It's a safe bet that a police evidence tech's favorite television show is anything but a “CSI: Crime Scene Investigation” or “Law & Order” spin-off.
Jason Rearick / The Citizen
In a demonstration at State Police Troop E headquarters in Canandaigua, investigators use an alternate light source Crimescope to find hidden stains using a vast array of wavelengths of visible light. The bright yellow stain is floor detergent.
In a demonstration at State Police Troop E headquarters in Canandaigua, investigators use an alternate light source Crimescope to find hidden stains using a vast array of wavelengths of visible light. The bright yellow stain is floor detergent.
Officers laugh over crime laboratories depicted as dark and moody settings when laboratories are filled with light for the examination of evidence.
Officers vent that the popular rise of crime dramas have given the public a false sense that evidence-gathering technology will always result in pristine results.
And officers are saddened that because of advanced DNA testing, crime victims expect immediate solutions from investigations that can take weeks or months to build a case from carefully compiled evidence.
Sometimes, cases will not be solved - even if DNA or fingerprint samples are obtained - if evidence samples can't be matched to a suspect developed from local leads or from a database.
“These TV shows, unfortunately, are giving victims a false sense of what's possible,” said Detective Sgt. Joseph Weeks, head of the Cayuga County
Sheriff's Office Criminal Investigations Unit.
But while public expectations jump ahead of what can be done in the field, forensic science has experienced a revolution.
Fingerprinting and crime laboratories staffed with experts to analyze evidence collected in the field have been around since the early 1900s. But advancements in the last 15 years in databases for fingerprints, tire tracks and shoe prints, global positioning system technology, digital imaging and DNA testing give officers tools they never had before to conduct criminal investigations.
Since 2001, New York courts have allowed DNA evidence developed from short tandem repeat (STR) testing to be admitted as evidence. It's that kind of testing that led to the vacation of Roy Brown's conviction of Sabina Kulakowski's murder last month.
“DNA has completely changed everything,” said Sgt. Joseph DiVietro of the Auburn Police Department's Identification Bureau. “In 1990, we weren't even looking for DNA. Now it's the focus.”
Investigators used to think it was amazing to narrow down a field of suspects by blood typing, said New York State Police Senior Investigator Thomas Gehl of Troop E's Forensic Identification Unit. The unit handled 496 cases among Troop E's 10 counties in 2006.
Now DNA analysis of blood, saliva, semen or hair can definitely place someone at a scene. But investigators say the public often makes the premature assumption that DNA at a crime scene conclusively proves guilt.
DNA is one piece of physical evidence that points to a suspect. Motive, a timeline of events based on witness interviews, and other physical evidence must be gathered and established.
“The long and short is you still need an officer that synthesizes and evaluates things ... ” said Al Pola, instructor of the Cayuga-Onondaga BOCES' New Visions Legal Professions program and a former police officer. “No brand-new technology is going to do that. Brand-new technology is just going to help an officer investigate the case.”
Assumptions about what DNA at a crime scene means can lead to misunderstanding an evidence tech's role in an investigation, investigators said.
The role is not to solve a case but to be an “objective collector” of evidence that either confirms or challenges the stories given by witnesses and possible suspects, said New York State Police Investigator Lee Stonebraker, Gehl's colleague in Troop E's Forensic Identification Unit.
“Some of (the crime shows) may be based on reality, but it's not,” Stonebraker said. “People end up expecting more. You have to explain that to juries.”
The evidence-gathering process is a contemplative one. Officers first spend time looking at the scene and analyze it for plausible scenarios.
They sketch the scene on a drawing pad, take photographs - from all four corners if it's inside a structure - and videotape to document the scene before touching any physical evidence.
Then, while wearing latex gloves, booties for their feet and, sometimes, body suits, safety goggles, respirators and hard hats, they document their evidence-gathering by taking pictures and notes every step of the way. A witness to the process is preferred. Even incomplete or imperfect evidence samples like fingerprints are kept to counter any skeptical cross-examination by a defense attorney.
It wasn't always this way. Gehl has a crime scene snapshot from 1973 in which investigators are moving a corpse without wearing gloves.
Evidence gathered can “convict guilty parties or also exonerate innocent parties,” Stonebraker said. Crimes can be detected or innocent explanations can be confirmed as in a February 2006 Cayuga County case, he added.
Stonebraker and State Police Investigator Kevin Sucher aided the Cayuga County Sheriff's Office in determining that the injuries deceased Victory resident Anna Gunton sustained were not from an assault but from a delirium caused by streptococcal meningitis, an infection of the brain.
The field of forensic science operates on the theory of transferability: that when two objects meet, some evidence of the contact can be found and verified. The ultimate goal for evidence techs' is for their work product to hold up in court. Every step of evidence-gathering must be documented, so if a case proceeds to trial, a chain of custody can be tracked between the crime scene and the courtroom. Law enforcement agencies' evidence rooms and labs are kept locked inside of already secure buildings. Evidence from the most important cases must be delivered in person to a crime lab by an officer.
“The O.J. (Simpson) factor and the 'CSI' effect: it's led to greater expectation from juries,” said W. Mark Dale, director of the State University of New York at Albany's Northeast Regional Forensic Institute. “They basically anticipate seeing a lot of technology applied to the evidence but there's another factor.
“The integrity of evidence is very important. It needs a seamless chain of custody. It needs to have tight security. There can be no time that it's not accounted for. It has to be protected from contamination and loss. It has to be protected from degradation. If those evidence-handling issues are not addressed the best DNA results may not be entered into court, may be excluded.”
In the real world, cases aren't quickly investigated and neatly solved in an hour-long program with commercial breaks. There are several factors that slow down cases.
Nationally, there is a backlog of DNA evidence to be tested and a shortage of DNA scientists to do the testing. The U.S. Department of Justice estimates there is backlog of evidence from 350,000 rape and homicide cases.
Dale's institute runs a 12-week, 12-graduate credit program that trains college graduates with biology or chemistry degrees in laboratory processes, microbiology and how to present their work in criminal trials. Though 48 students graduated in 2006, more trained people are needed to meet the demand.
DiVietro estimates that results are pending from half of the 108 cases he submitted in 2005 and half of the 86 cases he submitted in 2006 to the public New York State Police laboratories for either DNA or narcotics testing.
With that kind of backlog, DiVietro has had the state labs farm out evidence five or six times to a private laboratory when he has called up to get evidence processed in time for a trial or another urgent matter.
“On TV, it all happens in a week,” DiVietro said. “It gives (the public) a false sense the wheels of justice move quickly.”
As well, cash-strapped law enforcement agencies can't always afford nifty technologies that can cost tens of thousands of dollars.
Gehl said that interagency cooperation has become increasingly important when state-of-the-art technology is not available to smaller law enforcement agencies with small equipment budgets.
Pola teaches his students how to roll fingerprints onto a card with ink because not every law enforcement agency can afford inkless fingerprinting systems that are connected to databases that alert if the person being fingerprinted is wanted in another jurisdiction.
In smaller departments like the APD, the identification officer is also the evidence custodian. The job is one for both a sleuth and a librarian.
DiVietro estimates that the APD keeps 10,000 to 11,000 items of evidence at a time.
A floor-plan map is necessary to keep track of police records dating back to 1866. Two refrigerators in the upper level of the APD station are packed to the brim with physical evidence that must be kept refrigerated or frozen. The evidence room is stuffed with items as varied as baseball bats, skateboards, a Keystone Light beer pack, license plates, a glow-in-the-dark Halloween skeleton and backpacks. Items must be kept until court cases are disposed of.
“The most important part of the job is being meticulous and being well-organized,” DiVietro said.
Gehl and Stonebraker laugh that “CSI” never shows evidence techs going through the paperwork required in their jobs.
If a television audiences “actually saw a detective investigating a case, it'd be canceled in two weeks,” Pola said.
Staff writer Amaris Elliott-Engel can be reached at 253-5311 ext. 282 or at amaris.elliot-engel@lee.net
Officers vent that the popular rise of crime dramas have given the public a false sense that evidence-gathering technology will always result in pristine results.
And officers are saddened that because of advanced DNA testing, crime victims expect immediate solutions from investigations that can take weeks or months to build a case from carefully compiled evidence.
Sometimes, cases will not be solved - even if DNA or fingerprint samples are obtained - if evidence samples can't be matched to a suspect developed from local leads or from a database.
“These TV shows, unfortunately, are giving victims a false sense of what's possible,” said Detective Sgt. Joseph Weeks, head of the Cayuga County
Sheriff's Office Criminal Investigations Unit.
But while public expectations jump ahead of what can be done in the field, forensic science has experienced a revolution.
Fingerprinting and crime laboratories staffed with experts to analyze evidence collected in the field have been around since the early 1900s. But advancements in the last 15 years in databases for fingerprints, tire tracks and shoe prints, global positioning system technology, digital imaging and DNA testing give officers tools they never had before to conduct criminal investigations.
Since 2001, New York courts have allowed DNA evidence developed from short tandem repeat (STR) testing to be admitted as evidence. It's that kind of testing that led to the vacation of Roy Brown's conviction of Sabina Kulakowski's murder last month.
“DNA has completely changed everything,” said Sgt. Joseph DiVietro of the Auburn Police Department's Identification Bureau. “In 1990, we weren't even looking for DNA. Now it's the focus.”
Investigators used to think it was amazing to narrow down a field of suspects by blood typing, said New York State Police Senior Investigator Thomas Gehl of Troop E's Forensic Identification Unit. The unit handled 496 cases among Troop E's 10 counties in 2006.
Now DNA analysis of blood, saliva, semen or hair can definitely place someone at a scene. But investigators say the public often makes the premature assumption that DNA at a crime scene conclusively proves guilt.
DNA is one piece of physical evidence that points to a suspect. Motive, a timeline of events based on witness interviews, and other physical evidence must be gathered and established.
“The long and short is you still need an officer that synthesizes and evaluates things ... ” said Al Pola, instructor of the Cayuga-Onondaga BOCES' New Visions Legal Professions program and a former police officer. “No brand-new technology is going to do that. Brand-new technology is just going to help an officer investigate the case.”
Assumptions about what DNA at a crime scene means can lead to misunderstanding an evidence tech's role in an investigation, investigators said.
The role is not to solve a case but to be an “objective collector” of evidence that either confirms or challenges the stories given by witnesses and possible suspects, said New York State Police Investigator Lee Stonebraker, Gehl's colleague in Troop E's Forensic Identification Unit.
“Some of (the crime shows) may be based on reality, but it's not,” Stonebraker said. “People end up expecting more. You have to explain that to juries.”
The evidence-gathering process is a contemplative one. Officers first spend time looking at the scene and analyze it for plausible scenarios.
They sketch the scene on a drawing pad, take photographs - from all four corners if it's inside a structure - and videotape to document the scene before touching any physical evidence.
Then, while wearing latex gloves, booties for their feet and, sometimes, body suits, safety goggles, respirators and hard hats, they document their evidence-gathering by taking pictures and notes every step of the way. A witness to the process is preferred. Even incomplete or imperfect evidence samples like fingerprints are kept to counter any skeptical cross-examination by a defense attorney.
It wasn't always this way. Gehl has a crime scene snapshot from 1973 in which investigators are moving a corpse without wearing gloves.
Evidence gathered can “convict guilty parties or also exonerate innocent parties,” Stonebraker said. Crimes can be detected or innocent explanations can be confirmed as in a February 2006 Cayuga County case, he added.
Stonebraker and State Police Investigator Kevin Sucher aided the Cayuga County Sheriff's Office in determining that the injuries deceased Victory resident Anna Gunton sustained were not from an assault but from a delirium caused by streptococcal meningitis, an infection of the brain.
The field of forensic science operates on the theory of transferability: that when two objects meet, some evidence of the contact can be found and verified. The ultimate goal for evidence techs' is for their work product to hold up in court. Every step of evidence-gathering must be documented, so if a case proceeds to trial, a chain of custody can be tracked between the crime scene and the courtroom. Law enforcement agencies' evidence rooms and labs are kept locked inside of already secure buildings. Evidence from the most important cases must be delivered in person to a crime lab by an officer.
“The O.J. (Simpson) factor and the 'CSI' effect: it's led to greater expectation from juries,” said W. Mark Dale, director of the State University of New York at Albany's Northeast Regional Forensic Institute. “They basically anticipate seeing a lot of technology applied to the evidence but there's another factor.
“The integrity of evidence is very important. It needs a seamless chain of custody. It needs to have tight security. There can be no time that it's not accounted for. It has to be protected from contamination and loss. It has to be protected from degradation. If those evidence-handling issues are not addressed the best DNA results may not be entered into court, may be excluded.”
In the real world, cases aren't quickly investigated and neatly solved in an hour-long program with commercial breaks. There are several factors that slow down cases.
Nationally, there is a backlog of DNA evidence to be tested and a shortage of DNA scientists to do the testing. The U.S. Department of Justice estimates there is backlog of evidence from 350,000 rape and homicide cases.
Dale's institute runs a 12-week, 12-graduate credit program that trains college graduates with biology or chemistry degrees in laboratory processes, microbiology and how to present their work in criminal trials. Though 48 students graduated in 2006, more trained people are needed to meet the demand.
DiVietro estimates that results are pending from half of the 108 cases he submitted in 2005 and half of the 86 cases he submitted in 2006 to the public New York State Police laboratories for either DNA or narcotics testing.
With that kind of backlog, DiVietro has had the state labs farm out evidence five or six times to a private laboratory when he has called up to get evidence processed in time for a trial or another urgent matter.
“On TV, it all happens in a week,” DiVietro said. “It gives (the public) a false sense the wheels of justice move quickly.”
As well, cash-strapped law enforcement agencies can't always afford nifty technologies that can cost tens of thousands of dollars.
Gehl said that interagency cooperation has become increasingly important when state-of-the-art technology is not available to smaller law enforcement agencies with small equipment budgets.
Pola teaches his students how to roll fingerprints onto a card with ink because not every law enforcement agency can afford inkless fingerprinting systems that are connected to databases that alert if the person being fingerprinted is wanted in another jurisdiction.
In smaller departments like the APD, the identification officer is also the evidence custodian. The job is one for both a sleuth and a librarian.
DiVietro estimates that the APD keeps 10,000 to 11,000 items of evidence at a time.
A floor-plan map is necessary to keep track of police records dating back to 1866. Two refrigerators in the upper level of the APD station are packed to the brim with physical evidence that must be kept refrigerated or frozen. The evidence room is stuffed with items as varied as baseball bats, skateboards, a Keystone Light beer pack, license plates, a glow-in-the-dark Halloween skeleton and backpacks. Items must be kept until court cases are disposed of.
“The most important part of the job is being meticulous and being well-organized,” DiVietro said.
Gehl and Stonebraker laugh that “CSI” never shows evidence techs going through the paperwork required in their jobs.
If a television audiences “actually saw a detective investigating a case, it'd be canceled in two weeks,” Pola said.
Staff writer Amaris Elliott-Engel can be reached at 253-5311 ext. 282 or at amaris.elliot-engel@lee.net
