By: Pete Gagliardi and Richard Leary
Issue: October/November 2005
Untitled Document
THE PROACTIVE USE AND COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF BALLISTICS EVIDENCE, ONCE OVERLOOKED
AS UNLIKELY TO PRODUCE THE HIGHEST PROBABLE VALUE, BENEFITS FROM NEW TECHNOLOGY
IN SHARING AND COMPARING DATA.
Police operate under the assumption that there is no perfect crime, that according
to Locard’s Principle, every contact leaves a trace therefore every crime
can, in theory, be solved. However, effective police work requires a continual
balance of the amount of time, effort, and resources that can be applied to
the investigation of a particular crime simply because resources are limited.
This comes as no surprise because, as we move through our own personal lives
we continually evaluate our options and make choices that are most likely to
provide us with the most value.
Because of resource constraints, police are often forced to pursue only the
information of highest probable value in order to realize the proverbial “most
bang for the buck.” By this we mean that only evidence that is likely
to produce the required result in a direct way is collected. However, every
crime is different and so deciding what evidence should be recovered and is
relevant can be very difficult. The recovery of evidence has been traditionally
governed by deciding what is relevant. As Doyle [Sherlock Holmes] said: “It
is of the highest importance in the art of detection to be able to recognize,
out of a number of facts, which are incidental and which are vital. Otherwise
your energy and attention must be dissipated instead of being concentrated.”
This acknowledged that it was a bad strategy and a poor use of resources to “overturn
every stone in the hope of finding something.” For example, police conducting
a crime scene search for evidence of breaking and entering will often begin
at the point of entry and move to the point of exit (e.g. doors, windows, etc.).
This is in the hope of finding something relevant to the identity of the offender.
The forced door or broken window has a high potential to yield an abundance
of physical evidence (e.g. broken glass, DNA, fingerprints, tool marks, etc.).
Following the concept of highest probable value, the crime scene investigator
continually evaluates and re-evaluates how far the search for evidence will
extend in terms of time, effort, and resources. This is made even more difficult
because police must continually balance the severity and social impact of a
crime with the amount of resources that can and should be applied to its investigation.
The extent of the search for evidence has traditionally been arbitrary and
undertaken with limited tools and a massive reliance upon the ability of crime
scene examiners to use their senses to select the evidence of the highest probable
value. Tools that enhance our ability to sense evidence have until recently
been developed slowly.
While it is still true that crime scene examiners need to use their training
and experience to sense evidence, forensic science has developed new tools
and methods that enhance this ability. Even the slightest traces of material
for analysis that would normally be beyond our ability to sense can now be
recovered and analyzed. What was once overlooked, missed, or thought to be
unimportant can now be treated as possibly important. Furthermore, this evidence
can now be stored in enormous databases with automated cataloging and “matching
engines.” Matches and even evidential leads can be produced routinely
to such an extent that what was previously beyond us has become within our
grasp. In many cases, we can now literally “overturn every stone in the
hope of finding something.”
Consider the field of Forensic Ballistics. The comparison of the minute markings
and striations left on fired ammunition components (e.g. bullets and cartridge
cases) under a comparison microscope is a very manual and tedious task. For
almost 80 years, it was difficult at best and perhaps impossible for some labs
to sustain the comparison of every new piece of evidence recovered against
their own open case file inventory. For every lab to sustain the exchange of
ballistics evidence and query each other’s open case inventories looking
for leads was as unheard of as human flight was to early man. But not any more;
very soon, we will truly be able to compare every item of evidence recovered
with every other item of evidence in the hope of finding something….i.e. “matches.”
FIGURE 1: SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON OF 2 CARTRIDGE CASES WITH
SIDELIGHT
A key point of this paper is that “things change.” Leonardo DaVinci
once said that “there shall be wings – if not for me but for another
. . .” Yet for centuries, many people believed that
flight was impossible. Maybe Renaissance society overlooked DaVinci’s
sketches as artistic expression but we wonder what the neighbors must have
thought of the Wright brothers when they first began experimenting with flying
machines? Today, we take air travel for granted and at the same time we continue
to witness new ways of doing those things that were previously thought to be
impossible. Just recently, the airline industry introduced a new jumbo jet
capable of carrying 800 passengers and boasting an onboard gymnasium.
Police work is no exception to the effects of advancing science. It too is
changing. In recent years, we have witnessed automated ballistics technology
go from innovation to mainstream. Ballistics information sharing networks linking
hundreds of agencies and labs have been created to do what was previously thought
to be impossible – access and query every open case file of evidence
on the network in order to find investigative leads. Automated ballistics analysis
systems can now sustain the comparison of seemingly insignificant pieces of
evidence. Evidence that may appear to be insignificant to one agency may now
prove to be the long lost case-breaker for another.
The Integrated Ballistics Identification System (IBIS) is the standard system
being used to create ballistics information sharing networks at the local,
regional, national, and international level. This type of sharing means investigators
and analysts do not have to work in isolation; crimes, cases, and evidence
can be linked to other crimes, cases, and evidence. Threats from criminals
and terrorists often know no jurisdiction. Ballistics technology allows digital
ballistic images of bullets and casings of guns used in crimes to be easily
analyzed and compared. Stored in databases that can be networked, the images
are then shared among many departments and agencies. The collection of large
amounts of possibly relevant rather than definitely relevant evidence along
with the ability to identify “matches” routinely has far reaching
consequences.
FIGURE 2: SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON OF 2 RECTANGULAR RIMFIRE CARTRIDGE CASES
FIGURE 3: CARTRIDGE CASE IMAGES IN THE MULTIVIEWER SCREEN
One example of the use of such technology involves a single piece of evidence:
a cartridge case from a drive-by shooting in Jerusalem. Two guns were used
in the crime and processed through IBIS. The cartridge case flagged a positive
match which was, in turn, tied to many unsolved criminal and terrorist cases.
Thirteen separate cases involving several weapons have been linked.
Should we be surprised by this? We say no because one characteristic of science
is its ability to recognize advancement and change. Many of us treat science
as some form of irredeemable truth or constant that never changes whereas,
in reality, what sets true science apart is its ability to recognize advancement
and change. In modern science, what was once thought to be constant and beyond
question becomes simply a challenge. In modern science the only real constant
is “change” itself. This is having profound effects in forensic
science and particularly ballistics.
What can we conclude from all this? Things have certainly changed with respect
to how we should view forensic ballistics evidence in terms of defining highest
probable value. The tide has turned. IBIS technology can correlate evidence
at speeds well beyond human capability, exchange data more quickly and efficiently,
and help police sustain the generation of more information than ever before
to link crimes, guns, and suspects through ballistics evidence. Therefore,
we submit that the highest probable value now lies in the collection, imaging,
and sharing of all forensic ballistics evidence taken into police custody.
“Things change” and we must continually be aware of our changing
environment so that we can reposition our viewpoints and seize new opportunities
to be more efficient and effective at making the world a safer place.
Forensic science now allows us to examine finite detail so that we can collect
more, analyze and evaluate more, and draw more reliable conclusions. We can
literally get even more “bang for our buck.” As the father of reforming
science Descartes said, “to make so complete an enumeration of the links…and
to pass them all so thoroughly under review, that I could be sure I had missed
nothing.”
Although effective police work requires a continual balance of the amount
of time, effort, and resources that can be applied to an investigation, developments
in science and technology can make us more efficient and cost effective so
that we can reasonably say that given our new tools, “we have missed
nothing.”
Pete Gagliardi has 30 years of law enforcement experience at both the local
and Federal levels. In 1999, he retired as the Special Agent in Charge of the
New York Field Division from the US, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
(ATF) and joined Forensic Technology. He can be reached at: pete.gagliardi@contactft.com.
www.forensictechnologyinc.com
Richard Leary is Senior Policy Advisor to Forensic Pathways Ltd, UK, and
Honorary Senior Scientist, University College, London, England. A former
Senior Detective
and Scientific Officer in the United Kingdom, he is an acknowledged advisor
and expert on evidence and intelligence, Leary has worked for 27 years in
the West Midland Police forces. He is also a Senior Research Fellow of
University
College London, UK.
