Criminal Investigation & Forensic Evidence Scenarios
Réviser ces flashcardsGratuit · répétition espacée · iPhone, Android, Mac et web
Toutes les cartes
1
Scenario: A burglary scene contains a latent fingerprint on a movable bottle. What does a fingerprint identification establish, and what does it not establish?
It may associate a person with the bottle but does not independently establish when, where, or why the person touched it.
2
Scenario: A suspect confesses during custodial questioning without counsel. What must investigators examine before relying on the confession?
Whether constitutional and statutory custodial investigation safeguards were satisfied, including the right to competent and independent counsel.
3
Scenario: A witness identifies a suspect after seeing the suspect's photograph repeatedly on social media. What reliability concern arises?
Prior exposure may contaminate recognition and create source confusion or familiarity-based misidentification.
4
Scenario: A crime scene investigator finds blood on a suspect's clothing. What examinations may help evaluate its significance?
Appropriate blood identification, DNA analysis, stain-pattern assessment, and investigation of possible transfer mechanisms.
5
Scenario: A DNA profile is consistent with a suspect, but the sample came from a commonly shared object. What alternative explanation must be considered?
The DNA may have been deposited through innocent contact, indirect transfer, or another activity unrelated to the crime.
6
Scenario: Investigators recover a bullet and a firearm. What is the proper role of a forensic firearm comparison?
To examine relevant class and microscopic features and report conclusions within the method's validated capabilities and limitations.
7
Scenario: A firearm comparison examiner reports an inconclusive result. Can investigators describe the firearm as definitively excluded?
No. An inconclusive result is neither a confirmed association nor a definitive exclusion.
8
Scenario: A victim's phone contains messages threatening the victim. What must investigators establish before attributing them to a suspect?
The messages' authenticity, relevant account or device attribution, context, and any corroborating evidence.
9
Scenario: Investigators receive a screenshot of a purported confession. What is a major evidentiary concern?
The screenshot may omit context or be altered, so the original communication and its authenticity should be examined.
10
Scenario: Two witnesses provide matching accounts after discussing the incident together. What potential problem arises?
Their accounts may not be independent because discussion can influence memory and reported details.
11
Scenario: A witness changes a minor detail between interviews. Does this necessarily invalidate the entire account?
No. Investigators should evaluate the importance and explanation of the inconsistency against independent evidence.
12
Scenario: A crime scene search reveals no forced entry. Does that prove the victim voluntarily admitted the offender?
No. Other possibilities include an unlocked entrance, access by key, another entry point, or incomplete evidence.
13
Scenario: An investigator finds a shoe impression consistent with a suspect's footwear model. What can be concluded from class characteristics alone?
The footwear may belong to the same class or model, but class similarity alone does not uniquely identify the shoe.
14
Scenario: A broken glass fragment from a suspect's bag physically fits a fragment at the crime scene. What is the significance?
The fit may strongly support a common original object, while the timing and circumstances of transfer remain separate questions.
15
Scenario: A bloodstain pattern appears inconsistent with a witness's description of the assault. What should investigators do?
Reassess both the witness account and pattern interpretation, consider alternative explanations, and seek additional evidence.
16
Scenario: A suspected arson scene contains an ignitable liquid residue. Does that finding alone prove deliberate fire-setting?
No. Investigators must evaluate possible legitimate sources, fire origin, ignition circumstances, and the complete evidence.
17
Scenario: A body is found in an advanced state of decomposition. Why is an exact time of death difficult to establish?
Environmental conditions, biological variability, and decomposition processes introduce substantial uncertainty.
18
Scenario: A suspected poisoning victim has a positive urine drug screen. What additional steps support reliable interpretation?
Confirm the substance when appropriate, assess timing and clinical or forensic context, and consider specimen and method limitations.
19
Scenario: A deceased person's postmortem blood contains a potentially toxic drug concentration. Can that number alone establish cause of death?
No. Postmortem redistribution, tolerance, interactions, pathology, and circumstances must be evaluated.
20
Scenario: A vehicle collision involves skid marks on wet pavement. Why is a simple speed calculation potentially unreliable?
The calculation depends on accurate measurements and appropriate friction and braking assumptions that may not hold.
21
Scenario: An investigator observes a person carrying a suspicious package. Is suspicion alone sufficient to conduct any desired search?
No. The search must satisfy the applicable constitutional and procedural requirements.
22
Scenario: Officers arrest a suspect without a warrant based solely on an anonymous tip about a crime committed yesterday. What must be evaluated?
Whether a recognized warrantless arrest exception actually applies; an uncorroborated tip alone does not automatically justify arrest.
23
Scenario: A search warrant authorizes a search for specific documents. May investigators treat it as unlimited authority to search for unrelated evidence?
No. They must comply with the warrant's lawful scope and any independently applicable exceptions.
24
Scenario: Officers discover potentially incriminating evidence while lawfully present. What must be considered before invoking the plain-view doctrine?
Whether the officer had lawful access, the discovery satisfied applicable requirements, and the item's incriminating character was immediately apparent.
25
Scenario: A seized drug specimen is presented in court with an unexplained custody gap. What issue arises?
The prosecution may face difficulty establishing the identity and integrity of the specimen as required by applicable law.
26
Scenario: A buy-bust operation results in seized drugs, but required inventory procedures were not followed. What should investigators examine?
The applicable statutory requirements, reasons for noncompliance, and whether integrity and evidentiary value were properly preserved.
27
Scenario: A trafficking victim initially denies exploitation but later discloses abuse. How should investigators interpret the change?
Consider fear, coercion, trauma, safety, and interview conditions rather than automatically treating the later disclosure as false.
28
Scenario: A child witness uses inconsistent terminology for body parts. What is the appropriate interviewing approach?
Use developmentally appropriate, nonleading questions and accurately record the child's own words.
29
Scenario: A kidnapping victim is recovered alive and appears distressed. What should be prioritized before a detailed interview?
Immediate safety, urgent medical needs, and a trauma-informed assessment of readiness to provide information.
30
Scenario: A missing person's belongings are found near a river. Does this establish drowning?
No. Investigators must evaluate alternative explanations and obtain relevant medical, physical, and circumstantial evidence.
31
Scenario: A ransom message appears to originate from a particular phone number. Does the number alone identify the sender?
No. Device access, account control, spoofing, records, and other attribution evidence must be examined.
32
Scenario: A cybercrime investigator finds that a suspect's account logged in from a particular IP address. Does that uniquely identify the user?
No. Shared networks, dynamic addressing, VPNs, compromised accounts, and other factors may complicate attribution.
33
Scenario: A computer file's modification timestamp appears to coincide with a crime. What should investigators verify?
System clock accuracy, timestamp meaning, time zones, software behavior, and possible alteration.
34
Scenario: An investigator copies digital evidence but cannot verify the copy's integrity. What concern arises?
It may be difficult to demonstrate that the examined copy accurately represents the acquired source data.
35
Scenario: A financial investigation identifies several transfers just below a reporting threshold. What is the correct investigative approach?
Assess whether the pattern is suspicious in context and seek lawful corroborating evidence without assuming the transactions are criminal.
36
Scenario: A bank account received proceeds from suspected fraud but belongs to an uninvolved relative. What should investigators avoid?
Assuming account ownership alone proves knowing participation in the underlying offense.
37
Scenario: Investigators identify repeated transactions between businesses associated with suspected organized crime. What is needed before concluding conspiracy?
Evidence supporting an agreement and legally relevant participation, rather than association or transactions alone.
38
Scenario: A surveillance team loses visual contact with a suspect before a crime occurs. Can it claim uninterrupted observation?
No. The gap must be documented, and conclusions must reflect what was actually observed.
39
Scenario: Investigators seek to record a private conversation secretly. What should be checked first?
Whether the recording is lawful under the Constitution, the Anti-Wiretapping Act, and other applicable rules.
40
Scenario: A geographic profile suggests that an offender lives in one neighborhood. What is the correct use of that finding?
Treat it as an investigative hypothesis to test, not as proof that a resident committed the crimes.
41
Scenario: Several offenses share an unusual method. What additional evidence is needed to support crime linkage?
Reliable behavioral comparison and independent forensic, temporal, geographic, or other corroborating evidence.
42
Scenario: A forensic examiner is given only information that strongly implicates one suspect. What bias-control issue arises?
Irrelevant contextual information may influence interpretation; task-relevant information and appropriate safeguards should be used.
43
Scenario: Two laboratory experts disagree about a trace evidence comparison. What is the appropriate investigative response?
Examine their methods, data, uncertainties, and reasoning rather than selecting the conclusion that favors a preferred theory.
44
Scenario: A crime scene photograph was edited to improve contrast. What must be preserved for evidentiary transparency?
The original image and a documented record of the processing applied to the presentation copy.
45
Scenario: Investigators recover two left femurs from a suspected mass grave. What minimum conclusion is supported?
At least two individuals are represented, assuming both are correctly identified as distinct left femurs.
46
Scenario: A deceased person's identity is suggested by clothing and a relative's visual recognition. What further evidence may strengthen identification?
Appropriate primary identifiers such as fingerprints, dental comparison, or DNA, depending on the circumstances.
47
Scenario: An investigator learns of evidence supporting the suspect's innocence shortly before case referral. What should happen?
Preserve, document, and disclose the relevant evidence through proper channels so the case is evaluated fairly.
48
Scenario: A prosecutor identifies a missing element of the alleged offense. What is the investigator's responsibility?
Seek lawful supporting evidence if available and avoid manufacturing facts or overstating the case.
49
Scenario: An investigator cannot explain a material discrepancy between a report and courtroom testimony. What is the proper response?
Acknowledge the discrepancy, explain only what is genuinely known, and avoid speculation or false certainty.
50
Scenario: Physical evidence supports two plausible explanations of an incident. What is the scientifically appropriate conclusion?
Describe both supported possibilities, identify relevant uncertainties, and avoid claiming greater certainty than the evidence permits
Plus de flashcards : Droit et politique
Business Law and Ethics MidtermDroit et politique · AnglaisPeytonRevised Forestry Code of the PhilippinesDroit et politique · AnglaisHenzoPolitical Science: Nationalism and National SymbolsDroit et politique · AnglaisTejuIntellectual Property and MarksDroit et politique · AnglaisGOODOrganized Crime and Criminal Network AnalysisDroit et politique · AnglaisSANGALLARevised Penal Code: Falsification, Perjury, and BriberyDroit et politique · AnglaisSANGALLAPolice Administration and Risk ManagementDroit et politique · AnglaisSANGALLAExam 1 ReviewDroit et politique · Anglaiswowiepowamendments and articlesDroit et politique · AnglaisLizetteAmendments to ConstitutionDroit et politique · Anglaisbtoff49Contrats spéciaux - Arrêts 1Droit et politique · FrançaisLouis-LorenzoJudicial PrecedentDroit et politique · AnglaisKhadija
Tous les decks : Droit et politique
Révise ces decks dans l’app
Gratuit sur iPhone, Android, Mac et le web. Ajoute n’importe quel deck à ton compte en un tap.
