by Paul Millen
Once a CAP was established to the body, I would ensure that an inner cordon around the body itself was made. This was not always defined with police scene tape as you might see on TV, but it may include a smaller room or defined area around the body. With the body in sight I would review with the team what examination steps would need to take place to allow the body to be removed for a post-mortem (PM) examination without jeopardising any evidence. It was common to call a specialist if something unusual was noticed. There are always time pressures: the SIO needs to know how the victim died and this may only be determined at PM. However, some things cannot be rushed and it must take whatever time it needs. The temperature close to the body will be taken and recorded at regular intervals. This is because it affects the temperature of the body, and it may be important in determining the time of death later. At this stage a medical examiner or pathologist often enters the scene to see the body where it lies. It is their job to identify the time, cause and manner of death. So their examination often starts at the scene. The steps to enable removal of the body are determined and the need to record and recover any immediately obvious material assessed. The taping for fibres or the removal of some or all items of clothing can also take place, if they are likely to be contaminated (for example with blood) when the body is placed in a body bag.
An area around the body is prepared for removal, the body placed in a bag and removed to the edge of the outer cordon. A scene investigator or other officer needs to accompany the body to the mortuary for continuity and identification.
Depending on the time pressures of the investigation, members of the crime scene team may need to accompany the body and assist the pathologist with the post-mortem examination. There is always a need for continuity of intelligence from the scene to the post mortem so at the very least the scene manager or a crime scene investigator needs to be present. Information about the time, cause and manner of death affects the remaining examination of the crime scene. Where time pressures are high or the weather at the scene is deteriorating, additional scene investigators are called to deal with the post mortem. In these cases I would ensure that one of the original scene investigators continues with the scene whilst the PM takes place.
The outcome of the time, cause and manner of death is always a milestone in the investigation. At the very least it gives the SIO and those planning to interview any suspect some important information. The SIO would often call for a ‘debrief’ on the investigation to date and I would need to be there. I would have to relay key information but it is the individual investigators who have been to the scene and seen the evidence first hand who need to communicate this personally. If at all feasible I would ensure as many as possible were present at the debrief. Information from other lines of enquiry and from other witnesses is often relayed at these debriefs, some evidence from the scene may, once relayed, identify the need for further work.
Up to that point the events have usually and adequately filled a busy day. With a suspect in custody, any current examination at the scene would have to continue no matter what the time of day or night. The original scene investigators would need to be rested and, if possible, the scene would be closed down or a small team left to undertake essential work. Whenever possible, I would allow the team to rest and return at a suitable time the following day. Before I took any break I would ensure that the investigators and specialists needed for the following day were booked and briefed so that there would be no delay when work resumed.
The next day would always start with a review and a continuation of the examination plan. Recovery and search in a planned manner would give way to sequential and possibly destructive evidence recovery techniques. The use of light sources and chemical methods ensures that all potential areas for finger marks and other evidence are examined and the search exhausted. Forensic evidence search takes in wider areas, towards the edge of the cordon. This is often undertaken by police search team officers and police dogs where the area is large. The SIO and I would need to ensure that the purpose of the search be identified, documented and communicated to all the search team members.
Once the examination plan for the scene was completed and reviewed by the team members, the final review would be undertaken by the SIO and me. This is to ensure that the investigation this far is to the SIO’s satisfaction and that nothing is missing. I would ask the SIO to sign for the completed scene and release it back to its owner. There is often a need to clean the scene of any blood, body fluids or hazardous materials used in the examination and this would now take place. In heavily contaminated scene this is best undertaken by contractors.
It is easy to get tired of the endless debriefs, but another will follow. This time it takes place where once again the available information from all the scenes, suspects, victims and vehicles is compared with any findings at the scene. The debriefings are long but are an important method of cross-reference. Each is an important milestone. The question ‘What do we have?’ must be asked.
A few days before Christmas we were confronted with a missing mother and child from a ‘safe house’. The woman had been the subject of domestic violence and was removed completely from her home area to the safety of a rural location. The fact that she was missing was concern enough. What increased the concern was that when a social worker visited the safe house, she could not get entry and noticed through the window a scene of damage. Police arrived and forced an entry. The house had few items of furniture, but what little was there was damaged. This included most of the fittings in the kitchen and bathroom, which were all heavily damaged. It looked deliberate. Concern for the woman and child continued when small amounts of blood were noticed smeared on the walls and also a small piece of bloodstained bone. I put in place a full crime scene examination from the outset. A team undertook all the steps I have already described and no time was wasted. I called a forensic scientist to interpret the blood (origin and distribution) and a pathologist to give advice on the bone. The key priorities were to identify if the blood and bone were of human origin. If they were we had a potential murder scene and two missing people. This would need large resources and probably the need for an investigation team to work through the Christmas holiday. The investigation would need lots of resources and police time and the financial bill would be high. Naturally, the cost was not important, but I hoped I could find a way of answering the question quickly so that if a full murder investigation was needed we would know by the following morning, Christmas Eve. The intense scene investigation continued late into the night before Christmas Eve. I arranged for the items to be examined overnight. It meant a trip of 150 miles to a specific laboratory by police motorcycle for the items and for the scientist to work through the night. Forensic science laboratories are not routinely open all night, so special arrangements had to be made. They promised an answer by nine am on Christmas Eve.
Early the next morning the SIO called for a briefing whilst we awaited the laboratory test results. It was during the meeting that I received the call from the lab. The blood was dog in origin and the bone was chicken with traces of dog saliva. Whatever our concerns, at least there was nothing to suggest that the woman and her child had been injured at the house. I carefully noted the exact words which the scientist relayed so that I could enter an immediate written report of the conversation into the enquiry system. This took the pressure off mounting an immediate full examination of the rest of the house which would have taken at least two days. The SIO listened to the news with great interest. Enquiries were continuing with officers near the original home of the woman. To my surprise the SIO then gave instructions for a full and immediate escalation of the scene investigation. It was as if the result we had meant nothing. After a few minutes I asked if we could take a break. In the interval I expressed my view that although there were concerns, a full scene investigation would not give any intelligence about the location of the missing persons. If they were found harmed or if a suspect was arrested we could immediately review an
d commence whatever examination was necessary. I agreed to put in place a contingency plan. He agreed to this and back in the briefing this was relayed. The scene would be protected but for the moment any further examination would be delayed. It was a pragmatic decision based on reviewing the answers we had received and what they were telling us.
Within a few hours, both the woman and her child had been found unharmed. The damage had simply been caused by her when she decided to vacate the house, which said something about her character which we hadn’t known. She had been in no danger on this occasion from her violent partner. The scene investigation had quickly answered the most important of questions and had helped the proper and efficient use of our resources. Our action and the concern everyone had shown her was right and proper, but she didn’t appreciate it. We were not to know the outcome until we had investigated it and I’m sure we would do it all again if faced with a similar case.
In another case the body of an elderly man was found in his first-floor bedsit flat. There was no forced entry but he had a large bloody head wound. There were traces of blood found throughout the flat. The post mortem revealed that a blow to the head had contributed to his death, but there was nothing to suggest that anyone else was involved. There was suspicion that some money was missing from the flat, but that was never proven, and any strange neighbour would have quickly entered any SIO’s sights as a potential suspect. The flat was extensively examined and re-examined over a period of three weeks. The medical history of the deceased revealed some dementia. A full review with SIO, scene investigators, forensic scientist and pathologist concluded that the death was accidental and not suspicious. The head wound was the result of a fall, which did not bleed immediately, but bled slowly and profusely over a period of time as he moved around the flat. There were no signs of violence, struggle, theft or other persons present at the time or following the injury. All the files and collected material were retained should any further information come to light. The coroner subsequently recorded an accidental death.
Reviews can record the fact that no crime has taken place, even if some acquaintances of the deceased have acted in a suspicious way. This may be a distraction but must not become a miscarriage of justice. I fear in some instances that is often the case. Reviews need to ask firm questions and not allow investigations to drift into untested assumptions.
If a suspect is in custody, a targeted and priority submission of items to the crime lab needs to take place. The purpose of this is to quickly answer key questions. Whose blood is on the suspect’s clothing? Is it the victim’s? Has there been a sexual assault? Can we identify whose DNA is on the victim? Is this the murder weapon? Does it contains the victim’s blood? Are there any fingermarks on it? Whose fingermarks are they?
A more detailed consideration of every piece of recovered material is also needed to consider what potential evidence they contain and how it should be further examined. This discussion usually involved the SIO or their deputy or other senior member of their team sitting down with me and a scene investigator and going through each item one by one. Any required further examinations and their priority were recorded so that they could be addressed in order.
Each answer should prompt a question: What does the answer mean? What other questions does it throw up? The questioning only stops when each line of enquiry has been exhausted within the priorities of the overall investigation.
Aspects of the crime scene investigations do not stop when an individual is charged. Preparation has to be made to prepare the exhibits which are going to be called to court. On some occasions the prosecution and defence may agree a list which they will want to see during the court process. In any event, there has to be discipline in ensuring that all the exhibits are accounted for and have a full record of their recovery and where they have been. There needs to be statements from all the scientists or specialists who have examined them and a clear record of their continuity. That is so that they can be accounted for at any moment of their history. It is imperative that their integrity is maintained and that this is recorded.
I recall arriving at the Central Criminal Court in London for what was expected to be a lengthy trial. The care and discipline with which the case was prepared and managed clearly impressed both the prosecutor and defence legal teams. When each item was called for and a request to open the sealed item made, I was on hand to ensure that this viewing by lawyers and jurors was recorded. At the end of the viewing, the item was resealed and I made additional notes in the exhibit register. Within a few days the defence team must have realised the extent of evidence against the defendant and he changed his plea to that of guilty.
In another case the integrity and continuity of the exhibits was vigorously tested by defence lawyers. This was so detailed that I took the step of resealing the items once they had been examined in the presence of the defence lawyer and insisted on his signature on the reseal since he, and he alone, had handled the item in open court. He felt duty bound to agree since his line of attack was on just who had handled the item. He was now one of the very few who had. The trial was later stopped because the jury had received information which they should not have had and the presiding judge realised that a fair trial was no longer possible. The re-trial was interesting. The thorough inspection of the integrity and continuity of the exhibits was once again questioned but it seemed to peter out when it came the specific and important item which now bore the defence lawyer’s signature. He must have forgotten or not realised the significance. ‘And whose signatures are on this seal?’ he asked. ‘Well, one is mine and the other is yours, sir,’ I replied. My notes could account for the time and place the item had been opened and resealed. The judge intervened to explain to the jury that the item had been opened at an earlier court proceeding, but the defence lawyer seemed to lose interest in challenging the integrity of the exhibits after that.
All this amounts to a hard, hard, slog which is never the view on those popular TV programmes. There is, however, more to come.
In the UK it is common practice in unsolved murder or other serious cases for the investigation to be reviewed by another senior investigator. This normally takes place at twenty-eight days. It is intended to give the case a fresh and independent view. The review is not to catch the original team out, though it may do that. Rather it challenges and tests the investigation, any assumptions and major lines of enquiry, investigative priorities and of course the forensic and scene investigations. The reviewing senior investigator may bring a small team, including a crime scene manager, to assist in the task.
I have been involved in cases which have been reviewed and I have reviewed others. In one review of a lengthy ongoing investigation the review team picked up a line of enquiry in which we were still waiting for a result. It involved the searching of finger marks found at the scene with our surrounding forces. We were part of a computerised fingerprint system, networked with thirty-four other forces, but some of our immediately neighbouring forces were not. So we had to send them copies of the marks and requested a search against their databases. When you are asking a colleague for a favour it is perhaps a little strange to check up that they have done it and to the standard you would expect. The review prompted us to check their search and speed up their reply. It resulted in identification. It also highlighted the need for a complete network solution.
In a case which I reviewed, a long investigation into the murder of a man had not resulted in any arrests for the crime. The body of the man had been found in a burnt-out car near the M25 motorway. Pat Crossan, the original senior investigating officer, was convinced that the man had been murdered at a certain house premises. Pat had ensured that Martin Gaule, the crime scene manager, examined every detail of the kitchen floor for signs of blood. Martin’s thorough investigation determined that there was no blood on the floor and that there had been no clean up – even the dirt found in crevices (which one might expect) was still present. Pat Crossan had moved on and his deputy, DCI Joh
n Beavis, had kept a hold on the case. He asked me to review it and I made a few recommendations. In the review we determined that one of the suspects had a commercial garage premises. At about the time of the murder he had painted a large part of the garage floor red. Perhaps by fortune, at about the time of my review he vacated the premises. The investigators did not want it to get out that they were interested in the premises, but we wanted to examine it and look under the paint. So we came up with the novel idea of actually renting the premises, under the guise of a new business venture. It also meant that we didn’t need a search warrant. This may be the first time the police actually rented a potential crime scene. The examination would need the scene investigators to work at night, as we would need a blackout to fully utilise the high-intensity light sources (HILS). This would be our first, non-destructive, examination, before any attempt was made to remove the paint. If the neighbours in the adjacent business premises were suspicious of our activity they didn’t mention it. There were some conversations, but the scene investigators made it clear we were just starting up a business. Our strange hours, kept after all the others had gone home, meant that we could work inside in the dark without suspicion. Any visit meant that we had to dress down. I remember the detective inspector giving me a good look over as I turned up in a scruffy pair of jeans and T-shirt, not my usual suited attire. Once inside the premises full crime scene standards were maintained. Martin Gaule, a crime scene manager, SOCO John Dowswell and Ken Williams the head of forensic photography worked at the premises for a number of nights. We called a forensic scientist to assist and give advice at the search scene as the examination continued. Blood was found but it did not match the victim, it matched one of the suspects. This information was useful because it tied up with other blood found at other premises and helped complete a picture. The review of the case did result in a conviction. I put forward Martin Gaule, John Dowswell and Ken Williams for commendations from the Chief Constable, which they duly received, and a letter of thanks to the forensic science laboratory for the expert support of their scientist.