Suppr超能文献

追踪还是不追踪:警察如何使用和感知化学痕迹证据的调查。

To trace or not to trace: A survey of how police use and perceive chemical trace evidence.

机构信息

Tasmanian Institute of Law Enforcement Studies (TILES), University of Tasmania, Private Bag 22, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia; Chemical & Physical Sciences Group, Victoria Police Forensic Services Department, 31 Forensic Drive, Macleod, VIC 3085, Australia.

Tasmanian Institute of Law Enforcement Studies (TILES), University of Tasmania, Private Bag 22, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia.

出版信息

Forensic Sci Int. 2020 Apr;309:110178. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110178. Epub 2020 Feb 8.

Abstract

There is limited information available about the impact of chemical trace evidence and it has tended to be anecdotal and mostly pertaining to court outcomes. Very little is known about the use of chemical trace evidence by police investigators or the impact that this evidence form has on criminal investigations. This survey, which was conducted in Victoria, Australia, was aimed at addressing these inadequacies by capturing information from police investigators about: (i) the purpose of using chemical trace and other forensic services; (ii) the expectation of what value forensic services would provide; (iii) the actual impact of forensic evidence in specified cases; and (iv) the general perceptions of forensic science. Police officers who were the lead investigators in a sample of criminal investigations were selected as the subjects for this survey. Each of the sample cases included chemical trace evidence and many of the cases also included other forms of forensic evidence. The police investigators indicated that they use chemical trace evidence with the expectation that it will assist decision-making in their investigations and contribute to building a case for court. Survey responses indicated that chemical trace evidence can impact on multiple stages of a case and that this form of evidence can play a part in guiding police investigators in making decisions about how their cases progress through the criminal justice system. It was found that an important aspect of the impact of chemical trace evidence can involve connections with other forensic and non-forensic evidence in the cases. The provision of preliminary results, prior to the formal written reports that are issued for use in court, enables chemical trace evidence to contribute timely support to investigations. The findings of this survey study contradict prevailing perceptions that the contribution of chemical trace evidence is limited to the presentation of evidence in court.

摘要

关于化学痕迹证据的影响,可用的信息有限,这些信息往往是轶事性的,主要涉及法庭判决结果。关于警察调查员使用化学痕迹证据的情况以及这种证据形式对刑事调查的影响,人们知之甚少。这项在澳大利亚维多利亚州进行的调查旨在通过从警察调查员那里获取以下信息来解决这些不足:(i) 使用化学痕迹和其他法医服务的目的;(ii) 对法医服务将提供何种价值的期望;(iii) 特定案件中法医证据的实际影响;以及 (iv) 对法医学的普遍看法。作为这项调查的对象,选择了在一系列刑事案件中担任主要调查员的警察。抽样案件中的每一起案件都包括化学痕迹证据,许多案件还包括其他形式的法医证据。这些警察调查员表示,他们使用化学痕迹证据,期望它将有助于他们的调查决策,并有助于为法庭提供案件。调查回应表明,化学痕迹证据可以对案件的多个阶段产生影响,这种证据可以帮助警察调查员在决定如何让案件在刑事司法系统中推进时做出决策。研究发现,化学痕迹证据的一个重要影响方面可以涉及案件中与其他法医和非法医证据的联系。在正式的法庭书面报告发布之前提供初步结果,可以使化学痕迹证据及时为调查提供支持。这项调查研究的结果与普遍的看法相矛盾,即化学痕迹证据的贡献仅限于在法庭上提出证据。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验