forensics discussion?

Anthony Ravenscroft · May 26, 2007

I'm wondering if I should start a thread or three for various aspects of crime-scene analysis, lab forensics, & investigative procedure in general.

I'm not a cop, never have been & likely never will be, though I've begun studying for my crimescene analyst certification, just because I enjoy it like some folks obsess on Sudoku. And I'm certain there's at least one detective who reads these forums.

My roommate laughs at me when I watch TV, because I'm very critical of... well, to be polite, elisions of reality. For instance, I bet not one person in a thousand pitches a fit when Grissom's team submits a partial print & gets a hit in a few minutes. Or matches DNA between first coffee break & lunch. Or has a first clue as to the unlikelihood of sucking blood evidence out of the freakin' air....

At the same time, nobody seems to know what an ALS is, or the importance of a frequency-variable laser, or why any sane person would spend $400 on a pocket flashlight, or what sort of light source is necessary for Luminol.

A few years ago, I almost blew a blood vessel when (on Crossing Jordan) Nigel made a cast of a dagger-thrust & got a near-perfect cast of the blade....

What say? Anyone else got input? gripes? questions?

Jamesaritchie · May 26, 2007

Anthony Ravenscroft said:
I'm wondering if I should start a thread or three for various aspects of crime-scene analysis, lab forensics, & investigative procedure in general.

I'm not a cop, never have been & likely never will be, though I've begun studying for my crimescene analyst certification, just because I enjoy it like some folks obsess on Sudoku. And I'm certain there's at least one detective who reads these forums.

My roommate laughs at me when I watch TV, because I'm very critical of... well, to be polite, elisions of reality. For instance, I bet not one person in a thousand pitches a fit when Grissom's team submits a partial print & gets a hit in a few minutes. Or matches DNA between first coffee break & lunch. Or has a first clue as to the unlikelihood of sucking blood evidence out of the freakin' air....

At the same time, nobody seems to know what an ALS is, or the importance of a frequency-variable laser, or why any sane person would spend $400 on a pocket flashlight, or what sort of light source is necessary for Luminol.

A few years ago, I almost blew a blood vessel when (on Crossing Jordan) Nigel made a cast of a dagger-thrust & got a near-perfect cast of the blade....

What say? Anyone else got input? gripes? questions?

I think most know things don't work as fast in real life as they do on CSI, but I think CSI must do it this way. And they get most things right, even if its' done too quickly and easily, and even if they do have more equipment than any ten real labs. They do have a couple of extremely good forensic specialists as consultants. And I think the job of a show like CSI is twofold. 1. Entertainment. 2. Show us what's possible, not what really is. The wow factor matters.

But I know what you mean. California has a backlog of just about 250,000 DNA cases. My own backwater state has a backlog of 2,500. But active murder cases do get prompt attention, and if there's a suspect to match DNA against, the test can be done in a few days.

Will Lavender · May 26, 2007

I'd enjoy it.

My thrillers are usually more puzzle-oriented (if that makes sense), but I sometimes steer away from a murder scene because I know virtually nothing about forensics.

I love Forensics Files, though.

rugcat · May 26, 2007

Anthony Ravenscroft said:
My roommate laughs at me when I watch TV, because I'm very critical of... well, to be polite, elisions of reality. For instance, I bet not one person in a thousand pitches a fit when Grissom's team submits a partial print & gets a hit in a few minutes. Or matches DNA between first coffee break & lunch. Or has a first clue as to the unlikelihood of sucking blood evidence out of the freakin' air....

Hey, it's TV. The producers of the show have access to any forensic experts they want, but they've made a conscious decision to take liberties with reality to keep the plot moving. It seems to work; a lot of people watch.

Look at House. Talk about a departure from reality. There are no technicians or nurses visible. The doctors on the show take their own blood draws, operate CT and MRI scans, do every kind of operation from cardiac problems to neurosurgery, and even run their own lab work. There are four of them treating a single patient for days, and most incredible, they never ask the patient about insurance.

Nobody cares--accurate medical procedure is not the reason they watch this particular show.

Still, a forensics thread is a nice idea. It only takes one glaring error of fact to turn off many readers. And there have been a lot of advances. Twenty years ago, you couldn't identify a suspect from latent prints unless you had all ten digits.

Anthony Ravenscroft · May 27, 2007

But you can't say "it's just TV" anymore. The courts are beginning to run into problems, where juries fail to convict because they think every small-town cop has a team of forensics super-squints, & that this complex evidentiary sequence is supposed to be assembled for every damned little offense.

Someone told me about one case where a guy was seen stashing half a kilo of cocaine -- the jury let him walk because the cops hadn't fingerprinted it, merely taken video & put uninvolved witnesses on the stand.

A few years ago, I read an interview with the CSI consultant. She mentioned her not-infrequent complaints about playing loose with procedure, science, logic, & laws of physics in order to pack a tidy plot into a 40-minute slot. There's nothing wrong with this... except that viewers already have enough difficulty confusing "I saw it on TV" with reality.

rugcat · May 27, 2007

It's always been that way. I once almost lost a DUI case (DWI in some states) because the jury was extremely concerned that I had not given the suspect her Miranda rights. Several of the jurors felt that since she had not been read Miranda rights, her civil rights had thus been violated and she deserved to go free.

The fact that I had not questioned her, (she was basically too drunk to talk) nor was anything she said introduced into evidence, didn't matter to the jury.

The case depended not on anything she said, but the evidence of driving pattern, (she roared out of a gas station, lost control, did a 360 and came to a stop against the bumper of my patrol car) inability to even attempt a field sobriety test, and a breathalyser reading of 0.25%. (Translation: hammered.)
This was quite a few years ago, but their understanding of the purpose of Miranda, or rather lack of it, came from the TV shows they watched.

MarkEsq · May 30, 2007

I'll echo that. I had a DWI case in which the driver was seen by an off-duty cop, very clearly, but sped off to his apartment and ran inside. The off-duty cop called 911 and when they showed up, the suspect wandered casually out of his apartment (wearing a different shirt), drunk, claiming his brother had been driving. The off-duty cop id'd him and I proved to the jury that his brother lived 200 miles away. I also pointed out that this brother didn't come testify for the defense.
I got my conviction but it took a while and after talking to the jurors, the hold-up was why the cops hadn't finger-printed the steering wheel. I stared at them for a moment, wanting to say that this was a DWI, not a murder case, then pointed out that it was his truck so his prints would be on the steering wheel no matter who was driving.
Oh yes, said the foreman. But the fresh prints would have been on top of old prints and shown who was driving. Fresh prints? Fresh? Like, not old and smelly?
Many prosecutors, me included, talk to the jury panel during selection about CSI and Law & Order to dispel any myths and reduce expectations about what we can do in terms of science.

rugcat · May 30, 2007

I believe they made a TV show about that case, set in California. The Fresh Prints Of Bel Air.

WackAMole · May 30, 2007

I think a Forensics thread is a great idea. I'm always looking for a place to specifically ask evidence related questions.

Also, my dad happens to be a Coroner and I get a lot of good stuff from him, but being a Coroner is different than a Medical Examiner. A lot of people dont understand that part. Coroners dont do autopsies and are actual elected positions requiring little to NO experience, just the mass of votes. A medical examiner is a hired position i believe? (could be wrong here) But I do know that Medical Examiners are fully qualified Pathologists who can perform autopsies, whereas, my father cannot and has to hire from a rotating pool for his autopsies.

All these little procedural tidbits that we otherwise might not know are fun and informative to read about.

At any rate, I would love to glom info from a thread/forum subclass like that, as well as contribute to it via my dad.

Hope to see it happen

good idea

rugcat · May 30, 2007

WackAMole said:
...being a Coroner is different than a Medical Examiner. A lot of people dont understand that part. Coroners dont do autopsies and are actual elected positions requiring little to NO experience, just the mass of votes.

This is true, although it varies from state to state. In some states, I believe, the Coroner must be a medical doctor at least, if not a forensic pathologist. In others the position evolved (or devolved) into a political one without particular regard to medical expertise.

So many states have gone to a ME system. In some of those, there is no longer a Coroner's office or position at all--the ME fulfills all of the state mandated requirements concerning deaths.

Marcusthefish · May 30, 2007

I think a forensics threat is a great idea, too.

I'm working on a crime thriller with a frame-up as one of the key scenes, so I'm particularly interested in the powder-residue test they use to determine whether someone fired a handgun.

MTF

WackAMole · May 30, 2007

rugcat said:
This is true, although it varies from state to state. In some states, I believe, the Coroner must be a medical doctor at least, if not a forensic pathologist. In others the position evolved (or devolved) into a political one without particular regard to medical expertise.

So many states have gone to a ME system. In some of those, there is no longer a Coroner's office or position at all--the ME fulfills all of the state mandated requirements concerning deaths.

Yeah, most states have gone to the ME, but so far here in washington, at least in this County, it's still a Coroner system. My dad happens to be a Doc, hes held office for 20+years now, but the guy before him had it for eighteen and his ONLY qualification was *drum roll* he was the editor of the local newspaper. Several Police officers and detectives have run against my dad for the position, but he has managed to hold on to it so far. Voters seem to like the Medical qualifications he has, but other than that, it's a popularity contest here.

Having a Coroner as a character in a novel rather than an ME does make for some more leeway in writing crime fiction. There's a heck of a lot you can get away with

especially if your coroner is your bad guy

MidnightMuse · May 30, 2007

Yes, here in Washington (in my county too) we have a Coroner who was voted in - has no experience - and simply collects the dead. The one we had for 20 years, who retired 10 years ago, is a family friend. He did a fine enough job, but all autopsies had to be sent to Tacoma where they had qualified ME's.

Finger prints bother me. Most states, they only match 8 points - other countries match a minimum of 18 points before they can say with any modicum of certainty that the finger print belongs to a suspect. 8 points is a joke - and could match up with thousands, if not tens of thousdans, of other people.

Yes - tv shows mix up reality and it makes me crazy. I just like to think those who are reading (our) books have more sense

Kate Thornton · May 30, 2007

Marcusthefish said:
I think a forensics threat is a great idea, too.

Yeow!

Carlene · May 30, 2007

Great thread!

The CSI that drive me bonkers is Miami! They all wear white, (eeeuuu bodies tend to have STUFF on them!) have long hair blowing all over the freakin' place and carry guns! I'm not sure but believe most CSI are civilians hired by the various law enforcement agencies - they are NOT sworn officers.

I heard a local CSI (San Diego) speak at a meeting once - it was fascinating! Anyhow, I asked him how long most CSI's last in the field and he said on average, five years. After that - it just gets to you. I could have listened to him all night. He was very nice and gave me his email so I can ask questions any time.

Carlene

Lindo · May 30, 2007

Whenever writers say "forensics" I hear: "what TV dragged out to recycle hospital shows and courtroom shows as cop shows".

Safely out of the USA, I have often wondered what effect the CSI shows would have on the criminal population. They suck stuff up, relearn how to talk from TV, get pointers on being less stupid. The most popular show in prison is "America's Most Wanted"...it's like watching a football game with Terry and Howie sitting next to you.

I think there are some books and websites on forensic info for writers.

Anthony Ravenscroft · May 30, 2007

Most crimes are a matter of opportunity &/or passion. The flipside of the "CSI effect" is therefore that most criminals don't plan a whole heck of a lot -- as a remedy, you need to watch more Cops & such stupid-criminals shows. Someone who commits a crime & then sticks around to take a shot at covering it up is more likely to get caught, to leave trace, etc. I'm surprised at the number of cases where a gun is wiped down but there's nice prints on the cartridge casings, for instance.

majilique · Jun 5, 2007

All the shows on the standard networks take literary licensing from actual cases. And by doing that it makes the shows more thrilling. If you want to see how a case is actually worked watch Court TV. Now that's the real thing

I have a friend who is a Crime Scene Forensics on the east coast, and she and I chortle about how far off real life these shows are, but if they were more true to life they would be boring as all get out and no one would watch them. TV is entertainment and that's what they are.

Out of the three CSI shows NY is the most outrageous (who wears Armani suits and high heels to a crime scene with Miami a close second (long flowing blond hair just doesn't cut it - though I will admit I love Horatio Canes's attitude). Only in the last three to four years, because of the popularity of these shows, many cities and counties, nationwide have changed their Forensic Units to Crime Scene Investigators, Units or Teams. Where I live, our police force just recently purchased a Hummer 3. Lovely waste of tax payers money.

ah well, my 2 cents.

db

Anthony Ravenscroft · Jun 10, 2007

The recurrent bit that sends us into giggles is when Khandi Alexander (on CSI Miami) walks into the morgue in a low-cut blouse, picks up a highspeed saw, & starts to reach toward a corpse when the camera cuts away. There are just so many things WRONG with that... starting with the assorted materials that get sprayed around.

And, yah, I get a little tired of seeing the same "ripped from the headlines ...but please don't sue us!!" gimmick used on three unrelated shows in a two-week period. Are these writers so friggin' lazy they can't even dig through older newspapers???

The Grump · Jun 10, 2007

A place to go for technical information? Great. I'm sure it will help a lot of people with mystery/thriller WIPs.

A side note: The courts in our county screen out people who watch CSI programs because they have unrealistic expectations of law inforcement. They also screen out for intelligence.

talkwrite · Jun 10, 2007

I took a workshop given for my profession from the Miami ( Dade County) Coroner, several years ago. Fascinating material but a very droll workplace. These people will clarify the inconsistencies with reality and these shows. The Mystery Writers of America ( MWA) Southwest chapter hosts luncheon meetings with speakers each month including coroners and forensic specialists and witnessing an autopsy. If membership is too expensive you can attend the luncheons for a cost of each lunch. Really, really worth it.

Nancyleeny · May 31, 2014

Anthony Ravenscroft said:
I'm wondering if I should start a thread or three for various aspects of crime-scene analysis, lab forensics, & investigative procedure in general.

I'm not a cop, never have been & likely never will be, though I've begun studying for my crimescene analyst certification, just because I enjoy it like some folks obsess on Sudoku. And I'm certain there's at least one detective who reads these forums.

My roommate laughs at me when I watch TV, because I'm very critical of... well, to be polite, elisions of reality. For instance, I bet not one person in a thousand pitches a fit when Grissom's team submits a partial print & gets a hit in a few minutes. Or matches DNA between first coffee break & lunch. Or has a first clue as to the unlikelihood of sucking blood evidence out of the freakin' air....

At the same time, nobody seems to know what an ALS is, or the importance of a frequency-variable laser, or why any sane person would spend $400 on a pocket flashlight, or what sort of light source is necessary for Luminol.

A few years ago, I almost blew a blood vessel when (on Crossing Jordan) Nigel made a cast of a dagger-thrust & got a near-perfect cast of the blade....

What say? Anyone else got input? gripes? questions?

I know this is an old thread, but I swear, I almost have a coronary watching Dana Delaney in Body of Proof doing autopsies with her long, shiny hair hanging down over the body and just a small pair of goggles on. I keep waiting for her to find her own hair on the body, and get a DNA match that will finally throw her in jail for bad autopsy work. Sheesh! You think they wold at least try to be real!

Nancyleeny · May 31, 2014

talkwrite said:
I took a workshop given for my profession from the Miami ( Dade County) Coroner, several years ago. Fascinating material but a very droll workplace. These people will clarify the inconsistencies with reality and these shows. The Mystery Writers of America ( MWA) Southwest chapter hosts luncheon meetings with speakers each month including coroners and forensic specialists and witnessing an autopsy. If membership is too expensive you can attend the luncheons for a cost of each lunch. Really, really worth it.

Is there a northeast chapter?

jeseymour · Jun 1, 2014

Nancyleeny said:
Is there a northeast chapter?

Yes. Where are you, specifically, in the northeast? MWA New England has excellent monthly meetings in Boston. Pretty sure there are chapters throughout New York state as well.

Nancyleeny · Jun 1, 2014

jeseymour said:
Yes. Where are you, specifically, in the northeast? MWA New England has excellent monthly meetings in Boston. Pretty sure there are chapters throughout New York state as well.

Hi,
I'm upstate NY, but my parents and kids live in NYc so I'm down there a lot, too.
Nancy

forensics discussion?

Scribble, scribble, scribble

Everything is what it seems.

Lost in the Fog

Scribble, scribble, scribble

Lost in the Fog

Clever title pending.

Lost in the Fog

WTF?!?!

Lost in the Fog

WTF?!?!

Midnight Reading

Still Happy to be Here. Or Anywhere

New kid, be gentle!

Scribble, scribble, scribble

Scribble, scribble, scribble

Hates Marketing. Loves Writing.

Passion in full bloom