U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

research report

A Guide for Law Enforcement A Guide for Law Enforcement

Crime Scene

Investigation

Crime Scene

Investigation
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

Noël Brennan

Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Jeremy Travis

Director, National Institute of Justice

Department of Justice Response Center

800–421–6770

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice

World Wide Web Site World Wide Web Site

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij

Cover photograph of man on the ground by Corbis Images. Other cover photographs

copyright © 1999 PhotoDisc, Inc.
Written and Approved by the

Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation

January 2000

A Guide for Law Enforcement

Crime Scene Investigation:
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

This document is not intended to create, does not create, and may not be

relied upon to create any rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable at

law by any party in any matter civil or criminal.

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.
iii

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
v

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
vi

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

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

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

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 NormingtonHollenbach

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
vii

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
ix

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
x

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.
xi

Message From the Attorney General .............................................................. iii

Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation ............................... v

Acknowledgments ..............................................................................................ix

Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1

Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for Law Enforcement ........................... 9

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

of Efforts ......................................................................................... 11

1. Initial Response/Receipt of Information ................................... 11

2. Safety Procedures...................................................................... 12

3. Emergency Care ........................................................................ 13

4. Secure and Control Persons at the Scene .................................. 14

5. Boundaries: Identify, Establish, Protect, and Secure ................ 15

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

in Charge ................................................................................ 17

7. Document Actions and Observations ........................................ 17

Section B: Preliminary Documentation and Evaluation of

the Scene ......................................................................................... 19

1. Conduct Scene Assessment ....................................................... 19

2. Conduct Scene “Walk-Through” and Initial Documentation ... 20

Section C: Processing the Scene .......................................................... 23

1. Determine Team Composition .................................................. 23

2. Contamination Control ............................................................. 24

3. Documentation .......................................................................... 24

4. Prioritize Collection of Evidence .............................................. 26

Contents
xii

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

Evidence ................................................................................ 27

Section D: Completing and Recording the Crime

Scene Investigation ........................................................................ 29

1. Establish Crime Scene Debriefing Team .................................. 29

2. Perform Final Survey of the Crime Scene ................................ 30

3. Documentation of the Crime Scene .......................................... 31

Section E: Crime Scene Equipment .................................................... 33

1. Initial Responding Officer(s) .................................................... 33

2. Crime Scene Investigator/Evidence Technician ........................ 33

3. Evidence Collection Kits (Examples) ....................................... 35

Appendixes ........................................................................................................ 37

Appendix A: Glossary ...................................................................................... 39

Appendix B: Reference List ............................................................................. 45

Appendix C: List of Organizations ................................................................. 47
1

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
2

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
3

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.
4

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.
5

◆ 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.

Region Number of Participants Percentage

Northeast 14 31.8%

Southeast 16 36.4%

Rocky Mountain 7 15.9%

West 7 15.9%

Total: 44 100%

Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation

Membership Distribution

Law Enforcement

Prosecutors

Defense Attorneys

Forensic Scientists
6

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.
7

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
9

Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for Law Enforcement

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

Crime Scene Equipment

Section A

Section B

Section C

Section D

Section E

Authorization: Actions taken pursuant to this guide shall be

performed in accordance with department policies and procedures

and Federal and State laws.
10

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.
11

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.

Arriving at the Scene: Initial Response/

Prioritization of Efforts

A
12

1. Initial Response/Receipt of Information

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.
13

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.

A
14

3. Emergency Care

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.
15

• 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.

A
16

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

• 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.
17

Section II. Mug Books and Composites 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.

A
18

7. Document Actions and Observations

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.
19

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.

B
20

1. Conduct Scene Assessment

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 walkthrough of the scene. The walk-through shall be conducted with individuals responsible for processing the

scene.
21

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.

B
23

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.

Processing the Scene

C
24

2. Contamination Control

Principle: Contamination control and preventing crosscontamination 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).
25

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.

C
26

3. Documentation

• 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.
27

• 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.

C
28

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

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.
29

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.

D

Completing and Recording the Crime Scene

Investigation
30

1. Establish Crime Scene Debriefing Team

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 walkthrough 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.
31

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.

D
32

3. Documentation of the Crime Scene

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.
33

Crime Scene Equipment

E

1. Initial Responding Officer(s)

2. Crime Scene Investigator/Evidence

Technician

Essential*

Bindle paper.

Biohazard bags.

Body fluid collection kit.

Camera (35 mm) with flash/film/

tripod.

Casting materials.

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.

Consent/search forms.

Crime scene barricade tape.

Cutting instruments (knives, box

cutter, scalpel, scissors).

Directional marker/compass.

Disinfectant.

Evidence collection containers.
34

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.

2. Crime Scene Investigator/Evidence Technician
35

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.

E
36

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.

3. Evidence Collection Kits (Examples)
37

Glossary

Appendixes

Appendix A

Appendix B Reference List

Appendix C List of Organizations
39

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
40

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.
41

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).
42

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.
43

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.
44

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.
45

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.
46

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.
47

The following is a list of organizations to which a draft copy of this

document was mailed.

Appendix C. List of Organizations

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
48

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 CollegeDepartment 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.