Running head: THE ENRIQUE CAMARENA CASE 1

The Enrique Camarena Case

CRJ 311 Forensics

March 18, 2019

THE ENRIQUE CAMARENA CASE 2

The Enrique Camarena Case

Introduction

Scientific theories and principles have long been involved in processing evidence in a

criminal case. In forensic investigations, scientific principles and theories are integrated in every

procedure taken concerning qualifying, collecting, and processing any potential evidence.

Forensic experts may be skilled at doing all these, but may find it hard to come with a

completely conclusive evidence when sources of potential evidence are altered or, in worse

cases, ruined. Therefore, it is important to consider proper chain of custody in criminal cases,

which ensures law enforcers and forensic experts to work together on the processing of potential

evidence for a speedy and accurate case resolution. More importantly, securing the crime scene,

especially the original place where crime exactly happened, is very much important for accurate

processing of forensic evidence.

Criminal investigation could be a nightmare to forensic experts. This happens especially

when pieces of potential evidence are hard to find and the only available material evidence to

analyze apparently do not characterize the original components of the crime scene. Smears of

paint, blood, soil, and many other possible traces of forensic evidence may be found in the

bodies of victims but material evidence should significantly match the materials found in the

place where the crime happened. Only then can more logical conclusions be made giving a

higher probability of solving the case. Problem occurs then when the original condition of crime

scene is altered even before forensic experts come to search the place for evidence.

The Enrique Camarena Case

Camarena’s dead body was found in the Bravo ranch in a rural area in Mexico. Enrique

Camarena, a U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) special agent, was assigned in the agency’s

Guadalajara office in Mexico. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) team with forensic experts
THE ENRIQUE CAMARENA CASE 3

was sent to conduct investigation and search for potential traces of evidence. Initially, the

forensic team collected known samples of potential evidence from the dead bodies. Samples of

hair and soil from clothes and bodies were taken and studied in the lab. Traces of material

samples, particularly hair and fiber, blood, and fingerprints were searched in a suspected

transport vehicle. Pathologists examined his body and found out that Camarena could have been

dead about a month before the day his dead body was found. Bravo ranch, where his dead body

was found, was investigated. Examination of his body suggested that Camarena could have been

tortured before he was killed. Investigation of the suspected vehicle led to the idea that Camarena

was kidnapped, tortured, and murdered elsewhere. The suspected car was found hidden in a

building in Guadalajara where Camarena was tortured and murdered. Involvement of the corrupt

official was found upon investigation of the suspected car, which belonged to a Mexican official

and was used for dealership. Investigators, however, were not able to search the house until the

officials had altered and removed obvious evidence. It was then found out that the kidnapping

was ordered by the drug lord backed by the corrupt Mexican officials (Malon, 1989).

Analysis of the Case

The different pieces of forensic evidence in this case: known samples of soil, hair, and

fingerprints collected from the dead body helped in its resolution upon processing the suspected

car for the same possible trace evidence, though barely matched what were found inside the

house where Camarena was tortured and killed. Both material and human forensic evidence were

useful in solving the puzzle and made up the story of what exactly happened to Camarena. This

only shows the important role forensic science plays in crime resolution that is almost impossible

to solve if crime resolution solely relies on testimonies made by witnesses. On the other hand,
THE ENRIQUE CAMARENA CASE 4

important lessons in forensic science could be derived from this case. There were obvious

mistakes made in the case that could have been improved. First of all, the crime scene was never

secured. The body was found in a ranch, which was never secured, that could have altered the

evidence. The time frame between the time the dead body was found and the time of torture and

actual killing was long enough for the body to decay and could possibly have lost material

evidence. Also, the house where the victim was allegedly tortured and murdered was found after

it had been painted until all obvious evidence were altered and ruined. Investigators could have

done better in this case. Time between evidence search and processing is relevant for various

things can happen and ruin potential evidence. This, again, reminds of proper chain of custody

and processing of evidence, and securing the crime scene the soonest possible time.

On the other hand, Wilkinson (2013) reported that Rafael Caro Quintero, one of the

convicted suspects of the Camarena killing case, was released and his conviction was voided. An

appeals tribunal ruled the conviction by Federal charges was improper as it should have been in

state court. Wilkinson (2013) also added that the drug traffikers in Mexico had momentary lie

low after the death of Camarena and that the case had adversely affected relation between

Mexico and the United States. As reported, the United States had not made it clear whether or

not to pursue extradition claim against Quintero.

Conclusion

The Camarena case had proven the value of forensic investigation in resolving criminal

cases that seem to be almost impossible to solve until analysis of material and human samples is

made. Indeed, scientific theories and princples are useful in criminal investigations. Similarly,

forensic analysis relies on scientific procedure that require careful handling and processing of
THE ENRIQUE CAMARENA CASE 5

potential forensic evidence. Time in between steps taken is also relevant as other things can

happen that may ruin pieces of evidence, which may eventually contribute to a lengthy

investigation process. Law enforcers and forensic experts can work together for speedy criminal

case resolution. Law enforcers can make the crime scene secure, such as keeping it free from

access so as not to alter existing evidence. When properly secured and handled, forensic experts

can do search, collection, and processing of potential evidence, analyzing each to see its

relevance to the case. Observing proper chain of custody is therefore important to keep every

potential evidence at its original state as it was in the orginal crime scene and make it admissible

in court.
THE ENRIQUE CAMARENA CASE 6

References

Malone, M. P. (1989, September). The Enrique Camarena case – A forensic nightmare. FBI Law
Enforcement Bulletin, 58(9), 1-6. Retrieved from
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/121533NCJRS.pdf
Wilkinson, T. (2013). DEA agent 'Kiki' Camarena's Mexico slaying called a game changer. LA
Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/09/world/la-fg-wn-dea-agent-
killing-a-game-changer-20130809