💾 Archived View for spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › law › mar90_1.law captured on 2023-06-16 at 19:00:05.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
March 1990
THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION PROCESS
By
Chief Gordon F. Urlacher
and
Lt. Robert J. Duffy
Rochester, New York, Police Department
The ability to conduct an effective preliminary
investigation is the foundation on which the entire criminal
investigation process is built. Preliminary investigations are
most effective when the officer views the work as a process
rather than as a series of simple mechanical tasks. This
approach also provides a guide for first responding officers to
select appropriate initial investigative procedures. Rarely are
two crimes identical; so, there cannot always be a standardized
set of procedures to follow in each and every case. But, by
remaining creative and flexible, the officer can be responsive to
the various factors which inevitably arise during a criminal
investigation. Therefore, all police administrators and managers
should concern themselves not only with how this process is being
conducted within their respective departments but also what
training and improvements could be used to ensure maximum
results.
The primary training concern for management in this area
should be to prioritize the first responding officer's options,
so that the total time spent on the investigation can be
minimized and the results maximized. The recommended procedures
set forth in this article are based on the Rochester, NY, Police
Department's research into the preliminary investigation process,
with specific emphasis on identifying the investigative
strategies that were most effective in solving crimes. These
procedures do not deal with every conceivable type of
investigation, but they will ensure that investigations will have
an increased chance of reaching their objectives--crime
identification, crime solution and apprehension, and successful
prosecution.
Five hundred cleared burglaries were studied to determine
which factors, such as witness identification of a suspect and/or
vehicle, fingerprint identification, or a random search, led to
the solution of the crime. Through this research, (1) those
investigative strategies, which proved to be most productive,
were identified.
This research also concluded that the success of criminal
investigations can be greatly improved by implementing a new
overall preliminary investigation strategy. Thus, the
preliminary investigation becomes a police department's first
step and can determine the department's overall success rate in
solving crimes.
OBJECTIVES
The preliminary investigation is the police agency's first
response to a report that a crime was committed. As in every
investigative effort, the primary objective is to determine who
committed the crime and to apprehend that person. Therefore, the
first responding officer collects evidence which will help
identify the individual responsible for the crime and which will
lead to the subsequent arrest and conviction of that person.
Unfortunately, this simple, but extremely vital, objective is
often forgotten.
All too often, the first responding officer acts as nothing
more than a mechanical report taker, when, in fact, such reports
are vital to the preliminary investigation. Every police officer
who conducts these investigations should remember that this work,
completed during the early stages, uncovers much of the usable
and pertinent information regarding that particular case.
FRAMEWORK
The framework of the preliminary investigation is based upon
several major areas which the first responding officer must
address. Completing the activities within these areas is the
objective of the preliminary investigation and will help guide
the first responding officer. The first step is to decide if an
offense has actually occurred. The second step is to identify
the victim and the time and place in which the crime took place.
Then, the officer should identify any solvability factors that
could lead to the successful conclusion of the investigation. A
solvability factor is information about a crime which can provide
the basis for determining who committed the crime.
Determining if an Offense Has Occurred
The preliminary investigation begins when the call to
respond has been received. At this time, the officer should
verify that the offense has actually occurred and should become
mentally prepared prior to arriving on the scene. The officer
should also formulate questions to be asked, as well as decide
which response factors are appropriate to the type of crime that
was committed. The responding officer should also keep a
watchful eye for any suspicious activity while en route to the
scene.
It is always good practice for the first responding officer
to make a quick, visual survey of the scene upon arrival. Then,
the officer should determine if there are any injuries and
identify and locate the witnesses in the event that the suspect
has already fled the scene. In addition, the officer must always
take measures to ensure that all remain at the scene until they
can each be interviewed.
Identifying and Assisting the Victim
Another initial task in the preliminary investigation is to
identify the victim. This can be relatively simple since the
victim is usually the complainant and the first person the
officer approaches. In many instances, such as in cases
involving burglary, the victim provides the most useful
information; however, for those victims who have been assaulted
or robbed, the information given may have limited value because
of the effect of traumatization.
To be a victim of crime, no matter how insignificant it may
seem, is often an extremely traumatic experience. Therefore,
sensitivity and nonjudgmental support from the preliminary
investigator will not only help calm the victim but will also
enable the officer to establish rapport and will make the job of
collecting information much easier. Once rapport has been
established, the officer should proceed with a specific line of
questioning that will help obtain the information needed to solve
the crime.
The first responding officer should also document the crime
by asking the following questions:
* Was the lapse of time between the crime's occurrence and the
notification of police normal?
* Are there discrepancies in the statements of either the
victims or witnesses?
* Does the physical evidence support the facts of the crime
related by the victim?
Identifying Solvability Factors
Not all crimes can be solved, no matter how much
investigative effort is put forth. In fact, with more and more
crimes being committed each day, many police agencies find it
difficult to provide even minimal investigative assistance to low
priority crimes. Therefore, it makes sense to allocate resources
only to those crimes which have a chance for solution. This is
why solvability factors are so important. They provide a valid
guide to the allocation of scarce resources.
Through data collected by the Rochester Police Department,
it was determined that at least one of the following 12
solvability factors must be present in order for the case to be
solved. If at least one of these factors was not present, the
crime was not solved. The 12 solvability factors, defined by the
Rochester Police Department, include:
* Witnesses to the crime
* Knowledge of the suspect's name
* Knowledge of where the suspect can be located
* Description of suspect
* Identification of suspect
* Property with traceable, identifiable characteristics, marks
or numbers
* Existence of a significant method of operation
* Presence of significant physical evidence
* Description of the suspect's vehicle
* Positive results from a crime scene evidence search
* Belief that crime may be solved with publicity and/or
reasonable additional investigative effort
* Possibility and/or opportunity for anyone, other than the
suspect, to have committed the crime
The job of the preliminary investigating officer is to
scrutinize each one of these factors to determine which, if any,
exist. And, in order to ensure that the officer had expended
adequate effort in every possible area, it should only be
necessary to look at the solvability factors identified. Since
crimes have little chance of being solved unless these factors
have been identified, it becomes clear just how important the
duties of the preliminary investigating officer really are. The
success of the follow-up investigation, if one is necessary,
depends heavily on how the preliminary investigation was
conducted and on the information uncovered during the initial
phase.
Communicating the Circumstances of the Crime
If the case is not closed immediately by an arrest, the work
of the preliminary investigating officer concludes when a
decision is made to continue or halt the investigation. At this
stage, the officer must ensure that the information obtained is
as complete as time and circumstances will permit, and that it is
properly documented, because further efforts by the police
department or agency will depend upon it.
At the end of the preliminary investigation, a decision
should be made as to whether there are sufficient leads to solve
the crime. The implications of this are obvious. If the
preliminary investigation has been thorough, then the
recommendation to continue investigative efforts will be based on
valid data, and the collection of material for later court
presentation will begin. But, if an improper preliminary
investigation has been conducted, a faulty decision could be
made, or later court action could be unsuccessful.
Identifying Complete and Incomplete Investigative Tasks
However, before the recommendation to continue or terminate
the investigation is made, it is imperative that the maximum
possible effort has been made to identify all of the solvability
factors. The officer should feel confident that all potential
witnesses have been sought, a thorough crime scene search has
been conducted, and every reasonable investigative effort has
been made. At this point, a recommendation for further
investigative effort can be made, provided that the officer
believes that a follow-up investigator will not duplicate prior
efforts.
IMPROVING PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS
One tactic that can be used to improve the quality of the
preliminary investigation process is to place greater emphasis on
collecting evidence. Physical evidence is valuable in
corroborating identifications made through other means. However,
few agencies have the resources to send trained evidence
technicians to all crime scenes, and few have developed policies
defining when technicians should or should not be sent. As a
result, technicians are over-used, the quality of their work
declines, and more evidence is collected than necessary.
Therefore, each police agency should develop guidelines for
the use of evidence technicians in routine cases, such as
robberies and burglaries without serious injuries or extremely
high losses. The criteria should also take into account that
when a crime scene is processed, physical evidence will be more
useful if and when the suspect is later identified. Therefore,
evidence technicians should be used when:
* A suspect is arrested at or near the scene and physical
evidence from the crime scene will be useful in the
prosecution
* A suspect has been identified but not arrested, and
physical evidence can be used to corroborate the
identification
* There are sufficient leads to make it possible that the
suspect will be identified, and physical evidence should be
collected to corroborate any future identification
* There are peculiar circumstances to the crime, indicating
that it may be part of a pattern. And, physical evidence
may be useful in corroborating the identification of a
suspect traced through investigation of other crimes in
the series.
Devoting more effort to canvassing neighborhoods for
witnesses can also enhance the preliminary investigation
process. Witnesses are extremely important in identifying
suspects and leading to arrests and convictions; yet, patrol
officers often fail to canvass neighborhoods near crime scenes in
order to locate those witnesses who were not at the crime scene
when the officer arrived. Relying solely on victims and
witnesses immediately available at the crime scene obstructs the
effectiveness of further investigative efforts.
In addition, one infrequently used source in preliminary
investigations are department records. In some cases, officers
may believe they are ``tied'' to their vehicles and that records
are difficult and time consuming to locate. To increase the
accessibility to these records, police managers should design and
implement record systems which can be accessed through enhanced
radio and telephone communications.
Instructing patrol officers how to make greater use of
informants can also have tremendous benefits. Informants are
particularly useful in identifying suspects; however, patrol
officers rarely use them, perhaps because they lack the skills to
cultivate and maintain informants. Store owners, businessmen,
delivery people, as well as ordinary citizens, make outstanding
sources of information, but are often overlooked. More often
than not, the officer patrols in a reactive manner, making little
effort to leave the car to get to know the people within a patrol
district. By implementing the ``directed foot patrol'' concept,
whereby officers must patrol on foot within a designated area of
their beat, officers can get to know the local citizenry and
develop useful informants.
CONCLUSION
In summarizing ways to improve the preliminary investigation
process within a department, it is absolutely necessary that
management instill among patrol officers, through training and
supervision, the concept that the preliminary investigation
process is so much more than merely writing a mechanized report.
The preliminary investigation should be conducted methodically
and should be a source of pride for police officers.
Each officer should realize that the manner in which the
preliminary investigation is conducted reflects on the overall
performance as a police officer, and also serves as a showcase
of personal investigative skills. Helping to implement positive
attitudes and behaviors such as these can only enhance the
overall outcome of the preliminary investigation process and the
success of the entire law enforcement organization.
FOOTNOTE
(1) Peter B. Bloch and James Bell, Managing Investigations:
The Rochester System, (Police Foundation).