The main question that appears from the crime scene is how can this one suspect place the body in the trunk of the car by himself and is it even possible for the suspect to be able to lift and carry the suspect to the trunk of the car. The victim was a larger man approximately 250 pounds. The medical examination states that the suspect could of had help or may not of had help placing the victim in the trunk of the car. There were minor abrasion and scrapes found on the body possibly from dragging the body down the stairs. This was unconfirmed and the medical examiner said it was possible that he placed the victims body in the trunk by himself. There was no physical evidence proving that there was another suspect tied to the case. No other fingerprints …show more content…
The blood seen on the outside of the victims vehicle lead police to the scene. This evidence sparked the case and was the first lead which began the investigation process. This evidence lead investigators to search and examine the car which no other evidence was found. The blood found on the back of the car was photographed then tested and was determined to be the victims blood who was found in the back of the car. The second piece of evidence that I will review was the 911 call by a witness that seen two males outside of the car of the victim and then the witness heard two gun shoots coming from his neighbors apartment. This phone call was the breakthrough of the case and lead detectives to the suspect who was the murder. The phone call lead to a search warrant which allowed the detectives and investigators to the suspect apartment where the murder happened. This is where the Fourth Amendment issues can exists. “There is an important constitutionally based body of law surrounding searches and seizures of places and persons; investigators and police officers must know it well. It is rooted in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution” (Gaensslen & Larsen, 2013, Sec. 2.1, Para. 7). The search warrant was signed off is the reason why investigators were allowed to proceed into the apartment. I see no faulty …show more content…
It is a visual representation of the crime scene and can help play out the murder and how it happened. Reconstructing the crime scene with the delta sphere 3D scanner places the vicim sitting on the couch like the suspect confessed then the suspect fires the gun wrapped in the T-shirt at the victim hitting him in the mouth dropping the vicim on the futon then another bullet is fired to the back of the suspects head. This 3D imaging can help show district attorneys the actuality of the crime scene in a descriptive and visual way giving them a clear picture of what happened during the murder. The 3D scanner images also show evidence found and seen at the crime scene. For example the blood spots found not he floor where the victims body appears to be placed before the victim is dragged down the stairs and placed in the back of the victims
We were presented with many facts that all pointed to Mr. Washburn as the murder. In the house all of the entrances were thoroughly inspected by authorities, and they found no sign of ransacking. “[They] examined all the locking mechanisms, all the doors and windows. In [their] opinion there was no evidence of any forced entry” (P.81). When police looked for fingerprints, “They were all of the Washburn family and the maid” (P.81). There was no trace of an outside party; somebody usually in the Washburn house committed the murder. While in the living room, an officer found a drop of blood. The evidence technician was called the next night to run some tests. “He sprayed the living room carpet with luminol. It is a luminous spray, and when it comes in contact with blood it illuminates” (P.82). To both men’s surprise the whole living room was illuminating. After spraying further the men found a trail from the living room through the kitchen to the garage. In the closet the men found a wet mop, which was tested for blood and also came back positive. Somebody tried to clean his or her bloody mess, and try to save himself. The physical evidence proves the killer was somebody who was familiar to the Washburn household.
On the evening of Ms. Heggar¡¦s death she was alone in her house. Eddie Ray Branch, her grandson, testified that he visited his grandmother on the day that she was killed. He was there till at least 6:30 p.m. Lester Busby, her grandnephew, and David Hicks arrived while her grandson was still there and they saw him leave. They then went in to visit with Ms. Heggar. While they were there, Lester repaid Ms. Heggar 80 dollars, which he owed her. They left around 7:15 p.m. and went next door to a neighboring friend¡¦s house. David Hick¡¦s went home alone from there to get something but returned within ten minutes of leaving. Because he was only gone for 5-10 minutes, prosecution theorized TWO attacks on Ms. Heggar because he could not have killed his grandmother during this 5-10 minute period alone. At 7:30 p.m., 15 minutes after the two had left, an insurance salesman called to see Ms. Heggar. He knocked for about 2 or 3 minutes and got no reply. Her door was open but the screen door was closed. Her TV was on. He claimed to have left after about 5 minutes and then he returned the next morning. The circumstances were exactly the same. With concern, he went to the neighbor¡¦s house and called the police. His reasoning for being there was because the grandmother¡¦s family had taken out burial insurance three days before she had died.
Harris is an important case for the law enforcement community. The case made it clear that the extensive demonstrations of reliability established by the Florida Supreme Court are not necessary. I am in favor of the US Supreme Court decisions because there was enough probable cause to make search of the vehicle. K-9 dogs are well trained with unique techniques to detect the presence of narcotics such as heroin, cocaine, marijuana, methamphetamine, and even though a k9 dog can also have false detections, as we as humans do as well, they can be very reliable. When and if an individual is stopped by a police officer and is acting suspicious, nervous, anxious, as if he was hiding something that 's more than enough probable cause to make a search. Police officers as well as the k-9 dogs are well trained, and they know when someone looks suspicious. Aldo, the k-9 dog, only proved Wheatley 's suspicion correct that Harris was nervous/anxious because he had those chemicals in the car. Simply the alert itself does not 100 percent constitute probable cause but it does not mean that the dog’s alert is not a critical piece of evidence which combined with the other evidence such as the officer 's suspicion, Harris’s nervous/anxious look, the can of alcohol in the car constitutes enough probable cause for the search. Aldo was deployed upon a suspicion based on all this other
However, police should have acknowledged that individuals can make mistakenly identify the wrong person, especially an individual who had just tragically witnessed his wife’s death, and that the positive identification can not be the only evidence used to confirm the identity of a suspect. In addition, a search was never conducted on Butler’s home to see if any evidence was there. Unless my memory fails me, police officers also did not perform a gun residue test on Butler to see if he had recently fired a gun. Regardless, police did not find any physical evidence, such as blood, on Butler’s clothes or body. In fact, there was no forensic investigation of evidence conducted at all. Mary Ann Stephen’s purse was later discovered in a trash can, but it wasn’t until after the acquittal of Brenton Butler that a fingerprint belonging to the real killer was found on her purse. Overall, the ethical issues involved in the Brenton Butler case are astounding. The best solution to resolve those issues is to thoroughly perform job duties with integrity. Investigators had to know that more evidence than just a positive identification made by one, rightly upset individual was not substantial enough to confirm the identity of the
The suspect had a chip tooth and Antonio had A gap that was really the only reason he got convicted. There three other suspects didn’t even get close to how Antonio Beaver had allot of similarity’s like the victim that did that crime. The best way to know if the suspect did the crime is doing allot of deep research instead of just going off a shecht artist.
On October 20, 2014 a young male teen was fatally shot in Chicago, Illinois. The shooting occurred in the middle of the road and the suspect that was fatally shot was named Laquan McDonald. McDonald was just 17 years old and was the suspect after initial reports placed him in the scene of a possible car jacking. It was reported that Laquan McDonald had a knife and was also seen slashing tires of a police cruiser. When police had finally had him surrounded in the middle of the road, one officer opened fire and released 16 shots into his body. Another deputy on hand said the use of force was not needed because Laquan was not in any way trying to attack the officers present. The officer who fired the 16 shots into Laquan is named Jason D. Van
Even though the prosecution presented evidence to the court, the only clear-cut hard fact the prosecution had against Anthony was that she failed to file a report for her missing daughter Caylee and that when she finally did a month after her daughter had gone missing, she proceeded to lie profusely to the authorities on the events that took place. The prosecution focused highly on the forensic evidence of decay located in the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car. The use of a cadaver dog to search the vehicle led investigators to be able to determine that a decomposing body had been stored in the trunk of the car. The forensics department used an air sampling procedure on the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car, also indicating that human decomposition and traces of chloroform were in-fact present. Multiple witnesses described what they considered to be an overwhelming odor that came from inside the trunk as it where the prosecution believes Caylee’s decomposing body was stowed. Several items of evidence were ruled out to be the source of the odor, as experts were able to rule out the garbage bag and two chlorine containers located in the trunk as the source. The prosecution alleged that Casey Anthony used chloroform to subdue her daughter and then used duct-tape to seal the nose and mouth of Caylee shut, inevitably causing her to suffocate. Based off the
Two detectives were assigned to the case: Harry Hanson and Finis Brown. [2] When they and the police arrived at the crime scene, it was already swarming with people, gawkers and reporters. The entire situation was out of hand and crowded, everyone trampling all over any hopes for good evidence. [2] One thing they did report finding was a nearby cement block with watery blood on it, tire tracks and a heel print on the ground. There was dew under the body so they knew it had been set there just after 2 a.m. when temperatures dropped to 38 degrees.
The officers tampered with evidence and made a false discovery that he was the person and that is how he was convicted (Innocent Project N.D.). Many forensic methods have been implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or nothing to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011).
On Thanksgiving evening, November 27, 1992, Sergeant Kenneth Mathison and his wife Yvonne drive their 1988 tan Ford van along Route 131 in Hilo, Hawaii. The rain is pouring down and before he knows it, Kenneth Mathison is awaiting police assistance as he cradles his wife’s dead body in the back of their van. Mathison, a sergeant of 25 years with the Hilo Police Department was allegedly informing his wife, a maternity nursing professional at the Hilo Medical Center, that he was being investigated in his second paternity suit. According to Mathison, when Yvonne heard the news, she jumped from the passenger side of the van. While he was looking for her in the blinding rain, Mathison purportedly ran over his wife. He then carried the body into the van and secured it with yellow rope in the back before attempting to find help. Will the forensic evidence support Mathison’s account of that fateful evening?
...hould have gone to prison for the evidence that they found. And this should stand as a reminder for future police officers that they need to follow all the rules set forth by the 4th amendment and stop this from happening again. Just to save some paperwork the police officers cost them to lose this case and someone who should be in prison is free to do this again.
This arises several questions. First where was the bloody rag found? Second, did the police have probable cause that Meyers was under suspicion of murder? Or was it simply a case of reasonable suspicion? In my opinion the results of the tests performed on the bloody rag found in Meyers case should not be admissible since Myers was not under suspicion of murder, and the bloody rag was not included in the lawful search warrant.
Logically would a police officer have shot to kill simply to commit murder in broad daylight with witnesses? Without all of these questions being answered with facts and being quick to judge is not only ridiculous, but it leads to more issues such as rioting and looting. It will also lead to more shootings. More innocent people will continue to be hurt. Either physically or by the loss of their business and cars, etc.
When the first responder got to the scene he adimatately meet the 911 caller, who lead him to a car in an apartment parking lot. The car doors were closed and all of the windows were fogged. The police officer used his flashlight to see inside of the car before opening the door. He found a young African American woman who had been shot several times. The officers quickly called for backup, investigators and medical personnel. While awaiting for their arrival he secured the crime scene with caution tape, creating an initial perimeter setup as discussed in lecture two. Once everyone arrived he left it to them to search the car while he talked to the 911 caller, witnesses and others who had information on who had been present in the car. The investigators were able to collect physical evidence of bullets and cartage casings that were found outside the vehicle and inside the vehicle on the floorboard of the driver’s side. The team determined the bullets came from a 40 caliber. Other types of physical evidence that were found on the scene were the bloody clothing on the victim, the victim’s cell phone and fibers in the car from the driver’s side. personnel at the scene crime took several photographs, powered test for finger prints and did a blood spatter analysis. Stewart’s autopsy revealed that she had been shot at close range in the left hand once and in the
...lice or lawyers used their integrity. The police skirted around the law and use evidence that the witnesses said was not correct. They had a description of the suspect that did not match Bloodsworth but, they went after him as well. They also used eyewitness testimony that could have been contaminated.