Title: Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for Law Enforcement.
Series: Research Report
Author: Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation
Published: January 2000
Subject: Criminal investigation
49 pages
78,000 bytes

Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not included in this ASCII plain-text file.
To view this document in its entirety, download the Adobe Acrobat graphic file
available from this Web site or order a print copy from NCJRS at 800-851-
3420 (877-712-9279 for TTY users).

--------------------------------

Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
National Institute of Justice

Crime Scene Investigation
A Guide for Law Enforcement
Research Report

--------------------------------

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
810 Seventh Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20531

Janet Reno
Attorney General

Daniel Marcus
Acting Associate Attorney General

Laurie Robinson
Assistant Attorney General

Noel Brennan
Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Jeremy Travis
Director, National Institute of Justice

Department of Justice Response Center
800-421-6770

Office of Justice Programs
World Wide Web Site 
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov

National Institute of Justice
World Wide Web Site
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij

--------------------------------

Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for Law Enforcement

Written and Approved by the Technical Working Group on Crime Scene
Investigation

January 2000

--------------------------------

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice
Jeremy Travis, J.D.
Director

Richard M. Rau, Ph.D.
Project Monitor

Opinions or points of view expressed in this document are a consensus of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S.
Department of Justice.

NCJ 178280

The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice
Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of
Justice Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and
the Office for Victims of Crime.

--------------------------------

Message From the Attorney General

Actions taken at the outset of an investigation at a crime scene can play a
pivotal role in the resolution of a case. Careful, thorough investigation is key to
ensure that potential physical evidence is not tainted or destroyed or potential
witnesses overlooked.

While many agencies have programs in crime scene processing, the level of
training and resources available varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, as does
the opportunity to practice actual investigation. To help these agencies, the
National Institute of Justice supported the development of this guide.

I commend the hard work of the 44 members of the technical working group
that created this guide. They are representative of law enforcement, the
prosecution, the defense, and forensic science, and their collective expert
knowledge, experience, and dedication to the task made this effort a success.

The guide is one method of promoting quality crime scene investigation. The
type and scope of a crime scene investigation will vary from case to case.
Jurisdictions will want to carefully consider the procedures in this guide and
their applicability to local agencies and circumstances.

Janet Reno
Attorney General

--------------------------------

Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation

The Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation (TWGCSI) is a
multidisciplinary group of content-area experts from across the United States,
from both urban and rural jurisdictions, each representing his or her respective
agency or practice. Each of these individuals is experienced in the area of crime
scene investigation and evidence collection in the criminal justice system from
the standpoints of law enforcement, prosecution, defense, or forensic science.

At the outset of the TWGCSI effort, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
created a planning panel--composed of distinguished law enforcement, legal,
and science professionals--to define needs, to develop initial strategies, and to
steer the larger group. Additional members of the technical working group were
then selected from recommendations solicited from the planning panel, NIJ's
regional National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers, and
national organizations including the American Academy of Forensic Science,
National District Attorneys Association, National Association of Criminal
Defense Lawyers, National Legal Aid and Defender Association, International
Association of Chiefs of Police, National Sheriffs' Association, International
Association for Identification, and the American Association of Crime
Laboratory Directors/Laboratory Accreditation Board.

Collectively, over a 1-year period, the 44 members of TWGCSI listed below
worked together to develop this guide, Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for
Law Enforcement.

National Crime Scene Planning Panel (NCSPP)

Dr. Jose R. Almirall
Associate Director and Assistant Professor
International Forensic Research Institute
Department of Chemistry
Florida International University
Miami, Florida

Susan Ballou
Forensic Scientist
Montgomery County Police Department
Crime Laboratory
Rockville, Maryland

Paul Carroll
Sergeant (Ret.)
Chicago Police Department
Big Pine Key, Florida

Elizabeth Farris
Chief Trial Counsel
Hampden County District Attorney's Office
Springfield, Massachusetts

Jo Ann Given
ASCLD/LAB
Naval Criminal Investigative Service
Norfolk, Virginia

Marjorie Harris
Forensic Scientist, Senior
Department of Criminal Justice
Division of Forensic Science
Richmond, Virginia

Larry McCann
Senior Special Agent (Ret.)
Virginia State Police 
Richmond, Virginia

Dr. Joseph L. Peterson
Department of Criminal Justice
University of Illinois
Chicago, Illinois

Elliot B. Spector
Director
Center for Police and Security Training
Suffield, Connecticut

Ann Talbot
ASCLD/LAB
Albuquerque Police Department
Albuquerque, New Mexico

James T. "Tom" Thurman
Associate Professor 
College of Law Enforcement
Eastern Kentucky University
Richmond, Kentucky

Additional Technical Working Group Members

Hal R. Arenstein
Attorney at Law
Law Offices of Hal Arenstein
Cincinnati, Ohio

Dexter J. Bartlett
Inspector
Illinois State Police
Crime Scene Services Command
Joliet, Illinois

Eric Buel
Director
Department of Public Safety Crime Laboratory
Waterbury, Vermont

Jeff Cover
Supervisor, Crime Scene Unit
Anne Arundel County Police Department
Millersville, Maryland

Elizabeth Devine
Supervising Criminalist
Scientific Services Bureau
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
Los Angeles, California

Henry Escobar
Detective
San Antonio Police Department
San Antonio, Texas

Jerry N. Estes
District Attorney General
10th Judicial District
Athens, Tennessee

James Estrada
Detective Investigator
Homicide Unit
San Antonio Police Department
San Antonio, Texas

Drew Findling
Attorney
Atlanta, Georgia

Nan Horvat/John Sarcone
Assistant Polk County Attorney/Polk County Attorney
Des Moines, Iowa

N. Michael Hurley
Regional Director
Oregon State Police
Forensic Services Division
Springfield, Oregon

Gary L. Kaldun
Forensic Scientist, Crime Scene Coordinator
Bureau of Criminal Apprehension
St. Paul, Minnesota

Joe Marchan
Supervising Criminalist
Texas Department of Public Safety Crime Laboratory
McAllen, Texas

Joseph John Moseley, II
Detective
Central Homicide Evaluation Support Squad
Chicago Police Department
Chicago, Illinois

Robert Mullins
Detective
Investigative Services
New Haven Police Department
New Haven, Connecticut

Steve Nash
Detective
Marin County Sheriff's Department
San Rafael, California

Kathryn Normington-Hollenbach
Senior Forensic Scientist
Wyoming State Crime Laboratory
Cheyenne, Wyoming

Galen Paine
Assistant Public Defender
Public Defender's Office
Sitka, Alaska

Michael J. Rafferty
Chief of Forensics
Florida Department of Law Enforcement
Fort Myers Regional Operations Center
Fort Myers, Florida

Eugene Rifenburg
Senior Investigator (Ret.)
New York State Police
Investigator (current)
Oneida Nation Police
Munnsville, New York

Gary A. Rini
Police Commander (Ret.)
Director
The American Institute for Police Science
Elkhorn, Nebraska

Heidi Robbins
Supervising Criminalist
Scientific Services Bureau
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
Los Angeles, California

Darrell Ryan
Lieutenant
Nashville Police Department
Nashville, Tennessee

Norman Shapiro
Vice President, New York State Defender's Association
Counselor at Law
Law Offices of Norman Shapiro
Middletown, New York

Clarene Shelley
Lieutenant
Lakewood Police Department
Lakewood, Colorado

Gregory Smith
Assistant County Prosecutor
Office of the County Prosecutor
Camden County 
Camden, New Jersey

Richard Stanek
Captain
Minneapolis Police Department
Minneapolis, Minnesota

Brad Townsend
Sergeant
Corona Police Department
Corona, California

Larry Turner
Director of Forensic Services
Jackson Police Department Crime Laboratory
Jackson, Mississippi

Stephen Weichman
County and Prosecuting Attorney
Teton County
Jackson, Wyoming

James Wiser
Crime Scene Investigator/Evidence Custodian
Mount Pleasant Police Department
Mount Pleasant, South Carolina

Larry Wood
Detective
Major Case Unit
Smyrna Police Department
Smyrna, Georgia

John Yarbrough
Sergeant
Homicide Bureau
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
Commerce, California

--------------------------------

Acknowledgments

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) wishes to thank the Technical Working
Group on Crime Scene Investigation (TWGCSI) for their dedication and
endurance. This 44-member network of experts from a variety of backgrounds
gave their time to draft and review the guide, providing feedback from all areas
of the Nation. The true strength of this document is derived from the
commitment of the TWG members to produce a guide that could be
implemented across the country, from small, rural townships to large,
metropolitan areas. In addition, the agencies and organizations that employ each
member of the group share in this endeavor. Through their support, each
member was given the flexibility needed to complete the project.

NIJ also wishes to thank Attorney General Janet Reno, whose support and
commitment to the improvement of the criminal justice system made this work
possible. In addition, appreciation is extended to David G. Boyd, Director of
NIJ's Office of Science and Technology, and to Richard M. Rau, Ph.D., the
NIJ Project Monitor, for his unwavering support of, and guidance through, the
process and production of this guide.

NIJ would like to thank all the individuals from various national organizations
who responded to the request for nominations of experts with a wide expanse
of knowledge and experience in the field of crime scene investigation. It was
from their recommendations that the members were selected. In particular,
thanks to Jim Polley from the National District Attorneys Association, Dan
Rosenblatt from the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Stuart Statler
from the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Clinton Lyons
from the National Legal Aid and Defender Association, Aldine N. "Bubby"
Moser, Jr., from the National Sheriffs' Association, and Ronald C. Jackson
from the International Association for Identification. NIJ would also like to
thank Mike Grossman, Director of NIJ's Technology Assistance Division, for
his nominations of law enforcement candidates and his help in obtaining
recommendations from NIJ's regional National Law Enforcement and
Corrections Technology Centers (NLECTC), as well as the directors of those
centers: James A. Keller, Robert Pentz, Chris Aldridge, John Ritz, Thomas
Sexton, and Tom Burgoyne. NIJ would also like to thank the more than 120
individuals and organizations who were sent a copy of the draft guide for review
and comment.

NIJ thanks CSR, Incorporated--particularly Tammy Kilgore, Terrylynn
Pearlman, and Stephanie Tiller--for their support in arranging all of the meetings
necessary to develop this guide. In addition, special thanks are extended to
Aspen Systems Corporation and its editors who participated: Michele
Coppola, Gayle Garmise, Rita Premo, and Jackie Siegel.

NIJ would like to express appreciation for the input Chris Asplen, Janice
Munsterman, Karl Bickel, Luke Galant, and Lisa Kaas gave the meetings and
the document and for the administrative support provided by Celeste
Descoteaux, Todd Spires, and Heidi Prue.

Special thanks to Lisa Forman, Carole Chaski, and Kathleen Higgins for their
contributions to the TWG and especially their tireless patience.

And finally, thanks to Anjali Swienton for her patience, dedication, endurance,
and all around outstanding support.

--------------------------------

Contents

Message From the Attorney General
Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation
Acknowledgments

Introduction
Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for Law Enforcement

--Section A: Arriving at the Scene: Initial Response/Prioritization of Efforts
1. Initial Response/Receipt of Information
2. Safety Procedures
3. Emergency Care
4. Secure and Control Persons at the Scene
5. Boundaries: Identify, Establish, Protect, and Secure
6. Turn Over Control of the Scene and Brief Investigator(s) in Charge
7. Document Actions and Observations

--Section B: Preliminary Documentation and Evaluation of the Scene
1. Conduct Scene Assessment
2. Conduct Scene "Walk-Through" and Initial Documentation

--Section C: Processing the Scene
1. Determine Team Composition
2. Contamination Control
3. Documentation
4. Prioritize Collection of Evidence
5. Collect, Preserve, Inventory, Package, Transport, and Submit Evidence

--Section D: Completing and Recording the Crime Scene Investigation
1. Establish Crime Scene Debriefing Team
2. Perform Final Survey of the Crime Scene
3. Documentation of the Crime Scene

--Section E: Crime Scene Equipment
1. Initial Responding Officer(s)
2. Crime Scene Investigator/Evidence Technician
3. Evidence Collection Kits (Examples)

Appendixes
Appendix A: Glossary
Appendix B: Reference List
Appendix C: List of Organizations

--------------------------------

Introduction

Note: A * appears after terms that are defined in the glossary and is used the
first time a glossary word or phrase occurs in each section of the document.

This guide is intended for use by law enforcement and other responders * who
have responsibility for protecting crime scenes, preserving physical evidence,
and collecting and submitting the evidence for scientific examination. Physical
evidence has the potential to play a critical role in the overall investigation and
resolution of a suspected criminal act. Realization of this potential depends on
actions taken early in the criminal investigation at the crime scene.
Developments in technology and improvements in the analysis and interpretation
of physical evidence recovered from crime scenes will place even greater
importance on properly documented and preserved evidence. An important
factor influencing the ultimate legal significance of this scientific evidence is that
investigators follow an objective, thorough, and thoughtful approach. The goal
of this process is to recognize and preserve physical evidence that will yield
reliable information to aid in the investigation.

Investigators should approach the crime scene investigation as if it will be their
only opportunity to preserve and recover these physical clues. They should
consider other case information or statements from witnesses or suspects
carefully in their objective assessment of the scene. Investigations may change
course a number of times during such an inquiry and physical clues, initially
thought irrelevant, may become crucial to a successful resolution of the case.

It is recognized that all crime scenes are unique. The judgment of the
investigator on the scene, with the assistance of other responders, such as the
prosecutor, should be given deference in the implementation of this guide. It is
impossible to propose a single, step-by-step procedure to approach every type
of situation. There are, however, fundamental principles of investigating a crime
scene and preserving evidence that should be practiced in every case. This
document is not intended as a comprehensive or rigid scheme of activities, but
as a guide for law enforcement, while recognizing the authority of Federal and
State statutes, case law, and local policies and procedures.

Although the development of a guide for crime scene investigation is instructive
in addressing issues surrounding the management of crime scenes, the Technical
Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation (TWGCSI) recognizes that local
logistical and legal conditions may dictate the use of alternative procedures.
Further, crime scene investigation procedures that differ from the practices in
this guide may not necessarily invalidate or detract from the evidence in a
particular case.

The authors encourage crime scene personnel to develop and continually
update their knowledge, skills, and abilities with respect to the processing of a
crime scene through training. In fact, successful implementation of this guide can
be realized only if staff possess basic (and in some cases advanced) training in
the fundamentals of investigating a crime scene. However, this document does
not address the mechanics of evidence collection * or the training requirements
of investigative personnel.

The application of this guide may vary from case to case. Most of the
procedures described in this document are typically ones that would be
followed in a major crime scene investigation. Some of the procedures listed
may not necessarily be followed in less serious or less complex investigations.
In addition, the order in which actions may be performed will vary depending
on the nature of the particular crime scene. In some investigations, the
responsibilities described in each section may be performed by the same
individual. The authors acknowledge that law enforcement agencies may be
faced with the dilemma of responding to more reported crimes than their
resources allow. It is one of the primary responsibilities of the investigator to
assess the case at hand and, after judging the seriousness of the case and the
availability of resources, to decide the level of investigation that will take place.
For potentially devastating situations, such as biological weapons * or
radiological or chemical threats, the appropriate agencies should be contacted.
The user should refer to the National Institute of Justice' s (NIJ's) publications
for fire and arson investigation, bomb and explosives investigation, electronic
crime investigation, and death investigation where applicable.

The authors recognize that the size of the agency, availability of resources, and
the level of expertise vary greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The experts
who have proposed this guide strongly suggest that agencies unable to adhere
to it seek assistance from other agencies. Assistance may take the form of
securing additional training, sharing resources, forming partnerships with
neighboring jurisdictions, and/or seeking additional funding. The authors also
recognize that many agencies already have programs in crime scene processing,
and much of the information contained in this document is derived from these
sources, including many of the resources identified in the reference list.

Based on this guide, agencies may determine that improvements are needed in
their training and policies concerning the investigation of crime scenes. This
guide may be a justification for strengthening an agency's resources.

Background

NIJ was asked by Attorney General Janet Reno in 1995 to study cases in
which convicted sex offenders were later exonerated by DNA testing. This
study resulted in the 1996 publication, Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by
Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence
After Trial. After being briefed on this publication, Attorney General Reno
asked NIJ to develop a consistent approach to the processing of crime scenes.
As a result, NIJ initiated the Technical Working Group on Crime Scene
Investigation to develop recommended practices for crime scene management.

Origin of the National Crime Scene Planning Panel and the Technical Working
Group on Crime Scene Investigation

In the spring of 1998, the American Society of Crime Laboratory
Directors/Laboratory Accreditation Board (ASCLD/LAB) and ASCLD
supported the principle of NIJ's establishment of TWGCSI. The NIJ Director
selected an 11-member planning panel called the National Crime Scene
Planning Panel (NCSPP). The NCSPP members represent independent,
multidisciplinary organizations whose constituents are responsible for
investigating, evaluating, and analyzing evidence from crime scenes. The
rationale for their involvement was twofold: they represent the diversity of the
professional disciplines and each organization is a key stakeholder in the
conduct of crime scene investigations and the implementation of this guide.

The NCSPP was charged with the development of the outline for a guide for
crime scene investigations using the format in Death Investigation: A Guide for
the Scene Investigator. The NCSPP also was charged with identifying the
expertise necessary for the composition of a Technical Working Group on
Crime Scene Investigation, a task the panel completed at a meeting in
Washington, D.C., in August 1998.

Candidates for TWGCSI were recommended by organizations representing
law enforcement, forensic science, crime scene training, the prosecution, and
the defense. The following criteria were used to select TWGCSI members:

--Each member was nominated/selected for the position by the NCSPP,
national organizations, and NIJ's four regional National Law Enforcement and
Corrections Technology Centers--Northeast, Southeast, Rocky Mountain, and
West.

--Each member had specific knowledge regarding the investigation of crime
scenes.

--Each member had specific experience with the process of crime scene
investigation and the outcomes of positive and negative scene investigations.

--Each member could commit to the project over at least a 6-month period.

The experts invited to TWGCSI consisted of 44 members from 25 States.
Their expertise was distributed among 18 law enforcement officers and trainers,
16 forensic analysts and educators, 5 prosecutors, and 5 defense attorneys.
This distribution of expertise, detailed below, brought together all the
nonmedical crime scene investigators to develop this guide.

Chronology

NCSPP meeting. In August 1998, the NCSPP met in Washington, D.C., to
review the existing literature and technology, prepare the project objectives,
and begin the guide development process. The NCSPP's objective was to
develop an outline for a guide based on existing literature and present it for
review to the assembled TWGCSI at a later date. During this initial session,
four investigative tasks were identified. Each task included subsections which
when developed provided a guide for investigators to follow while conducting a
crime scene investigation.

The guide's format has the following content:

--A statement of principle, citing the rationale for following the guide. 

--A statement of policy to the investigator on performing each section of the
guide.

--The procedure for performing each section of the guide.

--A summary statement citing justification for performing the procedures.

TWGCSI meetings. In December 1998, TWGCSI assembled in Washington,
D.C., and, after introductory remarks, separated into four breakout sections to
draft the guide. The four sections were: Arriving at the Scene: Initial
Response/Prioritization of Efforts, Preliminary Documentation and Evaluation of
the Scene, Processing the Scene, and Completing and Recording the Crime
Scene Investigation. An editor from Aspen Systems Corporation attended each
breakout section to audibly record the proceedings. Once all breakout sections
completed their work, the full TWG reassembled to review the initial draft.

The full TWG met again in January 1999 in Washington, D.C., to make
revisions and complete initial review as a group. The draft was edited and
TWGCSI members were asked to recommend organizations, persons, or
agencies they felt should comment. The draft was then mailed to this wider
audience and to all TWG members.

Organization review. The NCSPP reassembled in March 1999 in Washington,
D.C., to review and incorporate comments received from the wider audience
into the document. In April 1999, TWGCSI met in La Jolla, California, to
review the latest draft, make revisions, and approve changes. The document
was edited, and the NCSPP met in Washington, D.C., in July 1999 to review
the glossary, title, introduction, and appendixes for the document.

This document is divided into five sections: Arriving at the Scene: Initial
Response/Prioritization of Efforts, Preliminary Documentation and Evaluation of
the Scene, Processing the Scene, Completing and Recording the Crime Scene
Investigation, and Crime Scene Equipment. At the end of the document are
appendixes containing a glossary, a reference list, and a list of organizations to
which a draft copy of the document was sent.

Training Guide

The national crime scene investigation project includes tasks to develop training
criteria to fit the investigative guide. For each of the investigative tasks
presented in this document, "minimum levels of performance" will be developed
and verified by TWGCSI members. This "training guide" will provide both
individuals and educational organizations the material needed to establish and
maintain valid training programs. A set of sample forms with suggested
information to be recorded at the crime scene will be included in the training
guide.

Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation

--------------------------------

Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for Law Enforcement

Section A
Arriving at the Scene: Initial Response/Prioritization of Efforts

Section B
Preliminary Documentation and Evaluation of the Scene

Section C
Processing the Scene

Section D
Completing and Recording the Crime Scene Investigation

Section E
Crime Scene Equipment

--------------------------------

This handbook is intended as a guide to recommended practices for crime
scene investigation.

Jurisdictional, logistical, or legal conditions may preclude the use of particular
procedures contained herein.

For potentially devastating situations, such as biological weapons or radiological
or chemical threats, the appropriate agencies should be contacted. The user
should refer to the National Institute of Justice's publications for fire and arson
investigation, bomb and explosives investigation, electronic crime investigation,
and death investigation where applicable.

--------------------------------

Section A
Arriving at the Scene: Initial Response/Prioritization of Efforts

1. Initial Response/Receipt of Information

Principle: One of the most important aspects of securing the crime scene is to
preserve the scene with minimal contamination* and disturbance of physical
evidence. The initial response to an incident shall be expeditious and
methodical. Upon arrival, the officer(s) shall assess the scene and treat the
incident as a crime scene.

Policy: The initial responding officer(s)* shall promptly, yet cautiously,
approach and enter crime scenes, remaining observant of any persons, vehicles,
events, potential evidence, and environmental conditions. 

Procedure: The initial responding officer(s) should:

a. Note or log dispatch information (e.g., address/location, time, date, type of
call, parties involved). 

b. Be aware of any persons or vehicles leaving the crime scene. 

c. Approach the scene cautiously, scan the entire area to thoroughly assess
the scene, and note any possible secondary crime scenes. Be aware of any
persons and vehicles in the vicinity that may be related to the crime.

d. Make initial observations (look, listen, smell) to assess the scene and
ensure officer safety before proceeding.

e. Remain alert and attentive. Assume the crime is ongoing until determined to
be otherwise.

f. Treat the location as a crime scene until assessed and determined to be
otherwise.

Summary: It is important for the initial responding officer(s) to be observant
when approaching, entering, and exiting a crime scene.

2. Safety Procedures

Principle: The safety and physical well-being of officers and other individuals,
in and around the crime scene, are the initial responding officer(s') first priority.

Policy: The initial responding officer(s) arriving at the scene shall identify and
control any dangerous situations or persons.

Procedure: The initial responding officer(s) should:

a. Ensure that there is no immediate threat to other responders* --scan area
for sights, sounds, and smells that may present danger to personnel (e.g.,
hazardous materials such as gasoline, natural gas). If the situation involves a
clandestine drug laboratory, biological weapons*, or radiological or chemical
threats* the appropriate personnel/agency should be contacted prior to entering
the scene.

b. Approach the scene in a manner designed to reduce risk of harm to
officer(s) while maximizing the safety of victims, witnesses, and others in the
area.

c. Survey the scene for dangerous persons and control the situation.

d. Notify supervisory personnel and call for assistance/backup.

Summary: The control of physical threats will ensure the safety of officers and
others present.

3. Emergency Care

Principle: After controlling any dangerous situations or persons, the initial
responding officer(s') next responsibility is to ensure that medical attention is
provided to injured persons while minimizing
contamination of the scene.

Policy: The initial responding officer(s) shall ensure that medical attention is
provided with minimal contamination of the scene.

Procedure: The initial responding officer(s) should:

a. Assess the victim(s) for signs of life and medical needs and provide
immediate medical attention.

b. Call for medical personnel.

c. Guide medical personnel to the victim to minimize contamination/alteration
of the crime scene.

d. Point out potential physical evidence to medical personnel, instruct them to
minimize contact with such evidence (e.g., ensure that medical personnel
preserve all clothing and personal effects without cutting through bullet holes,
knife tears), and document movement of persons or items by medical
personnel.

e. Instruct medical personnel not to "clean up" the scene and to avoid removal
or alteration of items originating from the scene.

f. If medical personnel arrived first, obtain the name, unit, and telephone
number of attending personnel, and the name and location of the medical facility
where the victim is to be taken.

g. If there is a chance the victim may die, attempt to obtain "dying
declaration."*

h. Document any statements/comments made by victims, suspects, or
witnesses at the scene.

i. If the victim or suspect is transported to a medical facility, send a law
enforcement official with the victim or suspect to document any comments
made and preserve evidence. (If no officers are available to accompany the
victim/suspect, stay at the scene and request medical personnel to preserve
evidence and document any comments made by the victim or suspect.)

Summary: Assisting, guiding, and instructing medical personnel during the
care and removal of injured persons will diminish the risk of contamination and
loss of evidence.

4. Secure and Control Persons at the Scene

Principle: Controlling, identifying, and removing persons at the crime scene
and limiting the number of persons who enter the crime scene and the
movement of such persons is an important function of the initial responding
officer(s) in protecting the crime scene.

Policy: The initial responding officer(s) shall identify persons at the crime
scene and control their movement.

Procedure: The initial responding officer(s) should:

a. Control all individuals at the scene--prevent individuals from
altering/destroying physical evidence by restricting movement, location, and
activity while ensuring and maintaining safety at the scene.

b. Identify all individuals at the scene, such as:

--Suspects: Secure and separate.

--Witnesses: Secure and separate.

--Bystanders: Determine whether witness, if so treat as above, if not,
remove from the scene.

--Victims/family/friends: Control while showing compassion.

--Medical and other assisting personnel.

c. Exclude unauthorized and nonessential personnel from the scene (e.g., law
enforcement officials not working the case, politicians, media).

Summary: Controlling the movement of persons at the crime scene and
limiting the number of persons who enter the crime scene is essential to
maintaining scene integrity, safeguarding evidence, and minimizing
contamination.

5. Boundaries: Identify, Establish, Protect, and Secure

Principle: Defining and controlling boundaries provide a means for protecting
and securing the crime scene(s). The number of crime scenes and their
boundaries are determined by their location(s) and the type of crime.
Boundaries shall be established beyond the initial scope of the crime scene(s)
with the understanding that the boundaries can be reduced in size if necessary
but cannot be as easily expanded.

Policy: The initial responding officer(s) at the scene shall conduct an initial
assessment to establish and control the crime scene(s) and its boundaries.

Procedure: The initial responding officer(s) should:

a. Establish boundaries of the scene(s), starting at the focal point and
extending outward to include:

--Where the crime occurred.

--Potential points and paths of exit and entry of suspects and witnesses.

--Places where the victim/evidence may have been moved 

--(be aware of trace and impression evidence while assessing the scene).

b. Set up physical barriers (e.g., ropes, cones, crime scene barrier tape,
available vehicles, personnel, other equipment) or use existing boundaries (e.g.,
doors, walls, gates).

c. Document the entry/exit of all people entering and leaving the scene, once
boundaries have been established.

d. Control the flow of personnel and animals entering and leaving the scene to
maintain integrity of the scene.

e. Effect measures to preserve/protect evidence that may be lost or
compromised (e.g., protect from the elements (rain, snow, wind) and from
footsteps, tire tracks, sprinklers).

f. Document the original location of the victim or objects that you observe
being moved.

g. Consider search and seizure issues to determine the necessity of obtaining
consent to search and/or obtaining a search warrant. 

Note: Persons should not smoke, chew tobacco, use the telephone or
bathroom, eat or drink, move any items including weapons (unless necessary
for the safety and well-being of persons at the scene), adjust the thermostat or
open windows or doors (maintain scene as found), touch anything unnecessarily
(note and document any items moved), reposition moved items, litter, or spit
within the established boundaries of the scene.

Summary: Establishing boundaries is a critical aspect in controlling the
integrity of evidentiary material.

6. Turn Over Control of the Scene and Brief Investigator(s) in Charge

Principle: Briefing the investigator(s) taking charge assists in controlling the
crime scene and helps establish further investigative responsibilities.

Policy: The initial responding officer(s) at the scene shall provide a detailed
crime scene briefing to the investigator(s) in charge* of the scene.

Procedure: The initial responding officer(s) should:

a. Brief the investigator(s) taking charge.

b. Assist in controlling the scene.

c. Turn over responsibility for the documentation* of entry/exit.

d. Remain at the scene until relieved of duty.

Summary: The scene briefing is the only opportunity for the next in command
to obtain initial aspects of the crime scene prior to subsequent investigation.

7. Document Actions and Observations

Principle: All activities conducted and observations made at the crime scene
must be documented as soon as possible after the event to preserve
information.

Policy: Documentation must be maintained as a permanent record.

Procedure: The initial responding officer(s) should document:

a. Observations of the crime scene, including the location of persons and items
within the crime scene and the appearance and condition of
the scene upon arrival.

b. Conditions upon arrival (e.g., lights on/off; shades up/down, open/closed;
doors, windows, open/closed; smells; ice, liquids; movable furniture; weather;
temperature; and personal items.) 

c. Personal information from witnesses, victims, suspects, and any statements
or comments made.

d. Own actions and actions of others.

Summary: The initial responding officer(s) at the crime scene must produce
clear, concise, documented information encompassing his or her observations
and actions. This documentation is vital in providing information to substantiate
investigative considerations.

--------------------------------

Section B
Preliminary Documentation and Evaluation of the Scene

1. Conduct Scene Assessment 

Principle: Assessment of the scene by the investigator(s) in charge* allows for
the determination of the type of incident to be investigated and the level of
investigation to be conducted.

Policy: The investigator(s) in charge shall identify specific responsibilities,
share preliminary information, and develop investigative plans in accordance
with departmental policy and local, State, and Federal laws.

Procedure: The investigator(s)* in charge should:

a. Converse with the first responder(s)* regarding observations/activities.

b. Evaluate safety issues that may affect all personnel entering the scene(s)
(e.g., bloodborne pathogens*, hazards).

c. Evaluate search and seizure issues to determine the necessity of obtaining
consent to search and/or obtaining a search warrant.

d. Evaluate and establish a path of entry/exit to the scene to be utilized by
authorized personnel.

e. Evaluate initial scene boundaries.*

f. Determine the number/size of scene(s) and prioritize.

g. Establish a secure area within close proximity to the scene(s) for the
purpose of consultation and equipment staging.

h. If multiple scenes exist, establish and maintain communication with
personnel at those locations.

i. Establish a secure area for temporary evidence storage in accordance with
rules of evidence/chain of custody.*

j. Determine and request additional investigative resources as required (e.g.,
personnel/specialized units, legal consultation/prosecutors, equipment).

k. Ensure continued scene integrity (e.g., document entry/exit of authorized
personnel, prevent unauthorized access to the scene).

l. Ensure that witnesses to the incident are identified and separated (e.g.,
obtain valid ID).

m. Ensure the surrounding area is canvassed and the results are documented.

n. Ensure preliminary documentation*/photography of the scene, injured
persons, and vehicles.

Summary: Scene assessment allows for the development of a plan for the
coordinated identification, collection*, and preservation of physical evidence
and identification of witnesses. It also allows for the exchange of information
among law enforcement personnel and the development of investigative
strategies.

2. Conduct Scene "Walk-Through" and Initial Documentation

Principle: The scene "walk-through"* provides an overview of the entire scene,
identifies any threats to scene integrity, and ensures protection of physical
evidence. Written and photographic documentation provides a permanent
record.

Policy: The investigator(s) in charge shall conduct a walk-through of the
scene. The walk-through shall be conducted with individuals responsible for
processing the scene.

Procedure: During the scene walk-through, the investigator(s) in charge
should:

a. Avoid contaminating the scene by using the established path of entry.

b. Prepare preliminary documentation of the scene as observed.

c. Identify and protect fragile and/or perishable evidence (e.g., consider
climatic conditions, crowds/hostile environment). Ensure that all evidence that
may be compromised is immediately documented, photographed, and
collected.

Summary: Conducting a scene walk-through provides the investigator(s) in
charge with an overview of the entire scene. The walk-through provides the first
opportunity to identify valuable and/or fragile evidence and determine initial
investigative procedures, providing for a systematic examination and
documentation of the scene. Written and photographic documentation records
the condition of the scene as first observed, providing a permanent record.

--------------------------------

Section C
Processing the Scene

1. Determine Team Composition

Principle: Based on the type of incident and complexity of the scene, the
investigator(s) in charge* shall determine team composition. Trained personnel
shall perform scene processing.

Policy: The investigator(s) in charge shall assess the scene to determine
specialized resources required.

Procedure: Following the walk-through*, the investigator(s) in charge should:

a. Assess the need for additional personnel. Be aware of the need for
additional personnel in cases of multiple scenes*, multiple victims, numerous
witnesses, or other circumstances.

b. Assess forensic needs and call forensic specialists to the scene for
expertise and/or equipment.

c. Ensure that scene security and the entry/exit documentation* are continued.

d. Select qualified person(s) to perform specialized tasks (e.g., photography,
sketch, latent prints*, evidence collection*).

e. Document team members* and assignments.

Summary: The scene(s) assessment determines the number of personnel and
how responsibilities will be assigned.

2. Contamination Control

Principle: Contamination* control and preventing cross-contamination* at single
or multiple scenes is essential to maintaining the safety of personnel and the
integrity of evidence.

Policy: The investigator(s) in charge shall require all personnel to follow
procedures to ensure scene safety and evidence integrity.

Procedure: Other responders* and/or team members should:

a. Limit scene access to people directly involved in scene processing.

b. Follow established entry/exit routes at the scene.

c. Identify first responders* and consider collection of elimination samples.*

d. Designate secure area for trash and equipment.

e. Use personal protective equipment (PPE)* to prevent contamination of
personnel and to minimize scene contamination.

f. Clean/sanitize* or dispose of tools/equipment and personal protective
equipment between evidence collections and/or scenes.

g. Utilize single-use equipment* when performing direct collection of biological
samples.

Summary: Minimize contamination by being safe, clean, and careful to ensure
the welfare of personnel and the integrity of the evidence.

3. Documentation

Principle: An assessment of the scene determines what kind of documentation
is needed (e.g., photography, video, sketches, measurements, notes).

Policy: The investigator(s) in charge shall ensure documentation of the scene.

Procedure: The team member(s) should:

a. Review assessment of the scene to determine the type of documentation
needed.

b. Coordinate photographs, video, sketches, measurements, and notes.

c. Photograph:

--Scene utilizing overall, medium, and close-up coverage.

--Evidence to be collected with and without measurement scale* and/or
evidence identifiers.* 

--Victims, suspects, witnesses, crowd, and vehicles.

--Additional perspectives (e.g., aerial photographs, witness' view, area under
body once body is removed).

d. Videotape as optional supplement to photos.

e. Prepare preliminary sketch(es) and measure:

--Immediate area of the scene, noting case identifiers* and indicating north on
the sketch.

--Relative location of items of evidence and correlate evidence items with
evidence records.

--Evidence prior to movement.

--Rooms, furniture, or other objects.

--Distance to adjacent buildings or other landmarks.

f. Generate notes at the scene:

--Documenting location of the scene, time of arrival, and time of departure.

--Describing the scene as it appears.

--Recording transient evidence* (e.g., smells, sounds, sights) and
conditions (e.g., temperature, weather).

--Documenting circumstances that require departures from usual procedures.

Summary: A well-documented scene ensures the integrity of the investigation
and provides a permanent record for later evaluation.

4. Prioritize Collection of Evidence

Principle: Prioritize the collection of evidence to prevent loss, destruction, or
contamination.

Policy: The investigator(s) in charge and team members shall determine the
order in which evidence is collected.

Procedure: The team member(s) should:

a. Conduct a careful and methodical evaluation considering all physical
evidence possibilities (e.g., biological fluids*, latent prints, trace evidence*).

b. Focus first on the easily accessible areas in open view and proceed to
out-of-view locations.

c. Select a systematic search pattern for evidence collection based on the size
and location of the scene(s).

d. Select a progression of processing/collection methods so that initial
techniques do not compromise subsequent processing/collections methods.

--Concentrate on the most transient evidence and work to the least
transient forms of physical evidence.

--Move from least intrusive to most intrusive processing/collection methods.

e. Continually assess environmental and other factors that may affect the
evidence.

f. Be aware of multiple scenes (e.g., victims, suspects, vehicles, locations).

g. Recognize other methods that are available to locate, technically document,
and collect* evidence (e.g., alternate light source*, enhancement, blood pattern
documentation, projectile trajectory analysis*).

Summary: Prioritization provides for the timely and methodical preservation
and collection of evidence.

5. Collect, Preserve, Inventory, Package, Transport, and Submit
Evidence

Principle: The handling of physical evidence is one of the most important
factors of the investigation.

Policy: The team member(s) shall ensure the effective collection, preservation,
packaging, and transport of evidence.

Procedure: The team member(s) should:

a. Maintain scene security throughout processing and until the scene is
released.

b. Document the collection of evidence by recording its location at the scene,
date of collection, and who collected it.

c. Collect each item identified as evidence.

d. Establish chain of custody.* 

e. Obtain standard/reference samples* from the scene. 

f. Obtain control samples.*

g. Consider obtaining elimination samples.

h. Immediately secure electronically recorded evidence (e.g., answering
machine tapes, surveillance camera videotapes, computers) from the vicinity.

i. Identify and secure evidence in containers (e.g., label, date, initial container)
at the crime scene. Different types of evidence require different containers (e.g.,
porous*, nonporous*, crushproof).

j. Package items to avoid contamination and cross-contamination.

k. Document the condition of firearms/weapons prior to rendering them safe
for transportation and submission.

l. Avoid excessive handling of evidence after it is collected.

m. Maintain evidence at the scene in a manner designed to diminish
degradation or loss.

n. Transport and submit evidence items for secure storage.

Summary: Evidence at crime scenes that is in the process of documentation,
collection, preservation, or packaging should be handled with attention to scene
integrity and protection from contamination or deleterious change. During the
processing of the scene, and following documentation, evidence should be
appropriately packaged, labeled, and maintained in a secure, temporary manner
until final packaging and submission to a secured evidence storage facility or the
crime laboratory.

--------------------------------

Section D
Completing and Recording the Crime Scene Investigation

1. Establish Crime Scene Debriefing Team

Principle: The crime scene debriefing enables law enforcement personnel and
other responders* to share information regarding particular scene findings prior
to releasing the scene. It provides an opportunity for input regarding followup
investigation, special requests for assistance, and the establishment of
post-scene responsibilities.

Policy: Law enforcement personnel and other responders shall participate in
or initiate a crime scene debriefing to ensure the crime scene investigation is
complete and to verify post-scene responsibilities.

Procedure: The investigator(s) in charge* of the crime scene should establish a
crime scene debriefing team. When participating in a scene debriefing, law
enforcement personnel and other responders should:

a. Establish a crime scene debriefing team, which includes the investigator(s)
in charge of the crime scene, other investigators and evidence collection*
personnel (e.g., photographers, evidence technicians, latent print personnel,
specialized personnel, and initial responding officer(s)* if still present).

b. Determine what evidence was collected.

c. Discuss preliminary scene findings with team members.* 

d. Discuss potential technical forensic testing and the sequence of tests to be
performed.

e. Initiate any action(s) identified in discussion required to complete the crime
scene investigation.

f. Brief person(s) in charge upon completion of assigned crime scene tasks.

g. Establish post-scene responsibilities for law enforcement personnel and other
responders.

Summary: The crime scene debriefing is the best opportunity for law
enforcement personnel and other responders to ensure that the crime scene
investigation is complete.

2. Perform Final Survey of the Crime Scene

Principle: Final survey of the crime scene ensures that evidence has been
collected and the scene has been processed prior to release. In addition, a
systematic review of the scene ensures that evidence, equipment, or materials
generated by the investigation are not inadvertently left behind and any
dangerous materials or conditions have been reported and addressed.

Policy: The investigator(s) in charge shall direct a walk-through* at the
conclusion of the scene investigation and ensure that the scene investigation is
complete.

Procedure: The investigator(s) in charge should ensure that:

a. Each area identified as part of the crime scene is visually inspected.

b. All evidence collected at the scene is accounted for.

c. All equipment and materials generated by the investigation are removed.

d. Any dangerous materials or conditions are reported and addressed.

e. The crime scene is released in accordance with jurisdictional requirements.

Summary: Conducting a scene walk-through ensures that all evidence has
been collected, that materials are not inadvertently left behind, and that any
dangerous materials or conditions have been reported and addressed. 

3. Documentation of the Crime Scene

Principle: Reports and other documentation* pertaining to the crime scene
investigation shall be compiled into a "case file"* by the investigator(s) in charge
of the crime scene. This file shall be a record of the actions taken and evidence
collected at the scene. This documentation shall allow for independent review of
the work conducted.

Policy: The investigator(s) in charge shall ensure that reports and other
documentation pertaining to the crime scene investigation are compiled.

Procedure: The investigator(s) in charge should obtain the following for the
crime scene case file:

a. Initial responding officer(s') documentation.

b. Emergency medical personnel documents.

c. Entry/exit documentation.

d. Photographs/videos.

e. Crime scene sketches/diagrams.

f. Evidence documentation.

g. Other responders' documentation.

h. Record of consent form or search warrant.

i. Reports such as forensic/technical reports should be added to this file when
they become available.

Note: The above list is limited to crime scene documentation. This should not
be considered a comprehensive list of the documents involved in an
investigative case file.

Summary: This will ensure that reports and other documentation pertaining to
the crime scene investigation are compiled into a case file by the investigator(s)
in charge of the crime scene and allow for independent review of the work
conducted.

--------------------------------

Section E
Crime Scene Equipment

1. Initial Responding Officer(s)

Essential*

Consent/search forms.
Crime scene barricade tape.
First-aid kit.
Flares.
Flashlight and extra batteries.
Paper bags.
Personal protective equipment(PPE). 

* These items should be in police vehicles or readily available to initial
responding officer(s). 

Optional

Audiotape recorder.
Camera with flash and extra film.
Chalk.
Directional marker/compass.
Disinfectant.
Maps.
Plastic bags.
Pocket knife.
Reflective vest.
Tape measure.
Tarps to protect evidence from the weather.
Traffic cones.
Waterless hand wash (towelette with germicide). 
Wireless phone.

2. Crime Scene Investigator/Evidence Technician

Essential*

Bindle paper. 
Biohazard bags. 
Body fluid collection kit.
Camera (35 mm) with flash/film/tripod.

Casting materials.
Consent/search forms.
Crime scene barricade tape.
Cutting instruments (knives, box cutter, scalpel, scissors).
Directional marker/compass.
Disinfectant.
Evidence collection containers.
Evidence identifiers. 
Evidence seals/tape.
First-aid kit.
Flashlight and extra batteries.
High-intensity lights.
Latent print kit.
Magnifying glass.
Measuring devices.
Permanent markers.
Personal protective equipment (PPE).
Photographic scale (ruler).
Presumptive blood test supplies.
Sketch paper.
Tool kit.
Tweezers/forceps.

* These items should be in police vehicles or readily available to initial
responding officer(s).

Optional

Audiotape recorder.
Bloodstain pattern examination kit.
Business cards.
Chalk.
Chemical enhancement supplies.
Entomology (insect) collection kit.
Extension cords.
Flares.
Forensic light source (alternate light source, UV lamp/laser, goggles). 
Generator.
Gunshot residue kit.
Laser trajectory kit.
Maps.
Marking paint/snow wax.
Metal detector.
Mirror.
Phone listing (important numbers).
Privacy screens.
Protrusion rod set.
Reflective vest.
Refrigeration or cooling unit.
Respirators with filters.
Roll of string.
Rubber bands.
Sexual assault evidence collection kit (victim and suspect).
Shoe print lifting equipment.
Templates (scene and human).
Thermometer.
Traffic cones.
Trajectory rods.
Video recorder.
Wireless phone.

3. Evidence Collection Kits (Examples)

Blood Collection

Bindle.
Coin envelopes.
Disposable scalpels.
Distilled water.
Ethanol.
Evidence identifiers.
Latex gloves.
Photographic ruler (ABFO scales).
Presumptive chemicals.
Sterile gauze.
Sterile swabs.
Test tubes/test tube rack.

Bloodstain Pattern Documentation

ABFO scales.
Calculator.
Laser pointer.
Permanent markers.
Protractor.
String.
Tape.

Excavation

Cones/markers.
Evidence identifiers.
Metal detectors.
Paintbrushes.
Shovels/trowels.
Sifting screens.
String.
Weights.
Wooden/metal stakes.

Fingerprint

Black and white film.
Brushes.
Chemical enhancement supplies.
Cyanoacrylate (super glue) wand/packets.
Flashlight.
Forensic light source.
Lift cards.
Lift tape.
Measurement scales. 
One-to-one camera.
Powders.

Impression

Bowls/mixing containers.
Boxes.
Dental stone (die stone).
Evidence identifiers.
Measurement scales.
Permanent markers.
Snow print wax.
Water.

Pattern Print Lifter

Chemical enhancement supplies.
Electrostatic dust lifter.
Gel lifter.
Wide format lift tape.

Toolmarks

Casting materials.

Trace Evidence Collection

Acetate sheet protectors.
Bindle paper.
Clear tape/adhesive lift.
Flashlight (oblique lighting).
Forceps/tweezers.
Glass vials.
Slides and slide mailers.
Trace evidence vacuum with disposable collection filters.

Trajectory

Calculator.
Canned smoke.
Dummy.
Laser.
Mirror.
Protractor.
String.
Trajectory rods.

--------------------------------

Appendix A
Glossary

Appendix B
Reference List

Appendix C
List of Organizations

--------------------------------

Appendix A. Glossary

The definitions contained herein apply to terms as used in this document.

ABFO scales: (American Board of Forensic Odontology scales). An L-shaped
piece of plastic used in photography that is marked with circles, black and
white bars, and 18-percent gray bars to assist in distortion compensation and
provide exposure determination. For measurement, the plastic piece is marked
in millimeters.

Alternate light source: Equipment used to produce visible and invisible light at
various wavelengths to enhance or visualize potential items of evidence (fluids,
fingerprints, clothing fibers, etc.).

Bindle paper: Clean paper folded to use to contain trace evidence, sometimes
included as part of the packaging for collecting trace evidence.

Biohazard bag: A container for materials that have been exposed to blood or
other biological fluids and have the potential to be contaminated with hepatitis,
AIDS, or other viruses.

Biological fluids: Fluids that have human or animal origin, most commonly
encountered at crime scenes (e.g., blood, mucus, perspiration, saliva, semen,
vaginal fluid, urine).

Biological weapon: Biological agents used to threaten human life (e.g., anthrax,
smallpox, or any infectious disease).

Bloodborne pathogen: Infectious, disease-causing microorganisms that may be
found or transported in biological fluids.

Boundaries: The perimeter or border surrounding potential physical evidence
related to the crime.

Case file: The collection of documents comprising information concerning a
particular investigation. (This collection may be kept in case jackets, file folders,
ring binders, boxes, file drawers, file cabinets, or rooms. Sub-files are often
used within case files to segregate and group interviews, media coverage,
laboratory requests and reports, evidence documentation, photographs,
videotapes, audiotapes, and other documents.)

Case identifiers: The alphabetic and/or numeric characters assigned to identify a
particular case.

Chain of custody: A process used to maintain and document the chronological
history of the evidence. (Documents should include name or initials of the
individual collecting the evidence, each person or entity subsequently having
custody of it, dates the items were collected or transferred, agency and case
number, victim's or suspect's name, and a brief description of the item.)

Chemical enhancement: The use of chemicals that react with specific types of
evidence (e.g., blood, semen, lead, fingerprints) in order to aid in the detection
and/or documentation of evidence that may be difficult to see.

Chemical threat: Compounds that may pose bodily harm if touched, ingested,
inhaled, or ignited. These compounds may be encountered at a clandestine
laboratory, or through a homemade bomb or tankard leakage (e.g., ether,
alcohol, nitroglycerin, ammonium sulfate, red phosphorus, cleaning supplies,
gasoline, or unlabeled chemicals).

Clean/sanitize: The process of removing biological and/or chemical
contaminants from tools and/or equipment (e.g., using a mixture of 10-percent
household bleach and water).

Collect/collection: The process of detecting, documenting, or retaining physical
evidence.

Comparison samples: A generic term used to describe physical
material/evidence discovered at crime scenes that may be compared with
samples from persons, tools, and physical locations. Comparison samples may
be from either an unknown/questioned or a known source.

Samples whose source is unknown/questioned are of three basic types:

1. Recovered crime scene samples whose source is in question (e.g.,
evidence left by suspects, victims).

2. Questioned evidence that may have been transferred to an offender
during the commission of the crime and taken away by him or her. Such
questioned evidence can be compared with evidence of a known source and
can thereby be associated/linked to a person/vehicle/tool of a crime.

3. Evidence of an unknown/questioned source recovered from several
crime scenes may also be used to associate multiple offenses that were
committed by the same person and/or with the same tool or weapon.

Samples whose source is known are of three basic types:

1. A standard/reference sample is material of a verifiable/documented source
which, when compared with evidence of an unknown source, shows an
association or linkage between an offender, crime scene, and/or victim (e.g., a
carpet cutting taken from a location suspected as the point of transfer for
comparison with the fibers recovered from the suspect's shoes, a sample of
paint removed from a suspect vehicle to be compared with paint found on a
victim's vehicle following an accident, or a sample of the suspect's and/or
victim's blood submitted for comparison with a bloodstained shirt recovered as
evidence).

2. A control/blank sample is material of a known source that presumably
was uncontaminated during the commission of the crime (e.g., a sample to be
used in laboratory testing to ensure that the surface on which the sample is
deposited does not interfere with testing. For example, when a bloodstain is
collected from a carpet, a segment of unstained carpet must be collected for
use as a blank or elimination sample).

3. An elimination sample is one of known source taken from a person who
had lawful access to the scene (e.g., fingerprints from occupants, tire tread
impressions from police vehicles, footwear impressions from emergency
medical personnel) to be used for comparison with evidence of the same type.

Contamination: The unwanted transfer of material from another source to a
piece of physical evidence.

Control/blank sample: See comparison samples.

Cross-contamination: The unwanted transfer of material between two or more
sources of physical evidence.

Documentation: Written notes, audio/videotapes, printed forms, sketches
and/or photographs that form a detailed record of the scene, evidence
recovered, and actions taken during the search of the crime scene.

Dying declaration: Statements made by a person who believes he or she is
about to die, concerning the cause or circumstance surrounding his or her
impending death.

Elimination sample: See comparison samples.

Evidence identifiers: Tape, labels, containers, and string tags used to identify the
evidence, the person collecting the evidence, the date the evidence was
gathered, basic criminal offense information, and a brief description of the
pertinent evidence.

First responder(s): The initial responding law enforcement officer(s) and/or
other public safety official(s) or service provider(s) arriving at the scene prior to
the arrival of the investigator(s) in charge.

Impression evidence: Objects or materials that have retained the characteristics
of other objects that have been physically pressed against them.

Initial responding officer(s): The first law enforcement officer(s) to arrive at the
scene.

Investigator(s) in charge: The official(s) responsible for the crime scene
investigation.

Known: See comparison samples.

Latent print: A print impression not readily visible, made by contact of the
hands or feet with a surface resulting in the transfer of materials from the skin to
that surface.

Measurement scale: An object showing standard units of length (e.g., ruler)
used in photographic documentation of an item of evidence.

Multiple scenes: Two or more physical locations of evidence associated with a
crime (e.g., in a crime of personal violence, evidence may be found at the
location of the assault and also on the person and clothing of the
victim/assailant, the victim's/assailant's vehicle, and locations the victim/assailant
frequents and resides).

Nonporous container: Packaging through which liquids or vapors cannot pass
(e.g., glass jars or metal cans).

Other responders: Individuals who are involved in an aspect of the crime scene,
such as perimeter security, traffic control, media management, scene
processing, and technical support, as well as prosecutors, medical personnel,
medical examiners, coroners, forensic examiners, evidence technicians, and fire
and rescue officers.

Personal protective equipment (PPE): Articles such as disposable gloves,
masks, and eye protection that are utilized to provide a barrier to keep
biological or chemical hazards from contacting the skin, eyes, and mucous
membranes and to avoid contamination of the crime scene.

Porous container: Packaging through which liquids or vapors may pass (e.g.,
paper bags, cloth bags).

Presumptive test: A nonconfirmatory test used to screen for the presence of a
substance.

Projectile trajectory analysis: The method for determining the path of a
high-speed object through space (e.g., a bullet emanating from a firearm).

Radiological threat: The pending exposure to radiation energy. (This energy can
be produced by shortwave x-rays or through unstable isotopes.)

Single-use equipment: Items that will be used only once to collect evidence,
such as biological samples, then discarded to minimize contamination (e.g.,
tweezers, scalpel blades, droppers).

Standard/reference sample: See comparison samples.

Team members: Individuals who are called to the scene to assist in investigation
or processing of the scene (e.g., scientific personnel from the crime laboratory
or medical examiner's office, other forensic specialists, photographers, mass
disaster specialists, experts in the identification of human remains, arson and
explosives investigators, clandestine drug laboratory investigators, as well as
other experts).

Trace evidence: Physical evidence that results from the transfer of small
quantities of materials (e.g., hair, textile fibers, paint chips, glass fragments,
gunshot residue particles).

Transient evidence: Evidence which by its very nature or the conditions at the
scene will lose its evidentiary value if not preserved and protected (e.g., blood
in the rain).

Unknown/questioned: See comparison samples.

Walk-through: An initial assessment conducted by carefully walking through the
scene to evaluate the situation, recognize potential evidence, and determine
resources required. Also, a final survey conducted to ensure the scene has been
effectively and completely processed.

--------------------------------

Appendix B. Reference List

Bevel, T. and R. Gardner. Bloodstain Pattern Analysis. Boca Raton, Florida:
CRC Press, Inc., 1997.

Bodziak, W.J. Footwear Impressions Evidence. New York: Elsevier Science
Publishing Co., 1990.

Crime Scene and Evidence Collection Handbook. Washington, D.C.: Bureau
of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, 1999.

DeForest, P.R., R.E. Gaensslen, and H.C. Lee. Forensic Science: An
Introduction to Criminalistics. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1983.

FBI Handbook of Forensic Science, Collection, Identification and Shipping
Index (with modifications). Washington, D.C.: Federal Bureau of Investigation,
1992.

Fisher, B.A.J. Techniques of Crime Scene Investigation, 5th Edition. Boca
Raton, Florida: CRC Press Inc., 1993.

Fox, Richard H. and Carl L. Cunningham. Crime Scene Search and Physical
Evidence Handbook. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National
Institute of Justice, 1973.

Geberth, Vernon, J. Practical Homicide Investigation Checklist and Field
Guide. New York: CRC Press, 1996.

Handbook of Physical Evidence. Miami, Florida: Metro-Dade Police
Department, 1996.

Kirk, P.L. Crime Investigation, 2nd Edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
1974.

Physical Evidence Handbook, 5th Edition. Madison, Wisconsin: 

Wisconsin Department of Justice, 1993.

Rini, Gary A. Crime Scene Search and Physical Evidence Management:
Student Training Manual. Elkhorn, Nebraska: The American Institute for Police
Science, 1998.

Saferstein, R. Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Science, 6th Edition.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1998.

Saferstein, R. Forensic Science Handbook, Volumes I, II, III. Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1982/1988/1993.

Suggested Guidelines for Establishing Evidence Response Teams. Washington,
D.C.: Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory.

--------------------------------

Appendix C. List of Organizations

The following is a list of organizations to which a draft copy of this document
was mailed.

Accomack County, Virginia, Sheriff's Office
Alaska Crime Laboratory
Alaska State Troopers
Albuquerque Police Department
American Academy of Forensic Sciences
American Bar Association
American Correctional Association
American Jail Association
American Prosecutors Research Institute
American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors
American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers
Arapahoe County, Colorado, Sheriff's Office
Armed Forces Institute of Pathology
Association of Federal Defense Attorneys
Baltimore Police Department, Laboratory Division
Bridgeport Forensic Laboratory
Bristol, Virginia, Police Department
Brownsville, Texas, Police Department
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
California Department of Justice, Bureau of Forensic Services
Cameron County, Texas, Sheriff's Office
Campaign for Effective Crime Policy
Chicago Police Department
Children's Defense Fund
Cleveland State College Basic Police Academy
Commission of Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies
Conference of State Court Administrators
Connecticut State Police Forensic Laboratory
Council of State Governments
Crime Scene Academy
Criminal Justice Institute
Dade County, Florida, Medical Examiner's Office
Davidson County, Iowa, Office of the Attorney General
Donna, Texas, Police Department
Drug Enforcement Administration
Edinburg, Texas, Police Department
Fairbanks, Alaska, Police Department
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
Florida Department of Law Enforcement 
Harlingen, Texas, Police Department
Hidalgo County, Texas, Sheriff's Office
Illinois State Police
Indiana State Police Laboratory
Institute for Genomic Research
Institute of Police Technology and Management
International Association of Bomb Technicians and Investigators
International Association of Chiefs of Police
International Association for Identification
International City/County Management Association
International Homicide Investigators Association
Iowa County Attorneys Association
Juneau, Alaska, Police Department
Kent County, Michigan, Sheriff's Office
Laredo, Texas, Police Department
Law Enforcement Training Institute
Maine State Police Crime Laboratory
Massachusetts State Police Crime Laboratory
McAllen, Texas, Police Department
Metro Nashville Police Department
Michigan Department of State Police
Mission, Texas, Police Department
Nashville, Tennessee, District Attorney's Office
National Association of Attorneys General
National Association of Black Women Attorneys
National Association of Counties
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
National Association of Drug Court Professionals
National Association of Police Organizations
National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors
National Association of Women Judges
National Center for Forensic Science
National Center for State Courts
National Clearinghouse for Child Abuse
National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence
National Conference of State Legislators
National Council on Crime and Delinquency
National Crime Prevention Council
National Criminal Justice Association
National District Attorneys Association
National Governors' Association
National Law Enforcement Council
National League of Cities
National Legal Aid & Defender Association
National Organization for Victim Assistance
National Sheriffs' Association
National Victim Center
New Hampshire State Police Forensic Laboratory
New Jersey State Police
New York State Police
Oneida County, New York, Sheriff's Office
Orange County, California, Sheriff's Department-Forensic Science Services
Orange County, New York, Community College Department of Criminal
Justice
Peace Officer Standards and Training
Pharr, Texas, Police Department
Police Association
Police Executive Research Forum
Police Foundation
Rhode Island State Crime Laboratory
Rockland County, New York, District Attorneys Office
San Diego, California, Police Department
The Sentencing Project
Sitka, Alaska, Police Department
Suffolk County, New York, Crime Laboratory
Tennessee Bureau of Investigation
Tennessee Law Enforcement Training Academy
Texas Rangers Department of Public Safety
Town of Goshen, New York, Police Department
University of Texas-Pan American Police Department
U.S. Border Patrol
U.S. Conference of Mayors
U.S. Sentencing Commission
Vermont State Police
Webb County, Texas, Police Department
Weslaco, Texas, Police Department
Willacy County, Texas, Sheriff's Office
Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory

--------------------------------

About the National Institute of Justice

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ), a component of the Office of Justice
Programs, is the research agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Created
by the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended, NIJ
is authorized to support research, evaluation, and demonstration programs,
development of technology, and both national and international information
dissemination. Specific mandates of the Act direct NIJ to: 

--Sponsor special projects, and research and development programs, that will
improve and strengthen the criminal justice system and reduce or prevent crime.

--Conduct national demonstration projects that employ innovative or promising
approaches for improving criminal justice. 

--Develop new technologies to fight crime and improve criminal justice. 

--Evaluate the effectiveness of criminal justice programs and identify programs
that promise to be successful if continued or repeated. 

--Recommend actions that can be taken by Federal, State, and local
governments as well as by private organizations to improve criminal justice. 

--Carry out research on criminal behavior. 

--Develop new methods of crime prevention and reduction of crime and
delinquency. 

In recent years, NIJ has greatly expanded its initiatives, the result of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (the Crime Act),
partnerships with other Federal agencies and private foundations, advances in
technology, and a new international focus. Some examples of these new
initiatives: 

--New research and evaluation is exploring key issues in community policing,
violence against women, sentencing reforms, and specialized courts such as
drug courts. 

--Dual-use technologies are being developed to support national defense and
local law enforcement needs. 

--Four regional National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology
Centers and a Border Research and Technology Center have joined the
National Center in Rockville, Maryland.

--The causes, treatment, and prevention of violence against women and
violence within the family are being investigated in cooperation with several
agencies of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 

--NIJ's links with the international community are being strengthened through
membership in the United Nations network of criminological institutes;
participation in developing the U.N. Criminal Justice Information Network;
initiation of UNOJUST (U.N. Online Justice Clearinghouse), which
electronically links the institutes to the U.N. network; and establishment of an
NIJ International Center. 

--The NIJ-administered criminal justice information clearinghouse, the world's
largest, has improved its online capability. 

--The Institute's Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program has been expanded and
enhanced. Renamed ADAM (Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring), the program
will increase the number of drug-testing sites, and its role as a "platform" for
studying drug-related crime will grow. 

--NIJ's new Crime Mapping Research Center will provide training in computer
mapping technology, collect and archive geocoded crime data, and develop
analytic software. 

--The Institute's program of intramural research has been expanded and
enhanced. 

The Institute Director, who is appointed by the President and confirmed by the
Senate, establishes the Institute's objectives, guided by the priorities of the
Office of Justice Programs, the Department of Justice, and the needs of the
criminal justice field. The Institute actively solicits the views of criminal justice
professionals and researchers in the continuing search for answers that inform
public policymaking in crime and justice.

For information on the National Institute of Justice, please contact:

National Criminal Justice Reference Service
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
800-851-3420
e-mail: askncjrs@ncjrs.org

You can view or obtain an electronic version of this document from the NCJRS
Justice Information Center World Wide Web site. 
To access this site, go to http://www.ncjrs.org

If you have questions, call or e-mail NCJRS.