While the capture of the Night Stalker was a credit to law enforcement’s use of the media, his identification as Ramirez was the result of another modern technique. The Night Stalker case was among the first major cases to use automated fingerprinting technology.

Today, television detectives run fingerprints from a crime scene through an automated database and get results in seconds—somewhat inaccurately. In reality, the database kicks back “likely” matches and a trained fingerprint examiner must compare them to find an actual match. Still, the technology we use today allows quick searches of a vast number of fingerprints, and if a criminal leaves a fingerprint behind we can see if he’s ever been booked and fingerprinted, or if we have the same print on file from another scene.

In 1985, this use of computers was brand new. Before automated systems, examiners would have to look through fingerprints on file by hand, using ten-print cards (on which a booked criminal has rolled all ten fingerprints in ink). It meant a great deal of time and effort, and was rarely useful without a suspect in mind. Some even admitted that the collection of fingerprints at the scene was frequently done for public relations purposes only—to appear to be doing something to solve the crime.

When computers were first applied to the task, the systems were extremely expensive, making it difficult to sell to agencies with low budgets. That’s why when the California Department of Justice used their brand new automated fingerprint indexing system to immediately identify Richard Ramirez as the Night Stalker, it put these systems on the map—it proved they worked, and that the cost was justified.

For a contemporary article on the use of automated fingerprint technology, go here. For more on the Night Stalker’s crimes, go here.

The post Fingerprint Technology Captured Stalker appeared first on Crime Museum.

If you missed your chance to come to the week-long camp, now’s the time to make up for it! Sign up now at our camp website–that’s also where you can find details on the camp itself. Hope to see you there!

The post CSI Boot Camp! appeared first on Crime Museum.

Despite the fact that the operation went seamlessly, the Bin Laden raid was not an easy one.  His compound was surrounded by 8 feet of barbed wire.  There were also additional 7 foot security walls within the compound. So what factors contributed to Bin Laden’s defeat you may ask? US officials say that inside information was an integral part of the operation’s success. The Bin Laden family was also the only family that burned trash, and the only million dollar home that was without phone or internet connections; a giveaway that the compound was ideal to hide someone of great significance.  Administration said that the raid was kept so secretive that no foreign officials were told in advance, and very few within the US government were privy to prior knowledge of the history that was about to unfold a world away.

On September 11, 2001, over 3,000 lives were lost in the worst attacks of terrorism on American soil. On May 1, 2011, the man responsible for this horrific amount of innocent bloodshed was finally brought to justice. Bin Laden’s capture sent throngs of cheering Americans in to the streets in both Times Square, and in front of the White House. Gordon Felt, president of the Families of Flight 93, issued a heartfelt statement saying, “This is important news for us, and for the world. It cannot ease our pain, or bring back our loved ones. It does bring a measure of comfort that the mastermind of the September 11th tragedy and the face of global terror can no longer spread his evil”.

Please check back soon for updates on the forensic discoveries relating to Bin Laden’s capture and killing. For more information, please click here or here.

The post Bin Laden’s Death Is Justice for All appeared first on Crime Museum.

Rep. Giffords was shot in the head during Loughner’s rampage, but luckily was attended to by intern Daniel Hernandez (who had prior nursing training) until emergency workers were able to arrive on the scene. Giffords and two others who were wounded in the shooting are in good condition at the University Medical Center in Tucson, while the nine others suffering injuries have been released. The health of the congresswoman appears to be continually improving as she has opened her eyes, is breathing on her own through assistance from a tracheotomy tube in her windpipe, and can respond to basic commands like squeezing a hand, which indicates to neurosurgeons that she is capable of brain function.

While people across the nation have been shaken by the shooting on January 7^th, members of Congress have been especially hard hit by events. This marks the most recent attempt on the life of a sitting member of Congress since 1978 when Rep. Leo Ryan of California was killed while in Jonestown, Guyana. Tentative legislative business, including a reexamination of the current health-care law, has been postponed. Instead, talk has turned to issues of safety, such as a possible bill to enclose the House of Representatives’ public galleries in a material similar to Plexiglas and the installation of “panic buttons” within offices. While many citizens are calling for stricter gun control, legislators will not go as far, but instead talk of a bill banning high-capacity gun magazines.

The state of Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer has passed their own legislation in the meantime, banning protests within 300 feet of a funeral site. This law comes as a response to the Westboro Baptist Church announcing plans to picket the funeral of U.S. District Judge John Roll. While funerals and vigils are being held for those he killed and injured, Jared Loughner was taken into custody after being tackled by onlookers while reloading at the “Congress on Your Corner” event. He is currently being held in Phoenix without bail, facing federal charges for two counts of murder and three counts of attempted murder.

San Diego based lawyer Judy Clarke has been appointed to defend Loughner and has gained recognition in her career by previously defending Theodore Kaczynski, a.k.a. the Unabomber, and Susan Smith. Because of John Roll’s position as federal judge in Tucson, the remaining federal judges in his district have decided to not preside over the case in order to avoid a conflict of interest; a federal judge from outside the state may have to be brought in. More likely, Clarke will seek a change of venue in hopes of ensuring Loughner a fair trial. Though changes in venue are not typically granted, pretrial publicity can necessitate the move due to an impartial jury being unlikely within the community where the crime took place, as was the situation during the 1996 Oklahoma City bombing case.

The post Representative and Country Recovering appeared first on Crime Museum.

News reports indicate that police were led to Abuelazam by an anonymous phone tip to the Michigan police hotline.  Apparently the tipster was calling based on information that had been released about the suspect’s vehicle.   The Slasher’s vehicle had been described as an older model (1995-2005) Chevy Blazer or GMC Jimmy with a two-toned or dark green top over a light tan, beige, or gold bottom.  The tip led authorities to someone associated with Abuelazam, which in turn led to the liquor store in Michigan where he worked.  Upon further investigation, it was discovered that Abuelazam had hidden his dark green chevy S-10 Blazer at a Michigan home behind a shed.  His movements were traced from Michigan to Kentucky, and then from there to Atlanta where he was arrested at the airport before boarding a flight for Tel Aviv.  Abuelazam is currently being held on one count of assault with intent to commit murder in Michigan.  He is to be extradited back to Michigan to face charges.

The string of attacks by the Slasher started lasted from May 24, 2010 to August 7, 2010.  Based on those attacks, a trend began to appear.  The victims were primarily African American males with small stature or of older age—people perceived by the Slasher as being easier to physically control.   Only two victims did not fit this profile—one was white and the other Latino.  Some authorities therefore believe that these attacks were racially motivated, as none of the victims were been robbed.  Information gleaned from victims indicated that the Slasher approached unsuspecting victims who were on their own in the early morning hours.  He asked for directions or for assistance as a means to lure them closer to his vehicle.  The Slasher then attacked and stabs his victims, a very personal method for killing.

If you have any additional information that may be of value in this case, please contact Michigan police at 866-246-9500 or 810-732-1111 or 810-237-6800.  You can also call Crime Stoppers at 800-422-JAIL.  For more information regarding the case, please see any of the following news articles: CNN-1, CNN-2, CNN-3, NBC25-1, or NBC25-2.

The post The Serial Slasher Apprehended? appeared first on Crime Museum.

The system worked quite well, until 1903 when Will West was received at Leavenworth Penitentiary. Upon running Will West’s measurements, it was discovered that a “William West” was already imprisoned at Leavenworth.  He had the same anthropometric measurements as Will West.  A photographic comparison of the two men did little to distinguish them.   Finally, two years after Will West was brought to Leavenworth, fingerprints of each man were taken, compared, and found to bear no resemblance.  Thus each man was distinguished by his fingerprints.  Needless to say, Leavenworth converted from the Bertillon system to the more reliable fingerprint system, which is still in use today. This is a reminder that fingerprints are important.

The post Reminder That Fingerprints Are Important appeared first on Crime Museum.

Sherlock Holmes worked as a consulting detective in London with his partner Dr. John H. Watson, who moved in with Holmes to help pay the rent.  Holmes was a freelance detective as well as a forensic scientist, the first of his time.  Holmes is unlike anybody we would find working in forensics today because of his disciplinary crossing reach.

Holmes worked as a detective and as such used his sharp mind to “reason backwards” or to see the conclusion of a criminal act and be able to reason backwards to find the motive and the culprit.  But Holmes was much more than just a detective.

Sherlock Holmes also worked in the chemistry lab of a hospital, making him a forensic chemist.  Holmes “discovered” a test to detect hemoglobin, and hence blood, he did this in Doyle’s mind 13 years before it happened in the real world.  Holmes commented on the uniqueness of typewriters three years before any real life document examiners did the same. He is considered a pioneer in the use of forensic science.

Today forensic chemists do not do detective work in the field and detectives do not spend time in the laboratory examining evidence, these are two separate arms of law enforcement.  Sherlock Holmes was a genius at both as best described by Doyle’s quote from Holmes’ mouth expressing both processes in one eloquent statement:

“The process… starts upon the supposition that when you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. It may be that several explanations remain, in which case one tries test after test until one or other of them has a convincing amount of support”

The post Sherlock Holmes and Forensics appeared first on Crime Museum.

DERWIN J. BRADLEY
Law Enforcement/Counterterrorism

I’m sure you all remember the incident where singer Chris Brown battered his girlfriend Robyn Rihanna Fenty, commonly known as Rihanna. I was discussing the incident with a fellow author who was a former Fortune 500 CEO and, I suspect, a frightened estranged wife who might have been battered by her soon-to-be ex-husband.

I told them that in my 25 years of policing, I have seen numerous domestic violence cases where the woman was what we call ‘The Primary Aggressor’. The Primary Aggressor is defined as the person who initiates the violence and/or demonstrates the most aggressive behavior. Now don’t get me wrong, when Oprah said, “There’s never a good reason to hit a woman during an argument,” I agree wholeheartedly; however, it has been my experience in the field that women will typically commit the first act of violence. I have worked many cases where the woman initiated violence by pushing, slapping, or throwing objects at the man. (It is rumored that Rihanna threw the tainted cell phone at Brown, sparking the physical confrontation). Women also tend to try to physically block the man’s path if he tries to leave, or simply verbally berates and belittles him until he explodes violently and batters her. Of course the male wins the fight and is arrested for domestic violence.

I can’t tell you how many times men have sat in the back of my patrol car bewildered saying, “But she hit me first!” I would respond, “I know. But you beat her up.”
“Well what was I supposed to do? She hit me!”
“Take it. Walk away. Run away if you have to.”
“I don’t run from no woman! I ain’t leavin’ my own house!”
“Then you will continue to go to jail.” That statement usually sends them into a rant on how the system gives preference to women. I usually respond, “You are absolutely right. Now you have a choice to make.”

My friend and I really got into a heated debate about this issue. She believes that a man should know when to walk away even if the woman is pushing every button that he has. I told her that it sounds good in theory, but I would caution women on depending on an already unstable, immature, or just plain mean man to know when to walk away and have the inner strength to do so. The statement “There is never a good reason to hit a woman during an argument” sounds like a great rally cry, but if women are to avoid those sudden violent confrontations from violence-prone men, they have got to know when to back out of the situation.

My friend argued that it was not fair that the woman had to get herself under control during an argument because women are emotional creatures and get “caught up” in the heat of the moment. The man should know when to walk away and not lash out physically. I simply asked, “Are you willing to bet your health or maybe even your life on an angry, immature, mean-spirited, drunk/high, or emotionally unstable man doing the right thing?” That pretty much ended the debate for the time being.

I know that this is a tough subject because I had the same debate with my mother and several other women. I told you I would give the tough answers and in this case I only want to keep you safe and maybe even save your life. I’ve done many battered-woman rescues and hunted numerous violent batterers and each case is as frustrating as you-know-what!

So the final question remains: would you rather be right, or would you rather be healthy?

The post Cop’s Corner- Domestic Violence appeared first on Crime Museum.

I recently wrote and published a book entitled Black and Blue: Understanding Modern Law Enforcement In Your America. The book was written to try and give the average person a solid understanding of modern policing.

Interestingly enough, the more I dug into my memory banks for stories, the more I realized just how little the average American knew and understood about how the American Law Enforcement Official goes about doing their jobs. In your defense good citizens, I do realize that most of you get your ideas about police work from television or movies, and therein lies most of the problem.

Fear not folks, I will share with you real police work presented as it should be: honest, straightforward, and to the point. I will answer your questions about current events involving the police as well as inquiries about your personal situations. I will also challenge the old stereotypes that you have been programmed to accept with the truth, which might make you a little uncomfortable, but you’ll learn valuable insight into the world of the law enforcement official. Let’s get into it shall we?
 

CONTENT DISCLAIMER

The views and opinions expressed in the media, articles or comments on this site are those of the speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions held by the CSI Blog and NMCP. The editorial staff of the CSI Blog oversees and administers the site based on our editorial policy but should not be held accountable for all of the information you may find on this web site.

The CSI Blog and NMCP do not warrant the accuracy, timeliness or completeness of the information contained on our website. If you have a particular complaint about something you’ve found on this web site, please contact us.

Learn what suicide by cop is

The post Cop’s Corner- Introduction appeared first on Crime Museum.

Now a public figure, Dillinger turned to plastic surgery to alter his identity and evade Purvis and the rest of the law enforcement community. In those days, plastic surgery was not as common as it is today, and the medical procedures were primitive, dangerous, time-consuming and very painful. Dillinger underwent several bouts of plastic surgery, some more successful than others, but in the end he only managed to slightly alter his appearance. After one round of plastic surgery from which he was extremely disappointed to find that he still looked the same, one of the doctors suggested that he remove his fingerprints as a way to escape being detected. Dillinger liked this idea and elected to undergo the painful process of obliterating his fingerprints.

A wanted poster for Dillinger, complete with all ten fingerprints

Dillinger was not the first criminal to come up with that idea. In 1933, “Handsome Jack” Klutas had attempted to file down the small ridges on his fingers, but he ultimately failed. Two of Kate “Ma” Barker’s clan, Alvin “Creepy” Karpis and Ma’s son Freddy, decided to remove their fingerprints as well, so they hired mob physician Joseph P. Moran to do the job. Moran was inexperienced in this procedure and repeatedly hacked and knifed at their prints until the gangsters couldn’t bear any more pain, but when their fingers finally healed, the fingerprint ridges grew back to their original patterns.

Hoover was aware of this trend among criminals and he became wary of the possibility of success. He commissioned several surgeons and dermatologists to report on the likelihood of someone obliterating their fingerprints, and in 1934 they came back with their findings. Dr. Howard L. Updegraff, a member of that committee, had extensive experience in the area of fingerprint alterations and he reported that the only way to permanently obliterate a fingerprint is to graft skin from another part of the body over them. And in 1941, that’s exactly what Robert Phillips did when he got a doctor to graft the skin from his chest on to the tips of his fingers. Phillips, however, was caught because the ridges surrounding the graft areas, as well as on the other joints of his fingers were used to identify him.

Dillinger seemed to have taken the road less traveled when he chose acid to burn the tips of his fingers with in late May, 1934. The procedure appeared to be successful; however, faint ridge markings were still visible on his fingertips after the full healing process, as were seen after Dillinger’s death.

Many people in American history have attempted to elude the authorities by scarring or ruining their fingerprints, but forensics has been able to keep up with those criminals all the while. In fact, as Phillips found out firsthand, just ruining the tips of one’s fingers does not preclude fingerprint identification. The ridges that are found on the tips of one’s fingers are also found on the entire surface of the palm, and they are just as unique to an individual. Furthermore, by introducing scars onto one’s fingers, it makes the identification process even easier, since the scar patterns are unique and less common to the general population.

If one thing can be learned from Dillinger and the other notorious outlaws of the Gangster Era it’s that crime does not pay, and eventually criminals will be brought to justice, and not always the pretty way.

The post John Dillinger- Fingerprint Obliteration appeared first on Crime Museum.