See
[Exhibit(400)-200.1](../../../../../../../../C:/Local%20Settings/chapter400-inv/400-exhibits/exhibit400-200-5.doc)
for pertinent imaging definitions.

Examples of the types of digital images that SAs might create or
encounter include:

-   Crime scene photographs from digital cameras;

-   Images created by scanning original, photograph, negative evidence;
    or

-   Images created and/or processed from traditional film negatives.

200.4.1 [Preserving Original Digital Image.]{.underline} The primary
concern with digital image evidence is the preservation and storage of
the original image. The original image represents an accurate and
complete replica of the primary image. This original must be maintained
and stored in an unaltered state. SAs should maintain the digital image
in its native file formats. SAs must use duplicates or copies as working
images.

The following are recommended media for the preservation of original
images. They have been selected because of their quality, durability,
permanence and reliability:

-   Silver-based film (NOT instant film);

-   Write-once compact disk recordable (CD-R); and

-   Digital versatile disk recordable (DVD-R).

The following media are acceptable for the preservation of original
images, but care must be taken to avoid loss of data:

-   Photographic prints;

-   Diskettes;

-   Compact flash cards;

-   PC cards;

-   Smart media; and

-   Write-once magneto-optical drives.

200.4.2 [Preserving Original Post-Capture Processing.]{.underline} For
film, the original can be processed if the technique for processing is
non-destructive. For digital formats, make a duplicate image and use
this as the working image.

200.4.3 [Documenting Image Processing.]{.underline} Techniques common to
traditional darkrooms and digital imaging workstations, such as
cropping, dodging, burning, color balancing, and contrast adjustment,
that are used to achieve an accurate recording of an event or object,
are considered standard processing steps. When the results of these
types of processing are visually verifiable, documentation of such steps
is not considered mandatory, although still recommended, except when the
image is subjected to image analysis.

Techniques, such as masking, multi-image averaging or integration, and
Fourier analysis, used to increase the visibility of specific details in
an image, potentially at the expense of other image details, are
considered standard processing steps. However, their use must be
documented in sufficient detail that another comparably trained
individual can repeat the steps and produce the same output.

200.4.4 [Verification of Original and Processed Images.]{.underline} The
individual who captured the original image (or was present) can verify
that the image is "a true and accurate representation.\" Any processed
image subjected to image analysis must be documented using a processing
log.

200.4.5 [Preserving Original Chain of Custody.]{.underline} For digital
images, the chain of custody must document the identity of the
individuals with custody and control of the digital image file from the
point of capture to archive. Once the file is archived, the chain of
custody must document the identity of the individuals with custody and
control of the archived image.

200.4.6 [Guidelines for Software.]{.underline} Software used in the
processing and analysis of digital images must produce consistent
results, permitting another comparably trained individual to achieve
similar results.

**Note:** Manufacturers of software used for image processing may be
required to make the software source code available to litigants,
subject to an appropriate protective order designed to protect the
manufacturer\'s proprietary interests. Failure on the part of the
manufacturer to provide this information to litigants could result in
the exclusion of imaging evidence in court proceedings. This should be
considered when selecting software.

200.4.7 [Guidelines for Compression.]{.underline} Original images and
images expected to undergo image analysis must not be subjected to lossy
compression. If compression is necessary, lossless compression is
strongly recommended. When lossy compression is used, then the highest
quality option available is recommended. Subjecting images to lossy
compression results in critical image information being lost and/or
artifacts being introduced as a result of the compression process.
Repeatedly saving a file using lossy compression may exacerbate the loss
of image information.

200.5 []{#InkedPrints .anchor}[Inked Prints.]{.underline}

200.5.1 [Suspect/Victim Inked Prints.]{.underline} Excessive case
turnaround times in the latent section are a direct consequence of
examiners having to re-evaluate unidentified latent prints. To reduce
turnaround times, SAs should submit known prints for comparison
(suspect) and elimination (legitimate) purposes. Although the FSL
understands that occasionally the SA has developed no suspect,
individuals with legitimate access to the evidence can provide
elimination prints.

By eliminating legitimate prints during the evaluation phase, examiners
can concentrate their efforts on the identification of suspect prints.
Many prints developed by the FSL include not only finger, but also palm
and writer's palm prints. Therefore, SAs should also collect impressions
of these commonly encountered prints along with standard 10 print inked
fingerprint cards. Each post of duty (POD) has both the inkless finger
and palm print kits for obtaining these elimination prints.

200.5.2 [Requests for Civilian/Criminal 10-Print Cards from the
FBI.]{.underline} When a SA wants the FSL to initiate a search of FBI
civilian 10-print files for an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) or TIGTA
employee prints or to obtain a criminal fingerprint card, the SA must
e-mail this request along with pertinent identifying information to
latent specialists as soon as this information is available. Latent
examiners will contact the FBI for the individual's card.

SAs are advised that in approximately 25-30% of requests for civilian
cards, the FBI is unable to locate one. If this should occur, the FSL
will notify the SA as soon as possible so the SA can obtain prints from
the subjects. These services take approximately 15 working days until
the FSL receives print cards.

SAs are advised that local law enforcement agencies are an excellent
source for criminal print cards. Advise the local agency that the print
cards being requested are for latent comparison purposes. This ensures
the FSL obtains a good quality copy. In addition to fingerprint records,
SAs should also request copies of palm prints, often retained by local
law enforcement.

SAs must send the following minimum information to the FSL to initiate
FBI searches for fingerprint records:

-   Subject's full name, alias, married, nee (maiden);

-   SSN;

-   Race;

-   Sex;

-   Date of Birth;

-   Place of Birth; and

-   FBI number, when requesting a criminal record.

200.5.3 [Elimination Prints Pursuant to IAFIS Search.]{.underline} SAs
must submit elimination print cards for each person with known
legitimate access to questioned evidence items. This may include the
victim receiving the item, an SA or others who inadvertently have
handled the item, etc.

Elimination print cards must be submitted prior to making an IAFIS entry
and search. If the FSL does not eliminate legitimate prints, valuable
system resources are wasted.

200.6 []{#KnownExemplarWriting .anchor}[Known Exemplar
Writing.]{.underline}

Known exemplar writing consists of genuine specimens that represent a
true cross section of the person's writing. These specimens serve as the
sole basis for comparison with questioned writings. Exemplar writing
falls into two categories: "Non-Request" (or "Collected") exemplars and
"Request" exemplars. Collected exemplars are genuine writings prepared
in the normal course of social, occupational, or business activities.
"Request" exemplars, whether they are provided voluntarily or pursuant
to grand jury subpoena, are writings prepared by an individual on demand
by the SA for the sole purpose of comparison with questioned writing.
See [Exhibit(400)-
200.2](../../../../../../../../C:/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/400-exhibits/exhibit400-200-1.doc).

For handwriting comparisons, known exemplars must meet the following
criteria:

-   Exemplars must be in the same style as the questioned writing (i.e.,
    printed or cursive).

-   If the questioned writing consists of signatures and/or initials,
    the known exemplars must consist of the same name or initials.

-   The known exemplars must contain the same text, words, letters,
    numbers and combinations as the questioned writing.

When collected exemplars alone do not satisfy the above requirements,
then the SA must obtain request exemplars. Guidelines for obtaining
exemplar writing of sufficient type and content are listed in
[Exhibit(400)-200.2](../../../../../../../../C:/Local%20Settings/chapter400-inv/400-exhibits/exhibit400-200-1.doc).

SAs often ask how many exemplars to obtain. Although there is no
standard number,
[Exhibit(400)-200.2](../../../../../../../../C:/Local%20Settings/chapter400-inv/400-exhibits/exhibit400-200-1.doc)
suggests a general guideline. If the writer is present pursuant to a
grand jury subpoena, he/she is directed to provide normal and natural
handwriting samples in the type and amount determined by the SA.

SAs are strongly advised to contact FSL document examiners for
additional guidance, recommendations and assistance prior to obtaining
directed, request exemplar writing.

While obtaining request exemplars, the SA is advised to review each item
as it is removed from the writer. Ensure the writing resembles samples
of his/her normal course-of-business writing. Does it appear slow and
labored or rapid and scrawled? In either instance, the investigator may
face a reluctant writer attempting to disguise his/her writing. Below
are suggestions that have been successfully used to break conscious
attempts at disguised writing:

-   Show the writer known samples of his/her course of business writing.
    Ask the writer to remove his/her license, other forms of
    identification, etc. and to compare these with the writing provided.
    Request the writer use his/her normal and natural handwriting to
    complete the exemplar materials.

-   Request the writer change his/her slant of writing.

-   If the writer states that he/she has multiple styles of writing,
    gather samples of each different style.

-   Ask the writer to prepare several samples using his/her unaccustomed
    hand.

-   Dictate totally unrelated material.

-   Take a break and distract the writer from the act of writing.

-   Speed up the dictation.

If an individual continues to thwart efforts to obtain normal and
natural samples of his/her writing, explain that he/she can be held in
contempt of the grand jury subpoena.

200.7 []{#QuestionedDocuments .anchor}[Questioned
Documents.]{.underline}

The forensic specialty of questioned documents covers a broad spectrum
of case types, handles a wide variety of evidence types and answers
varied investigative questions. Some of the more routinely encountered
work is discussed in [Section 200.2.1](#ForensicLaboratoryCapabilities)
under laboratory capabilities.

Questioned document examiners examine evidence items that depict written
or printed communications such as checks, tax returns, corporate
contracts, facsimiles, or printouts, but that may also include items
such as writing in lipstick on a mirror, a cut-and-paste threat, a
suicide note, shredded documents, or burned or faded documents.

Some of the typical investigative problems answered by a forensic
document examiner include:

-   Identification of the author of questioned writing (signatures,
    initials, numerals, extended letters, forms, etc.);

-   Identification of a common source between materials (photocopier
    trash marks, typewriter font damage, torn edges);

-   Identification of the authenticity of material (e.g., genuine or
    counterfeit documents)

-   Deciphering original text (erasures, overwritten, obliterated
    entries, printer ribbons);

-   Printer ribbons for case-sensitive text;

-   Establishing the method of production;

-   Lead information − indented impressions, identify equipment used
    such as typewriter, printer, photocopier, writing instrument, etc.

-   Determination of common authorship of writings, even if no
    suspect(s) have been determined yet.

Typically document examinations are dependent upon a side-by-side
comparison of questioned and known items. SAs bear the responsibility
for collecting not only questioned evidence but also known exemplar
materials. Known exemplar materials can consist of handwriting, copies
made on suspected photocopiers, samples of typewriting taken from
suspected machines, samples of check stock from victim, pulling printer
ribbons, etc.

SAs are advised to contact questioned document examiners to discuss the
suitability of evidence for a forensic examination and for specific
guidance prior to gathering exemplar materials for comparison.

-   Occasionally physical evidence may be of limited value or unsuitable
    for a document examination. The FSL will evaluate each item or case
    on its own merits and make that determination on a case-by-case
    basis.

200.8 []{#LatentPrints .anchor}[Latent Prints.]{.underline}

The specialty of latent prints covers:

-   The visual examination of physical evidence for the presence and
    collection of patent/visible prints;

-   Multi-physical and/or chemical processing of evidence for the
    presence and development of latent/invisible prints;

-   The inter-comparison of 10-print cards to establish a common
    identity;

-   The comparison of known to patent/latent prints for identification;

-   The evaluation of patent/latent prints and their suitability for
    IAFIS entries and searches; and

-   The IAFIS entry and search of unidentified latent fingerprints.

Like questioned documents, successful latent print evaluations are
wholly dependent upon the comparison of patent/latent prints with known
prints. Known prints are categorized as victim/legitimate elimination
prints or suspect prints. For a thorough evaluation, SAs are advised to
submit major case prints (i.e., 10-print fingerprints), palm prints, and
the writer\'s palm prints. Inked, good quality copies or digital copies
of prints are the most suitable for laboratory comparisons.

SAs are often reluctant to submit evidence for latent processing when it
has not been properly protected. Their belief that multiple sets of
prints prevent the identification of suspect prints is unfounded.
Although multiple prints can obscure prints and frustrate the
examination, they do not preclude the identification of suspect prints.

Another frequently posed question is how long can latent prints be
detected? As long as evidence is properly stored and protected, latent
prints can be detected for years. Heat, humidity and static are the
enemies of latent prints. Although the longer latent prints remain
unprocessed on porous surfaces, the more difficult they become to
visualize using traditional processing methods. The FSL utilizes
secondary chemical processing methods designed to detect older prints
that are not developed by traditional chemical processing methods. Since
these secondary processing techniques are somewhat detrimental to the
document, the FSL will contact SAs for permission prior to proceeding
with these techniques.

Latent examiners will compare unidentified latent prints with those
provided as a result of the IAFIS search.

When original evidence is returned to the case SA, it should not be
removed from the evidence packaging. This packaging helps preserve
latent print evidence as long as possible.

200.9 []{#DigitalImageProcessingNonVideoFormat .anchor}[Digital Image
Processing (DIP) − Non-Video Formats.]{.underline}

DIP is used to resolve case problems involving poor image quality,
background interference, or images and text that have faded and cannot
be read or deciphered. DIP is performed on images to improve visibility
of details.

With the variety of problems encountered, the FSL's DIP system is a
networked subsystem which allows examiners to visualize evidence using
visible-ultraviolet (latent prints), visible-infrared (documents) and
visible color. High-resolution video, digital cameras and scanners are
used to capture maximum image information.

The DIP system is equipped with traditional and high-end image
enhancement software programs that improve image details, for example:

-   Improve brightness and contrast;

-   Remove repeating backgrounds using fast Fourier transformations
    (FFT) to improve the image quality

-   Help visualize and decipher obliterated entries;

-   Detect and decipher erasures;

-   Improve the readability of indented impressions; and

-   Improve the readability of faded negatives, photographs, facsimile
    copies.

The FSL\'s DIP system is standardized for the analysis of non-video
formats only. If an SA encounters images on videotapes, the system is
capable of processing only still prints from video or a digital copy
format. Although DIP is an extremely powerful tool and can improve the
overall quality of an image, it is not an overall solution. With extreme
cases of poor image quality, dependent upon digital resolution of
original, the FSL may be unable to improve the overall image appearance.

200.10 []{#OtherServices .anchor}[Other Services.]{.underline}

The FSL can provide other services in a limited capacity, to include:

-   Preparation of photographic arrays and graphic displays;

-   Digital photography; and

-   Crime scene processing.

200.10.1 [Photographic Arrays and Graphic Displays.]{.underline} The FSL
can assist SAs with photographic arrays. Since photographic arrays must
be consistent in both photograph size and format, black and white, the
FSL has several options available to meet these legal requirements.

The FSL can provide the following types of graphic displays for
courtroom demonstrations, presentations, etc.:

-   Hand-held 8x10 court charts;

-   Handwriting comparison charts;

-   Fingerprint comparison charts;

-   Poster-sized charts;

-   Bound booklets; and

-   Pamphlets.

200.10.2 [Digital Photography.]{.underline} The FSL captures record-copy
images of incoming evidence. Once the evidence is examined and analyzed,
photographs may be taken of the processed evidence to document the
results. The FSL offers the following digital photography services:

-   Photography of evidence;

-   Photo enlargements from photographs or negatives; and

-   Photo printing from digital image files or video stills.

200.10.3 [Crime Scene Processing.]{.underline} The FSL will provide
examiners trained to conduct general crime scene processing or to assist
with serving of a search warrant. The benefits of laboratory assistance
include:

-   Properly documenting the crime scene and identifying any potential
    hazards (chemical, biological or physical) that may be present;

-   Properly processing, collecting and packaging evidence for
    submission to the laboratory;

-   Assist with identifying \"forensically\" significant evidence for a
    laboratory examination; and

-   Conducting limited on-scene examinations of evidence.

Although the FSL retains this capability in-house, travel of personnel
to the scene is usually required. The FSL can only provide limited
coverage. Forward all requests for laboratory assistance to the
Laboratory Director, FSL.

200.11 []{#LaboratoryReportsOfExamination .anchor}[Laboratory Reports of
Examination.]{.underline}

The FSL issues official laboratory reports of examination for each
analysis conducted. These reports follow a uniform format and include
the following sections:

  ------------------- ---------------------------------------------------
  **Section**         **Description**

  Evidence            The dates and how the FSL received the exhibits.
                      Each questioned and known exhibit will be
                      designated with an exhibit number and a brief
                      description of the item.

  Purpose of          Brief statement of why the questioned exhibits were
  Examination         examined (e.g., to establish the author of the
                      written material, to decipher erased entries)

  Results of          A statement as to the results of examination in the
  Examination         form of an expert opinion.

  Disposition of      Where the evidence will be sent following the
  Evidence            completion of that particular examination.

  Remarks             If the opinion is less than conclusive, the
                      examiner will suggest ways to remedy shortcomings
                      (e.g., submission of additional known writing that
                      repeats the text of the questioned material).
  ------------------- ---------------------------------------------------

The technical examiner issues and signs the laboratory report. Reports
are returned to the SA by overnight courier.

200.12 []{#ExpertOpinions .anchor}[Expert Opinions.]{.underline}

Forensic examinations and expert opinions are dependent upon a thorough
evaluation and comparison of known and questioned materials. Their
importance to the examination cannot be stressed enough. The lack of
adequate known comparison materials and/or the poor quality of
questioned items can result in less than definite conclusions.

200.12.1 [Handwriting Opinions.]{.underline} Handwriting opinions are
expressed in terms of a subjective probability (i.e., it cannot be
equated to a numerical probability). Examiners of the FSL use the
professional terminology expressed in ASTM Standard E1658-96e1,
\"Standard Terminology for Expressing Conclusions of Forensic Document
Examiners.\" This standard explains the 9-point conclusions used. SAs
are referred to this document for clarification.

The 9-point opinions used by examiners of the FSL include:

-   Identification/Elimination: identifies or eliminates a known writer
    as the author of the questioned writing.

-   Highly Probable Did/Did Not: there is a high degree of
    agreement/non-agreement between the known and questioned writing,
    however, some major writing feature that is present is not reflected
    in the known/questioned writing.

-   Probably Did/Did Not: there is a high degree of
    agreement/non-agreement between the known and questioned writing,
    however, several significant features are not reflected in the
    known/questioned writing.

-   Indications Did/Did Not: there is agreement/non-agreement between
    the few significant features reflected in the known/questioned
    writing; however, the evidence is far from conclusive. This opinion
    often is used to develop investigative leads.

-   No Conclusion: there is insufficient evidence to point towards or
    away from a writer.

200.12.2 [Latent Opinions.]{.underline} Latent examiners express their
opinions as an identification or elimination. Their opinions are based
upon a comparison with submitted known prints.

When no known prints are submitted for comparison, latent examiners will
provide information regarding whether or not the examination found
prints of value.

When a latent print of value is found from an area not reflected in
submitted known prints, the latent examiner will eliminate the known
source, insofar as possible, and request particular known prints for
comparison (e.g., sides and tips of fingers, palm prints, writer\'s
palm, lower joint prints, extreme sides).

Latent examiners will independently determine whether or not
unidentified latent prints are suitable for IAFIS entry and search.

200.13 []{#ExpertTestimony .anchor}[Expert Testimony.]{.underline}

When expert testimony is anticipated, SAs are directed to contact the
technical examiner immediately. Provide the examiner with an anticipated
date for testimony along with the name and contact number for the
Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA). It is imperative for technical examiners
to meet and discuss their testimony with the AUSA. This pre-trial
conference ensures the AUSA understands the significance of the expert
opinion as well as any potential problems that may be encountered with
less than conclusive opinions.

SAs are directed to ask the AUSA to forward a subpoena to the examiner.
This is particularly important when an expert is on call for multiple
trials.

On occasion, the FSL may be asked to furnish supplemental materials
(e.g., Summary of Expert Testimony) when requested by defense counsel,
or supporting information for Daubert/Frye suppression hearings. Contact
FSL examiners as soon as possible to give them sufficient time to
prepare these materials. Summaries of Testimony include examiner
qualifications, an explanation of the analyses requested, the evidence
evaluated, the techniques used, the basis/theory of the techniques
employed, the conclusions reached, and any shortcomings of the methods.
Summaries of Expert Testimony literally replace the examiner\'s
testimony. Judges review them and ultimately determine whether or not
the examiner will be permitted to testify at trial as an expert witness.

200.13.1 [Courtroom Demonstration Materials.]{.underline} Examiners will
discuss the use of courtroom demonstration materials with the SA and/or
AUSA. If it is agreed such materials would be helpful, the SA may be
requested to return all original evidence to the FSL for creating these
charts. The FSL does not routinely make photographs of evidence other
than file record copies, as these are often unsuitable for creating
testimony aids.

200.14 []{#ForensicScienceLabWebPage .anchor}[Forensic Science
Laboratory Web Page.]{.underline}

The FSL retains laboratory information on TIGTA-OI's Intranet homepage.
The page includes current information, policies and procedures, forms,
Operations Manual links, and laboratory capabilities and instructions.