Chapter 1

Introduction To
Criminalistics

CHAPTER OVERVIEW
Criminalistics is the professional and scientific
discipline dedicated to the recognition, collection,
identification, and individualization of physical
evidence and the application of the natural sciences
to the matters of law. Forensic science is the
application of science to the law. Criminalistics is
based on diverse scientific disciplines. Criminalistics
draws upon chemistry, biology, physics, and
mathematics to relate physical evidence to crime.

CHAPTER OBJECTIVES
At the end of this chapter you will be able to do the
following:
1. Define the term evidence.
2. Identify the reasons why physical evidence is important
to criminal investigations.
3. Provide practical examples of the application of
physical evidence to criminal investigations.

1
2 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

Physical evidence has the potential to play a critical role in the

resolution of a suspected criminal act. This objective is furthered by the
thoughtful, objective and thorough approach to the investigative
process. The foundation of forensic science is the preservation of
physical evidence that will provide reliable information to aid in an
investigation.
In order to appreciate the importance of forensic science, the basic
principles must be understood. These principles include proper identifi-
cation and collection of evidence at a crime scene; knowledge of the best
practices in the field of criminalistics; the importance of firearms, docu-
ments, tool marks, impressions, DNA and trace evidence to the field of
criminalistics; and crime scene management. Proper crime scene man-
agement includes identification, evaluation, collection and preservation
of evidence, thorough search practices, and protection of the scene.

A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
The origins of forensic science can be traced to the 1800’s. During
this era, forensic specialists were self-taught. There were no special
schools, courses or formal training. One of the first significant
applications of forensic science occurred in 1888 in London, England.
During the late 1880’s, Jack the Ripper had committed several serial
murders in London. Doctors were allowed to examine victims of Jack
the Ripper for wound patterns.
The use of fingerprint evidence in solving crimes today seems
routine and unremarkable. During the 1800’s however, fingerprints
were the subject of intense scientific research. During the 1880’s it was
discovered that fingerprints are unique to an individual and remain
unchanged over a lifetime. This discovery led to the identification of
offenders in criminal investigations.

The Points of Comparison Method

At one time around 1900, there was a
system called the anthropometric system that
had been invented by a Frenchman, Alphonse
Bertillon (1853-1914), consisting of numerous,
minute body measurements, such as finger and
forearm lengths. This system was in
Chapter 1 Introduction To Criminalistics 3

competition with fingerprinting (technically called dactylography),

discovered by Henry Faulds and popularized by Francis Galton.
Bertillon based his system on the use of 11 points of comparison,
calculating his odds of being wrong on any given match being 4 million
to 1. These types of calculations form the basis of a number of forensic
sciences relying upon the Points of Comparison method, such as
odontology, firearms examination, and questioned document
examination. Due to population growth since Bertillon’s time, the
contemporary method is based on at least 12 points of comparison and
an odds ratio of about 6 million to 1. An odds ratio or percent chance of
being wrong also characterizes the quantitative information provided by
modern analytical techniques such as spectrography, chromatography,
and DNA typing (in the case of DNA, the odds ratio is an amazing 30
billion to 1).
Other milestones in the development of criminalistics during the
1800’s were:
• The first recorded use of questioned document examination.
• The development of tests for the presence of blood in a
forensic context.
• A bullet comparison used to catch a murderer.
• Comparison of a bullet and/or expended cartridge case to a
known firearm.
• The first use of toxicology, specifically arsenic detection, in a
jury trial.
• The development of the first crystal test for hemoglobin using
hemin crystals.
• The development of a presumptive test for blood.
• The first use of photography for the identification of criminals
and documentation of evidence and crime scenes.
• The first recorded use of fingerprints to solve a crime.
• Development of the first microscope with a comparison
bridge.
During the 1900’s forensic science developed into a formal
academic discipline. One of the first steps in this progression was the
establishment of a forensic science curriculum in 1902 by Swiss
Professor R. A. Reiss at the University of Lausanne, Switzerland. This
led to the formation of university courses and degrees in criminalistics
and police science during the 1930’s. Criminalistics made significant
4 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

advances along with the rise in technology during the 1900’s. The
following are some of these advances:
• Establishment of the popular practice of using the comparison
microscope for bullet comparison in the 1920’s.
• Development of the absorption-inhibition ABO blood typing
technique in 1931.
• Invention of the first interference contrast microscope in 1935
by Dutch physicist Frits Zernike (Received Nobel Prize in
1953).
• Development of the chemiluminescent reagent luminol as a
presumptive test for blood.
• Study of voice print identification.
• Invention of the Breathalyzer for field sobriety tests.
• Use of heated headspace sampling technique for collecting
arson evidence.
• Development of the scanning electron microscope with
electron dispersive X-ray technology.
• Identification of the polymorphic nature of red blood cells.
• Enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence (1975).
• Establishment of one of the first academic departments of
criminology/criminalistics at the University of California at
Berkley (1950).
• American Academy of Forensic Science (AAFS) was formed
in Chicago.
• Evaluation of the gas chromatrograph and the mass
spectrometer for forensic purposes.
• Development of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR)
technique for clinical and forensic applications.
• Use of DNA to solve a crime and exonerate an innocent
suspect (1980).
• Introduction of DNA and the challenge of certification,
accreditation, standardization and quality control guidelines
for both DNA Laboratories and the general forensic
community (1987).

WHAT IS EVIDENCE?
Evidence is defined as information submitted in a legal proceeding
that establishes or disproves an alleged set of facts. Evidence is the basis
Chapter 1 Introduction To Criminalistics 5

of any criminal charge. Without evidence to support a charge of criminal

wrongdoing, this allegation would be unable to be proven. The standard
of proof in a criminal case is that any allegation must be proven beyond a
reasonable doubt. This is a very high burden of proof. In a non-criminal
case, such as a contract dispute or a small claims action, the standard is
much lower. The standard of proof in these cases in based upon a
preponderance of the evidence. This means an allegation is more likely
true than not true. A preponderance of evidence can be translated to a
standard of proof over 50%. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a much harder
standard to meet. In contrast, the beyond a reasonable doubt standard
calls for an excess of 90% standard of proof.
Evidence collected at a crime scene plays a vital role in any criminal
investigation. This evidence may prove that a crime has been
committed, link a suspect to the scene or victim, establish the identity of
a suspect or victim, corroborate witness accounts, and exonerate
innocent parties. Evidence gathered at a crime scene also provides leads
for investigators to follow up on. Physical evidence is a real, tangible
object present at the crime scene. Physical evidence can take a variety of
forms at a crime scene. At the scene of a burglary investigation,
impressions such as fingerprints, tool marks, foot ware impressions and
tire marks are examples of physical evidence that may be collected.
Biological, trace, firearm evidence and questioned documents are also
examples of physical evidence. Biological evidence includes blood,
semen, cellular material, body fluids, hair, nail scrapings, and blood
stain patterns. Weapons, gunpowder patterns, cartridge cases,
projectiles, fragments, pellets, wadding, metallic residues, and projectile
wounds or impacts are examples of firearm evidence. Questioned
document evidence includes handwriting, mechanically produced text,
papers, writing implements, inks, and anything upon which a symbol
can be placed.

Bioscience in Action: Interesting Cases

Rape Investigation. An incapacitated woman claimed she was
raped at a party in Albany, New York. The woman was unable to
identify her attacker. Albany City Police secured and submitted blood
specimens taken from eight males present at the party. DNA patterns
were developed for all eight suspects. The results of the DNA analysis
directly implicated one of the eight subjects in the rape.
6 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

Homicide Investigation. An accomplice to a murder told police

investigators that his partner had murdered a man, moved the body from
the crime scene in a vehicle and threw the body from a bridge. DNA
analysis confirmed this witness’s account of the incident. Investigators
found the victim’s blood at the crime scene, in the vehicle used to
transport the victim and on three garden tools used in the murder. An
examination of the bridge from which the victim was thrown over,
revealed hairs on the railing. Based upon this finding, the exact site from
which the body was thrown was identified.

THE IMPORTANCE OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

The value of physical evidence in a criminal investigation cannot be
understated. An individual’s guilt or innocence can hinge upon evidence
collected at a crime scene. This type of evidence is more reliable than
eyewitness accounts of an incident. Over time, people’s memories can
fade. There is a tendency of people to fill in parts of an incident that they
did not see in its entirety. In contrast to eyewitness testimony, physical
evidence does not change. A fingerprint taken from a crime scene ten
years ago is equally as reliable as if it were collected today.
Physical evidence can prove that a criminal act did in fact occur and
it can establish key elements of the offense. The crime of rape generally
defined is sexual intercourse against the victim’s will or consent.
Physical evidence such as torn clothing and bruising of the rape victim’s
body support the lack of consent element of this crime.
A suspect can be placed in direct contact or in close proximity with
the victim or crime scene. In a sexual assault or rape case, a sample of the
suspect’s semen may be collected from the victim’s body. Through the
use of DNA analysis this evidence can be used to identify the suspect
and place that suspect in contact with the victim.
Physical evidence can establish the identity of a suspect or person
associated with the crime. At the scene of a burglary, a fingerprint found
at the point of entry can identify as suspect and place that suspect at the
scene. A person may be exonerated or eliminated as a suspect in an
investigation based upon physical evidence. Individuals have been
released from prison after being ruled out of a crime by DNA analysis.
In an interview or interrogation situation, physical evidence can play
a critical role. In a bank robbery investigation, a suspect is identified and
Chapter 1 Introduction To Criminalistics 7

questioned. This suspect adamantly denies being involved in the

robbery. When confronted with a video surveillance tape of the robbery
clearly identifying him/her, the suspect confesses to the crime.
A victim’s statement or testimony can be corroborated. In a domestic
violence case, a female victim claims to have been struck numerous
times by her partner, causing significant bleeding. The victim’s spouse
is later contacted and has blood on his hands and clothing. The suspect
claims this blood is his own from an accident at home. Analysis of the
blood on the suspect’s hands and clothes determines that it belongs to the
victim, thereby corroborating her statement. Physical evidence may also
be used in the alternative, to discredit an untruthful victim. In a burglary
investigation, the lack of physical evidence, such as no signs of forced
entry, may indicate that a victim is being untruthful. This lack of
evidence may indicate another criminal act entirely, such as insurance
fraud.
Figure 1.1 The Importance of Physical Evidence and the Law

Title: National Conference on Science and the Law

Proceedings.
Series: Research Forum
Author: National Institute of Justice
Published: NIJ, July 2000
Subject: Criminal Justice System
Preface
The intersections of science and law occur from crime scene to
crime lab to criminal prosecution and defense. Although detectives,
forensic scientists, and attorneys may have different vocabularies and
perspectives, from a cognitive perspective, they share a way of
thinking that is essential to scientific knowledge. A good detective, a
well-trained forensic analyst, and a seasoned attorney all exhibit
“what-if” thinking. This kind of thinking in hypotheticals keeps a
detective open-minded: it prevents a detective from ignoring or not
collecting data that may result in exculpatory evidence. This kind of
thinking in hypotheticals keeps a forensic analyst honest: it prevents
an analyst from ignoring or downplaying analytical results that may
be interpreted as ambiguous or exculpatory evidence. This kind of
8 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

Figure 1.1 The Importance of Physical Evidence and the Law (cont.)

thinking in hypotheticals keeps attorneys thoroughly prepared: it

prevents a prosecutor from ignoring alternative theories of the crime
that will surely arise in the defense, and it keeps the defense open to
raising alternative theories. Our adversarial system of justice relies
on thinking in hypotheticals, examining each possibility, looking at
all the angles because we expect proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
We have already seen too many times what happens when
“what-if” thinking breaks down. Consider what happens when a
detective refuses “what if” thinking. Exculpatory evidence is not
collected at the crime scene; an innocent person may be convicted.
Evidence is collected in such a sloppy manner that it cannot be
processed by the crime lab; a guilty person may be set free. Consider
what happens when a forensic analyst refuses “what if” thinking. A
crime lab technique has been accepted for the last 50 years; no one
has questioned its validity or reliability because everyone just
believes that it works; people may be wrongfully convicted or
exculpated by a scientifically unsound technique that is presented as
scientific evidence. Or consider what happens when “what if”
thinking breaks down in the courtroom. Judges naively accept
whatever scientists with a particular set of credentials tell them, the
scientist-witness is allowed to represent both the opinions of the
entire scientific discipline as well as specific opinions with regard to
the case, and the expert witness industry is thriving.
Currently, the criminal justice profession has several
mechanisms for ensuring that “what-if” thinking does not break
down. Daubert, and now Kumho, hearings can highlight serious
deficiencies in traditionally accepted forensic sciences. Training for
judges and lawyers can upgrade their ability to determine the value of
scientific evidence and to distinguish between good investigative
leads, which may result from pre- scientific techniques, and solid
scientific evidence, which derives from the scientific method.
Research by academics or scientific organizations such as the
National Academy of Sciences can provide answers to
methodological dilemmas, which face any science moving from the
Chapter 1 Introduction To Criminalistics 9

Figure 1.1 The Importance of Physical Evidence and the Law (cont.)

laboratory to the crime scene. Law enforcement training can provide

detectives and departments with best practices for investigation and
evidence collection, such as the National Institute of Justice’s recent
publication on crime scene investigation. Technical working groups
that are discipline based, such as the National Institute of Justice’s
Technical Working Group on Eyewitness Evidence, can provide
checks on scientific and investigative procedures and interpretation
of results.
But even with such homologous ways of thinking, judicial
decisions, and educational safeguards in place, science and law
continue to be uneasy partners. Questions about this partnership form
the basis for the following papers, from scientists, attorneys, and
judges, which all address, from differing aspects, the relationship
between science and law. It is hoped that by facing these questions
directly we shall find answers that enable us to use science and law in
the service of truth and justice.
Carole E. Chaski, Ph.D.
Executive Director Institute for Linguistic Evidence, Inc.
Georgetown, Delaware
Source: The entire report can be viewed at:
http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles1/nij/179630.txt

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence

A criminalist (aka crime scene technician, examiner, or

investigator) is a person who searches for, collects, and preserves
physical evidence in the investigation of crime and suspected
criminals. They typically work in city or regional crime labs and are
expected to do more than the forensic scientists and crime lab
technicians there. They are expected to be on call 24 hours a day to go
out to crime scenes, frankly when and where detectives are stumped.
Some jurisdictions require the presence of a criminalist at all major
crime scenes. The services of a criminalist are used at the beginning
of a case. By contrast, the services of a forensic scientist are primarily
10 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

used at the end, or courtroom testimony phase, of a case. All crime lab
employees must be ready to offer expert testimony in court, however.
Criminalists usually get called to testify about matters of
contamination, cross-contamination, and chain of custody, but many
of them (senior criminalists) have developed an interpretive
expertise, for example, in blood spatter analysis, trace evidence,
impression evidence, or drug identification, as well as skills at crime
reconstruction and sometimes profiling (Levinson & Almog 1989).
The term criminalistics (Kriminalistik) was first used by Hans
Gross in 1891, but the term was mostly forgotten until the 1960s
when a series of cooperative movements took place between police
agencies and criminal justice or criminology departments to establish
criminalistics (University of California, Berkeley) and forensic
science (Michigan State) college programs. Professors Paul Kirk in
California and Ralph Turner in Michigan (among many others) were
pioneers in those movements. As Osterburg and Ward (2000) imply,
criminalistics programs followed the police science model to record,
identify, and interpret the minutia (minute details) of physical
evidence, and forensic science followed the medical science model to
apply generally accepted principles of established disciplines (like
pathology, serology, toxicology, odontology, and psychiatry) to the
scientific examination of physical evidence. Forensic science is the
broader term because criminalistics is a branch of forensic science.
“Forensic” is simply an adjective that can be put in front of any
science applied to answering legal questions. The American
Academy of Forensic Sciences web site highlights about twenty
various degree programs that relate to some aspect of criminalistics
or forensic science education.
The world’s first crime laboratory was established by Edmond
Locard in Lyon, France during 1910. The famous Locard Exchange
Principle that “every contact leaves a trace” is named for him, after
Locard solved a strangling case by using fingernail scrapings. In
America, a few major cities and the FBI obtained crime labs during
the 1930s, and by the mid-1970’s (the birth of criminal justice), 47
states had crime labs. A few criminal justice programs that existed
Chapter 1 Introduction To Criminalistics 11

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

prior to the explosion of the field in 1974 offered a criminalistics or

forensic science concentration, but today, most criminal justice
programs only have one course in criminal investigation. Post-1975,
the criminal justice model became an attempt to make sense of whole
systems of justice, and the criminology model, dominated heavily by
sociology until about 1990, became theory, research, and
policy-driven. Many criminalists consider themselves (professional)
criminologists, but few criminologists consider themselves
criminalists.
THE IMPORTANCE OF CRIME LABS
With federal police agencies, two (2) organizations stand out
above the rest, the FBI and ATF, mainly because their crime labs are
pretty much considered the tops in the field and a model for
elsewhere.
The FBI laboratory has 4 sections: (1) Scientific analysis (DNA,
Firearms-toolmarks, Hairs and Fibers, Materials Analysis, Chemistry
and Toxicology, Questioned Documents; (2) Special Projects (film,
photography, composites, art, computer design); (3) Fingerprinting
(some 200 million records); (4) Investigative Operations and Support
(grew out of Questioned Documents unit and includes lie detection of
various sorts). The FBI lab only handles violent crime, works
exclusively for the prosecution, and is considered the world’s largest
lab.
The ATF laboratory handles (1) Explosives, bombs, arsons (and
does it well); (2) Trace evidence and deciphering firearms ownership
and usage; (3) Disaster response teams (kind of like FEMA); (4)
Field support; and (5) some Gang intelligence record keeping. ATF
labs are typically very high-tech and have always been accredited.
It’s typical for a Crime Lab to have 4 divisions under a Director’s
Office: (1) a section dealing with anything pertaining to fluids, this
being called a Serology Division; (2) a section dealing with unknown
substances, drugs, or poisons, this being called a Chemistry or
Toxicology Division; (3) a section dealing with anything so small,
like hairs or fibers, that they need to be looked at under a microscope,
12 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

this being called a Trace Evidence, Biology, or Microscopy Division;

and (4) a section dealing with guns, weapons, instrumentation, or
whatever, this being called a Ballistics, Firearms, or Fingerprinting
(Dusting and Lifting) Division (where Interns usually work).
There are about 350 crime laboratories in the U.S. and at least
80% of them are affiliated with a police agency (where they typically
hold bureau status in the organization). The rest are located in the
private sector and some of these are exemplary and known for a
particular specialty: Cellmark Diagnostics (for DNA), Battelle Corp.
(for arson cases), and Sirchie Corp. (for fingerprinting and trace
evidence collection), to name a few. There is a shortage of DNA
laboratories since only 120 labs are set up to do DNA testing
(Steadman 2002). Almost all labs in existence are forensic labs,
where “forensic” means the experts there are available to give
courtroom opinions, but when a lab is set up to receive evidence from
ongoing criminal investigations, this is called casework, and the lab
is referred to as a casework lab.
You can’t just start up a crime lab anywhere or anytime you feel
like it. Things are set up geographically so that on average, a lab is
almost always 50 miles within 90% of the police agencies. There are
some places that buck this pattern, but usually each state has one
“parent” lab and 5-6 regional labs. They are always hiring and
looking for help, as there’s a labor shortage of qualified applicants.
There’s also usually a work backlog, and some labs and state systems
are so backed up, that it takes many months to get the results back on
an evidence analysis. But in all fairness, the backlog situation should
not be a concern because crime labs were never intended to replace a
field investigation. The point of this is that police investigators
should never come to rely on a crime lab, but use it as a supplement to
their own investigative skills. Criminalistics and forensic science are
not silver bullets.
Chapter 1 Introduction To Criminalistics 13

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

THE PROBLEMS OF CRIME LABS

Chain of Custody
There are many sources of error. Evidence has to be discovered
(police or criminalist), it has to be collected (police, crime scene
technician, or criminalist), and then it has to be packaged, labeled,
and transported (police supervisor or criminalist). Once it gets to the
lab, it has to be logged in, assigned an identification number, placed
in storage, kept from intermingling with other evidence, and analyzed
(criminalist, crime lab technician, or forensic scientist).
Before any laboratory work is done, it must be ensured that the
workplace is clean and contamination free. Then, the evidence is
visually inspected and properly described to document its condition.
Often, it will be photographed, weighed, and sketched. Then, the
laboratory worker (criminalist, crime lab technician, or forensic
scientist) will have to figure out what tests are appropriate, if
sufficient amounts of the evidence exist, properly dissect the portion
to be tested, and properly prepare the testing material (which might
include the delicate mixing of numerous chemical compounds), all
the while continuing to document each step. Only then does any
testing begin.
Some tests include as many as five or six separate procedures,
each of which must be properly performed and documented, the
evidence properly repackaged and relabeled, and once again
transported to storage. Only then does the lab worker engage in the
process of interpreting what the experiments have disclosed. A report
is prepared and the contents of that report must be precisely correct.
At the prosecutor’s discretion, the evidence has to make it back to
the police evidence room, where it will be stored until he/she decides
they want to use it or want more testing performed, in which case it
goes back to the crime lab. It should be fairly evident that all this
transportation of evidence gives rise to numerous possibilities for
error in the form of destruction, mishandling, and contamination.
14 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

Integrity
It’s important a crime lab find some system for establishing its
credentials as a forensic laboratory. A couple of the organizations
that perform this function include the American Society of Crime
Laboratory Directors (ASCLD), the National Forensic Science
Technology Center (NSFTC), and the College of American
Pathologists (CAP). In addition, labs that specialize may also apply
for credentials from an organization, or Board, which regulates that
specialty. For example a lab that performs odontological work might
apply to the National Board of Forensic Odontology.
Generally, whenever a lab applies for accreditation, it has to meet
certain minimum requirements, which include, among other things,
the development and publication of:
• A Quality Control Manual - Quality control refers to
measures that are taken to ensure that the product, for
example a DNA-typing result and its interpretation, meets a
specified standard of quality.
• A Quality Assurance Manual - Quality assurance refers to
measures that are taken by a laboratory to monitor, verify,
and document its performance. A basic business principle is
that QA serves as a check on QC.
• A Lab Testing Protocol - Protocols consist of a few hundred
pages of highly technical manuals and should include such
things as “validation studies” which the lab performed itself
to make it capable of performing tests in any particular
discipline.
• A program for proficiency testing - Proficiency testing
determines if the lab workers individually, and the
laboratories as institutions, are performing up to the
standards of the profession. In these tests, samples to be
examined are given to a laboratory or particular worker, but a
test giver already knows the results. There are two methods
employed in administering these tests, blind and known. In
the blind test, the lab worker doesn’t know that a test is taking
place; they think the evidence sample they are working on is
just another case. The open proficiency test is like an open
Chapter 1 Introduction To Criminalistics 15

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

book exam. In addition, individual lab workers join

associations to beef up their resumes. The two main ones are
the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS), the
American Board of Criminalistics (ABC).
In general, attacks on laboratory expertise come in three
categories (which are the same techniques for attacking physical
evidence):
• Tampering - Tampering refers to allegations that the crime
scene or piece of evidence was tampered with. There’s a
presumption of regularity on the side of the prosecution, so
this is hard to prove.
• Contamination - Contamination is somewhat easier to allege,
given irregularities in the chain of custody.
• Substitution - Substitution (or mistake) is a problem if the lab
workers are new, inexperienced, or lack the appropriate
credentials.
THE BASICS OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
Physical evidence is part of the “holy trinity” for solving crimes
— physical evidence, witnesses, and confessions. Without one of the
first two, there is little chance of even finding a suspect. In homicide
and sexual assault cases, physical evidence is the number one
determinant of guilt or innocence. Physical evidence is also the
number one provider of extraordinary clearances, where police can
link different offenses at different times and places with the same
offender. Working with physical evidence means being aware at all
times of what the prosecutor needs to win the case in court. This
means knowing the Types of Evidence and the Laws of Evidence.
Four Types of Evidence:
Testimonial
This is the kind of evidence that comes to court through witnesses
speaking under oath or affirmation. They could be testifying about
something they saw (eyewitnesses), something they heard (hearsay
witnesses), or something they know (character, habit, or custom
witnesses).
16 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

Physical
These are tangible objects that are real (sometimes said to speak
for themselves because they can be taken into the jury room), direct
(no preliminary facts needed), and not circumstantial (do not require
an inference to be made), although circumstantial evidence is
sometimes offered and strengthened by expert testimony. Examples
of physical evidence would include the gun used to commit the crime,
trace particles found at the crime scene, property recovered,
fingerprints, shoeprints, handwriting, etc.
Documentary
This is usually any kind of writing, sound or video recording. It
may be the transcript of a telephone intercept. Authentication of the
evidence is usually required along with expert testimony at times.
Demonstrative
These are types of real evidence used to illustrate, demonstrate, or
recreate a tangible thing, for example, a cardboard model mockup of
the crime scene or other constructed-to-scale models. The purpose of
this stuff to replace timely, expensive, and possibly prejudicial jury
trips to the crime scene.
Both forensic scientists and criminalists need to be intimately
familiar with the Standards of Admissibility for Scientific Expertise,
since these vary from state to state, and sometimes even from court to
court within states.
Relevancy test (FRE 401, 402, 403) - this is embodied in the
Federal Rules of Evidence and state versions which essentially
involve a liberal rule allowing anything that materially assists the
trier of fact (jury) and is deemed relevant by the trier of law (judge).
Frye Standard (Frye v. U.S. 1923)
For the results of a scientific technique to be admissible, the
technique must be sufficiently established to have gained general
acceptance in its particular field. This is the “general acceptance” test
that often requires knowledge of the literature.
Chapter 1 Introduction To Criminalistics 17

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

Coppolino Standard (Coppolino v. State 1968)

The court allows a novel test or piece of new, sometimes
controversial, science on a particular problem at hand if an adequate
foundation can be laid even if the profession as a whole isn’t familiar
with it.
Marx Standard (People v. Marx 1975)
The court is satisfied that it did not have to sacrifice its common
sense in understanding and evaluating the scientific expertise put
before it. This is the “common sense” or “no scientific jargon” test,
and it is rarely used Daubert standard (see Lecture on Daubert). This
test requires special pretrial hearings for scientific evidence and
special procedures on discovery. This is a rather stringent test that
requires knowledge of Type I and Type II error rates, as well as
validity and reliability coefficients.
CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
Since criminalistics is the recording, identification, and
interpretation of minutia (minute details), a number of standard
techniques and procedures have been developed to do this. It is
important to understand the basic concepts behind these techniques.
A more useful term than minutia is striations, which are scratch
marks caused by irregularities or lack of microfine smoothness, such
as those found on fingerprints, bullets, cartridges, casings, or tool
marks. With evidence like paint, hair, grease, and glass, the chemical
composition (qualitative and quantitative) provides the details. With
other types of evidence, such as glass fragments, the morphology (or
form) of an object reveals valuable information, such as a jigsaw
puzzle fit linking pieces of broken glass together.
Criminalists know how to operate a variety of devices and
machines. The three simplest devices are lights, camera, and
microscope. By adjusting the light on an object, the morphological
and composition characteristics of evidence often become visible. A
basic principle is contrast, as in when the background color of an
object is made different than the foreground color. Cameras often
allow the use of lens filters to screen out certain colors, and contrast
18 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

(among other things) can be increased or decreased in photography.

Microscopes are the main technique for enlarging resolution,
although it is possible to enlarge without enhancing resolution. Most
physical evidence reveals valuable detail at magnifications between
2x and 10x. The more complex devices are called analytical
instruments, and consist of the following:

Table 1 Analytical Instrument

Instrument Substance Effect of Sample Information

Spectrophotometers Organic/Inorganic Nondestructive Quantitative

Mass spectrography Organic Destructive Qualitative

X-Ray Diffusion Crystalline Nondestructive Qualitative

Neutron Activation Inorganic Nondestructive Qualitative/Quantitative

Scanning Electron Organic/Inorganic Nondestructive Semi-quantitative

X-Ray Dispersion Inorganic Nondestructive Qualitative

Chromatography Organic Nondestructive Qualitative/Quantitative

There are many more organic substances than inorganic

substances. Most drugs, explosives, hairs, and biological fluids are
organic, based on the element carbon. Most dirt, gunpowder, poisons,
paint, and glass are inorganic, although some substances represent a
mix or organic and inorganic.
Without doubt, the most important concept in criminalistics is
identification, or what Paul Kirk called individualization (Kirk
1936). Identification produces unequivocal (certain) interpretation.
An equivocal crime scene, by comparison, yields physical evidence
subject to different interpretation (and is the basis for crime
reconstruction and profiling). When a number of details are put
together (as in points of comparison), so that they constitute a class of
one (by itself), they are said to establish an identity, also called
individual characteristics, or entities in a class by itself. At this point,
if there are similarities between evidence from the crime scene and
evidence from a suspect, the expert can say, without a doubt, that
identity has been individualized.
Chapter 1 Introduction To Criminalistics 19

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

It is important to clearly understand the concepts of identity,

match, class and individual characteristics. Identity is a set of
characteristics (combinations of class characteristics or combinations
of class and individual characteristics) by which a thing is
recognizable or known. Identity is the same as pattern. A pattern is
established, for example, when a particular piece of class evidence
like fiber (for which there are large quantities in the population) is put
together with another piece of class evidence like red hair (which
usually only exists in the subpopulation of white people). It cannot be
said the investigator has “individualized” anything at this point, but
the red hair in this example can be considered enough of an individual
characteristic, which combines with the class characteristic to
establish identity. At this point, if there is a “match” between the
fibers and hair from the crime scene with a suspect, the examiner can
say the crime scene (unknown or questioned) sample “may have
come from the same source” as the suspect’s (known or exemplar)
sample, which is sufficient for probable cause. Identity can also be
used to conclusively eliminate people as suspects.
Class characteristics alone do not allow matches with a single
suspect. Matches for evidence with individual characteristics do
allow pinpointing a particular suspect. Matches at the individual level
are called similarities, because in theory, there’s no such thing as a
perfect match. An example of a similarity, or match in individual
characteristics, would be a number of comparable points of
comparison between the friction ridge lines on a latent (crime scene)
fingerprint with the fingerprints of a particular suspect. This kind of
(true) match allows the examiner to say that, because the similarities
outweigh any dissimilarities, the crime scene (unknown or
questioned) sample “did come from the same source” as the suspect’s
(known or exemplar) sample, which is sufficient, most of time, for
proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Reliability and integrity are enhanced if the examiner has
conducted tests on standards using controls. A standard is the
opposite of exemplar. An exemplar always comes from a suspect or
something representing a known modus operandi or signature.
20 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

Standards consist of simultaneous tests done on items taken from the

“background” or nearby the crime scene (control sample), items
similar to one the suspect used, such as test firings of a similar
weapon (standard sample), or items used for calibration purposes
kept in stock at the lab (reference sample).
The astute student may notice that the word “match” is used a
couple of different ways in criminalistics. Nobody uses the phrase
(true) match, for example, like I have used in my explanations above.
Some people prefer the term “matching” (Ramsland 2001). Abuse of
the term “match” is even worse in forensic science, which allows
different disciplines to set their own criteria and standards. To wrap
things up, let’s conclude with an interesting topic, the points of
comparison method, and then attempt to present a table, which
classifies evidence by their class and individual characteristics.
THE POINTS OF COMPARISON METHOD
At one time around 1900, there was a system called the
anthropometric system that had been invented by a Frenchman,
Alphonse Bertillon (1853-1914), consisting of numerous, minute
body measurements, such as finger and forearm lengths. This system
was in competition with fingerprinting (technically called
dactylography), discovered by Henry Faulds and popularized by
Francis Galton. Bertillon based his system on the use of 11 points of
comparison, calculating his odds of being wrong on any given match
being 4 million to 1. These type of calculations form the basis of a
number of forensic sciences relying upon the Points of Comparison
method, such as odontology, firearms examination, and questioned
document examination. Due to population growth since Bertillon’s
time, the contemporary method is based on at least 12 points of
comparison and an odds ratio of about 6 million to 1. An odds ratio or
percent chance of being wrong also characterizes the quantitative
information provided by modern analytical techniques such as
spectrography, chromatography, and DNA typing (in the case of
DNA, the odds ratio is an amazing 30 billion to 1).
Chapter 1 Introduction To Criminalistics 21

Figure 1.2 An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence (cont.)

There is no such thing as a comprehensive classification scheme

for all types of physical evidence. Some types of class evidence can
be somewhat individualized, such as hair and blood, and some
individual types are best considered both class and individual
evidence. With that having been said, here’s a table that lays out some
basic distinctions:
Class Evidence Individual Evidence

Drugs Fingerprints

Fibers Toolmarks

Hair Handwriting

Blood DNA

Glass Firearms

Soil Shoeprints

Source: http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/315/315lect02.htm

SUMMARY
Modern day criminalistics has advanced along with technology from
its origins in the 1800’s. The thorough, thoughtful collection of evidence
at a crime scene forms the foundation of a criminal investigation. The
importance of physical evidence cannot be underemphasized. This
evidence tells the story of a criminal offense. Physical evidence can
provide who, what, when, where and sometimes why in the resolution of
a criminal case.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. What are three examples of advances in criminalistics during
the 1900’s?
2. Provide at least three examples of the application of physical
evidence in a criminal case.
3 Why is physical evidence important in solving crimes?
22 Introduction To Criminalistics Chapter 1

ADDITIONAL READINGS
Handbook of Forensic Services, United States Department of Justice,
Federal Bureau of Investigation: 1999 www.fbi.gov.
Advancing Justice through DNA Technology, Office of the President,
http://www. ojp. usdoj. gov March 2003
Crime Scene Investigation, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice, World Wide Web Site http;//www. ojp. usdoj.gov, 1999
An Introduction to Criminalistics and Physical Evidence; Tom O’Conner
Ph.D. North Carolina Wesleyan University http://faculty.ncwc.edu