When disaster strikes, the use of scientific laboratories in solving high profile
criminal or terrorism cases couldn’t be better documented. But behind
the news headlines and public interest, there remains an ongoing issue that
is, on
a daily basis, hampering the efforts of law enforcement and forensics teams
across the United States.
Even as far back as 2005, data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics referred
to a ‘disturbing trend of increased cases and increased backlog in all
disciplines of forensic science.’ The facts certainly present a pressing
case for change. With drug investigations now accounting for nearly half of
untested evidence in crime labs, and proposed new measures such as California’s
Proposition 69, set to further increase the volume of DNA samples waiting processing,
the need for more facilities, more staff, and quicker results is growing by the
day.
Responding to this need is more complex than it sounds. There are a large
range of organizations that deal with the different disciplines of forensic
science however the critical mass of each is comparatively small. This presents
a real
issue in terms of training with few large enough to justify a permanent training
facility. Public sector organizations in particular fear a large outlay in
training, only to lose staff once qualified, to a larger, private organization.
BUILDING A SOLUTION
Temporary structures are gaining increasing recognition as a potential solution
to these issues, as the magnitude of the problem rapidly outgrows the actual
size and breadth of existing facilities. But this is not just as simple as
building, for building’s sake.
When it comes to forensics, the building itself is just the shell – what
is critical is the technology incorporated within, and its ability to integrate
with existing systems and procedures. The need for a temporary structure can
be triggered by a number of factors – for some organizations it’s
about providing an adjunct to an existing facility in order to cope with high
priority issues such as reducing backlogs. For others, there’s a need
for an interim facility while a permanent solution is found, for some just
a commercial desire to find out whether a forensics laboratory will reap benefits
for their bottom line. Whatever the trigger, it is clear that a ‘quick
fix’, non-custom facility simply will not do.
In Britain, my own organization,
the Forensic Science Service, has already created and trialled temporary
laboratories. Like our counterparts State-side,
we too have had to address growing backlog issues and have found that such
temporary laboratories provide an ideal solution.
But let’s be clear – if
you’re imagining a flimsy structure
that’s up for just a few months at a time, then think again. These temporary
structures last for up to 15 years and incorporate a wide range of proven technology,
from sampling kits for evidence gathering through to semi-automated amplification
and separation systems, and ‘best in class’ interpretation using
expert systems software.
When it comes to addressing backlog issues time is
of the essence. For every day that passes with samples untested, another suspected
criminal is free to re-offend. At a standard size of 20 feet x 22 feet x 8.5
feet, these temporary facilities are delivered on the back of a truck, bolted
together, and stacked as required, before being fully integrated with existing
systems and processes. This means that the time required to order them, install
them, and get them up and running is considerably less than a fully permanent
facility, greatly relieving pressure from forensics professionals.
COMBINING A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE WITH A LONG TERM SOLUTION
But no matter how progressive a facility, it is in itself not enough to solve
the growing challenge facing the U.S. and the international community as
a whole. Without the necessary trained staff, the growing issue of backlogging
will only worsen. What is the future for forensic science then? Custom buildings,
complete with fully trained staff.
It is this sort of joined up approach
that has already helped the UK in reducing a three year DNA backlog down
to zero. The temporary labs that will be used in the U.S. are a new and
improved version: more robust, deployable, and easier to transport. And because
we
are looking to introduce a range of purchasing options (including direct
sale and leasing options), they will provide maximum flexibility.
As a Government
owned company, we are well placed to understand the political, professional,
and practical pressures that face the sector when addressing
the issue of forensic backlogs. For all of us, regardless of the discipline
that we cover, we have one common goal: to assist the criminal justice process
to arrive at the correct conclusion whether that’s conviction or exoneration,
and where possible to prevent crime altogether, making our homes and our streets
safer places. By using existing expertise and new technologies and innovations,
we believe that this is one area of forensics where there is a real opportunity
to make a difference on the ground, to every day lives.
Richard Pinchin is Head of U.S. Operations, iforensic –a division
of Forensic Science Service Ltd. He holds a degree in Biology from Nottingham
University and is the author of several papers. Richard joined the Forensic
Science Service Central Research Establishment at Aldermaston UK in 1988.
In the late 1990s the concept of Intelligence Led Policing and the UK National
Intelligence Model led to the formation of the FSS Forensic Intelligence
Bureau which Richard managed. www.iforensic.co.uk
