research about crime scenes

Articles on Crime Scene Investigation

Displaying all articles.

Forensics are different when someone dies in a body of water. First, you need to locate them

Paola A. Magni , Murdoch University ; Edda Guareschi , Murdoch University , and Rossella Paba , James Cook University

Crime won’t stop because of COVID. So how should we protect crime scene investigators?

Paola A. Magni , Murdoch University

How do police forensic scientists investigate a case? A clandestine gravesite recovery expert explains

Brendan Chapman , Murdoch University

Forensic breakthrough helps explain how innocent people’s clothing fibres could end up at crime scenes

Kelly Sheridan , Northumbria University, Newcastle and Matteo Gallidabino , Northumbria University, Newcastle

CSI: current research into the impact of bias on crime scene forensics is limited – but psychologists can help

Lee John Curley , The Open University and James Munro , Edinburgh Napier University

Seeing the unseeable: how viewing crime scene photos can be beneficial

Kate Rossmanith , Macquarie University ; Hugh Dillon , UNSW Sydney , and Jane Mowll , UNSW Sydney

Fingerprinting to solve crimes: not as robust as you think

Jamie Walvisch , Monash University

For sniffing out crime and missing persons, science backs blood-detection dogs

LaTara Rust , University of Technology Sydney and Shari Forbes , University of Technology Sydney

Why CSI: Space will be a far greater challenge than forensic science on Earth

Mehzeb Chowdhury , Durham University

This new fingerprint technique could revolutionise the way we solve gun crime

John W Bond , University of Leicester

Related Topics

• Crime scene
• Fingerprints
• Forensic analysis
• Forensic evidence
• Forensic pathology
• Forensic science
• Jury decision making

Top contributors

Associate Professor of Forensic Science, Murdoch University

Senior Lecturer, The University of Melbourne

Assistant Professor, Northumbria University, Newcastle

Lecturer in Social Work, UNSW Sydney

Associate Professor in Media and Cultural Studies, Macquarie University

Professor, Centre for Forensic Science, University of Technology Sydney

Adjunct Professor of Law, UNSW Sydney

PhD candidate, University of Technology Sydney

Senior Lecturer in Forensic Science, Murdoch University

Assistant Professor in Forensic Chemistry, King's College London

Lecturer in Psychology, Glasgow Caledonian University

Adjunct Lecturer in Forensic Sciences, Murdoch University

Associate Professor in Forensic Science, Northumbria University, Newcastle

Psychology Researcher, Edinburgh Napier University

Senior Lecturer in Criminology, University of Leicester

• X (Twitter)
• Unfollow topic Follow topic

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

https://www.nist.gov/forensic-science/nist-forensics-science-crime-scene

Forensic Science

Nist forensics science -- crime scene.

Crime scene investigation includes everything that happens to document, locate, preserve and collect bits of evidence, whether charred by fire or hidden from sight. NIST scientists are developing tools, techniques and standards to help forensic investigators study arson cases, compare bullets and casings, and assess many other items that may be found at a crime scene.

Research Projects

• Read about an industry collaboration that could lead to improved 3D scanning of crime scenes.
• Experts from NIST and the University of Delaware found a lack of consistency in commercially available rulers often used as reference scales in forensic photography. Read their study . (link opens a pdf)
• NIST studies building disasters and failures including fires that result in a significant number of deaths. See our Fire Forensics website for study reports.
• Preserving biological evidence: NIST and the National Institute of Justice convened a technical working group to recommend best practices for evidence handlers. Their report is available online .

NIST Publications

• Fire Disaster and Failure studies
• Dimensional Review of Scales for Forensic Photography (opens a pdf)
• The Biological Evidence Preservation Handbook: Best Practices for Evidence Handlers
• Latent Print Examination and Human Factors: Improving the Practice through a Systems Approach

Data and Standards

• Find NIST Standard Reference Materials for crime scene investigations on the Standard Reference Materials website .
• Find NIST Standard Reference Materials for fire research on the Standard Reference Materials website .
• Fire on the Web is a collection of resources from the Fire Research Division at NIST. Included are fire related software packages, experimental fire data and mpeg/quick time movies of fire tests.
• NIST Special Database 4: 8-Bit Gray Scale Images of Fingerprint Image Groups
• NIST Special Database 24: Digital Video of Live-Scan Fingerprint Data
• NIST Special Database 30: Dual Resolution Images from Paired Fingerprint Cards
• NIST Special Database 27: Fingerprint Minutiae from Latent and Matching Tenprint Images
• NIST Special Database 9: Mated Fingerprint Card Pairs (Volumes 1-5)
• NIST Special Database 10: Supplemental Fingerprint Card Data for NIST Special Database 9
• NIST Special Database 14: Mated Fingerprint Card Pairs 2
• NIST Special Database 28: National Software Reference Library
• NIST Special Database 29: Plain and Rolled Images from Paired Fingerprint Cards
• Consolidated Model of Fire and Smoke Transport
• Fire Dynamics Simulator and Smokeview
• The National Institute of Justice has funded the development of free or low cost software tools, apps and databases to assist with investigations or research. Find them on the NIJ website .

Scientific Staff Members

• Susan Ballou
• Christopher Blackburn

Libraries | Research Guides

Crime scene investigation, journals and databases.

• Crime, Law, and Social Change Crime, Law and Social Change publishes peer reviewed, original research articles addressing crime and the political economy of crime, whether at the global, national, regional or local levels, anywhere in the world. The Journal often presents work on financial crime, corruption, organized criminal groups, criminal enterprises and illegal markets, state crime, terrorism and security issues, cybercrime, cross-border crime and environmental crime.
• Crime Science Can systematic reviews and meta-analyses advance our knowledge and synthesis of crime in a broad sense, rather than just assessing the effectiveness of various interventions? This collection includes actual reviews and meta-analyses to this end; comments and thoughts on this question; and empirical manuscripts relevant to the use of systematic reviews as a means to improve knowledge of the environmental aspects of crime as well as its patterns, organization and explanations.
• Forensic Science International Forensic Science International publishes original contributions in the many different scientific disciplines pertaining to the forensic sciences. Fields include forensic pathology and histochemistry, chemistry, biochemistry and toxicology, biology, serology, odontology, psychiatry, anthropology, the physical sciences, firearms, the physical sciences, and document examination.
• NCJRS Abstracts This link opens in a new window Over 150,000 summaries of books & reports, journal articles, program descriptions, and evaluations maintained by the National Institute of Justice's National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Includes U.S. material and selected international publications, in English. Topics include corrections, courts, drugs and crime, law enforcement, juvenile justice, crime statistics, and victims of crime. On October 1, 2014, the NCJRS Virtual Library began to focus primarily on the collection of informational materials and resources produced, funded, and/or sponsored by the bureaus and offices of the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs (OJP).
• Oxford Bibliographies: Criminology This link opens in a new window Oxford Bibliographies in Criminology offers peer-reviewed annotated bibliographies on the study of crime as a social phenomenon. Bibliographies are browseable by subject area and keyword searchable.
• SAGE Knowledge This link opens in a new window An online collection of subject encyclopedias and handbooks covering a wide-variety of subjects in the social sciences. Particularly strong for handbook coverage.

Your Librarian

• Last Updated: Aug 8, 2024 9:17 AM
• URL: https://libguides.northwestern.edu/csi

CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATION

• November 2021
• International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) 10(11):642-648
• 10(11):642-648

• State Forensic Science Laboratory

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Dhuha Salim Namaa

• Halah Khalid Ibrahim Al-Sammarraie
• Haider K. AL-Rubai
• Rabi'atul'Adawiyah Azmil

• Tanmoy Kumar Mukherjee
• Annwesha Mazumdar
• Sabyasachi Khan
• S. Al-Thawadi
• Nataliia Akhtyrska
• Olena Kostiuchenko
• Yurii Sereda
• Ivan Miroshnykov

• Ross M. Gardner
• Richard Saferstein
• Max M Houck
• Forensic Science
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Forensic Sci Int Synerg

The added value of behavioural information in crime scene investigations

Rosanne h.d. de roo.

a Netherlands Forensic Institute, The Hague, the Netherlands

b Forensic Science Department, Amsterdam, University of Applied Sciences, Tafelbergweg 51, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Madeleine de Gruijter

Christianne j. de poot, josita c.m. limborgh, paul van den hoven.

Forensic and behavioural science are often seen as two different disciplines. However, there is a growing realization that the two disciplines should be more strongly integrated. Incorporating psychological theories on human behaviour in forensic science could help solving investigative problems, especially at the crime scene. At the crime scene it is not just about applying scientific methods to analyse traces; these traces must first be perceived and categorized as relevant. At the crime scene, the behavioural perspective of an investigative psychologist could play an important role. In this study, we examine to what extent (1) investigative psychologists detect deviant behavioural cues compared to forensic examiners when investigating a crime scene, (2) forensic examiners can find the relevant traces that can be associated with this behaviour and (3) the availability of a psychological report highlighting these behavioural cues helps forensic examiners in finding more relevant traces. To this end, a total of 14 investigative psychologists and 40 forensic examiners investigated a virtual 3D mock crime scene. The results of this study show that investigative psychologists see significantly more deviant behavioural cues than forensic examiners, and that forensic examiners who receive a psychological report on these cues recognize and collect significantly more traces that can be linked to deviant behaviour and have a high evidential value than examiners who did not receive this information. However, the study also demonstrates that behavioural information is likely to be ignored when it contradicts existing beliefs.

1. Introduction

Crime scene investigators are responsible for recognizing potential evidence at the crime scene and for selecting and collecting pieces of evidence for the purpose of documentation and further analysis. Differentiating between relevant and irrelevant traces is a complex, cognitive process, and is crucial to the success of criminal investigations. Understanding behaviors of offenders, victims and other people involved guides the search for and interpretation of traces. Therefore, knowledge from behavioural sciences should be integrated into crime scene investigation (CSI) to improve the quality of the investigation. In some districts in the Netherlands investigative psychologists advise crime scene examiners during investigations at crime scenes, yet, the presumed added value has never been investigated. In the present paper we studied the influence of introducing an investigative psychologist into the CSI.

1.1. Crime scene investigations

During the investigation of a crime scene, information is obtained about the actions that have taken place at a scene [ [1] , [2] , [3] ]. The main goal of crime scene examiners, those responsible for the CSI, is to collect evidence that can be used during the investigation – for instance, to reconstruct what may have happened or to identify a suspect – and can further be used as evidence in court [ 2 ]. Generally, a CSI consists of several steps: recognition, documentation, collection and preservation of evidence 1 . For the latter three steps strict standards and protocols [ 4 , 5 ] are set and constantly improved [ 6 , 7 ] to ensure that evidence will be accepted when presented in the courtroom [ 3 , 4 , 6 , [8] , [9] , [10] , [11] ]. However, before these standardized steps can take place, forensic examiners first have to perceive the traces or trace items and determine their relevance. This process is less standardized, and during this phase of the CSI forensic examiners apply a more dynamic approach to develop hypotheses of what may have happened at the crime scene and to recognize potential evidence [ 12 ]. It should be emphasized that the recognition and selection of evidence is highly complex and is primarily a cognitive process. The study of Earwaker et al. (2020) emphasizes that a more structured and evidence-based process is needed for the creation and examination of hypotheses at the crime scene [ 13 ], especially since decisions made at the crime scene play a key role throughout the further forensic reconstruction and legal processes [ 7 , 13 , 14 ]. When evidence is not recognized, it will not be secured and examined, and thus be lost forever [ 2 , 3 , 12 ]. Therefore, recognizing potentially relevant traces or trace items is of the uttermost importance, and, unlike the technical steps that follow, this process is difficult to capture in rules and guidelines and is under-studied [ 12 , 13 ].

1.2. Human factors during CSI

As with all human decision making, the process of recognizing and interpreting (latent) traces is susceptible to errors in reasoning [ 15 , 16 ]. The selection and interpretation of traces at the crime scene involves differentiating between crime-related and unrelated traces and weighing their potential quality 2 , which is especially complex, as crime scenes are often ambiguous and observations at a crime scene may usually be attributed to multiple explanations [ 17 , 18 ]. For example, a bloodstain on a sink could be crime-related but could also be the result of a small shaving accident unrelated to the crime. Crime scene examiners should consider these different explanations to create multiple scenarios that guide the search for and selection of relevant traces. Prior information that crime scene examiners receive before they enter a crime scene and expectations they hold based on earlier experience may influence their interpretation of traces [ 19 , 20 ]. When prior information or expectations are correct, this will help the crime scene examiners, but when they are incorrect, this could lead to wrongful interpretations and conclusions. The more ambiguous the crime scene, the greater the chance expectancy effects will affect the results [ 19 , 21 ].

Crime scene examiners must determine whether a crime was committed at all, considering not all scenes are crime scenes. They have to formulate hypotheses based on the available information and their observations to create plausible scenarios that suit the observed traces [ 17 ]. Traces that are left behind after a crime can provide information on an activity that took place and may point in the direction of a perpetrator, while unrelated traces can create bias and point crime scene examiners in the wrong direction. Based on their hypothesized scenarios, crime scene examiners will value the traces they perceive and select the evidence that is submitted for further examination [ 1 , 2 , 7 , 12 , 17 , 22 ].

Santtila et al. (2004) and Lee (2001) state that the skill of recognizing crucial evidence is acquired through experience and training [ 3 , 23 ]. However, substantiation for this statement is lacking support and literature is contradictive [ 16 ]. Compared to novice forensic examiners, experienced crime scene examiners can perform their CSI more efficiently as they are able to rely on schemas based on trace patterns often found during crime scene investigations [ 12 , 23 , 24 ]. An example of this is creating schemas based on observations of behavioural patterns of burglars that can be derived from traces left behind at burglary crime scenes. It is important to note, however, that the same schemas can degrade the evaluative performance of the CSI as they can restrict an expert’s imagination and flexibility, causing the experts to ignore, or even miss, important information if it does not match their expectations. This expectancy bias can cause tunnel vision 3 and makes experts less open-minded towards alternative, less likely scenarios [ 16 , 25 ]. In addition, research has shown that there are large differences among crime scene examiners when it comes to their selection of traces, and that important traces can be easily missed [ 22 ].

1.3. Knowledge from behavioural sciences in CSI

Clearly, recognition and selection of relevant traces is extremely difficult. Therefore, knowledge from different disciplines could help to enhance the quality of the crime scene investigation [ 2 , 26 ]. In particular, as crime scenes are the result of criminal behaviour, knowledge from behavioural sciences such as investigative psychology and criminology might help in interpreting the crime scene and its traces and building possible scenarios at the scene. It might also supplement our understanding of the crime scene investigators’ decision making [ 2 , 27 , 28 ]. Criminology focuses, among other things, on behaviour in general and in particular on working methods and activities of perpetrators [ 29 ]. Investigative psychology aims to gain insight into both perpetrator behaviour as well as the perception, choice behaviour and decision-making behaviour of professionals in the criminal justice system. They aid in suspect prioritization, geographical profiling, linking crimes and crime scenes, the interviewing process and risk assessment of offenders [ 30 ]. They develop awareness of biases and pitfalls arising from these human factors in criminal investigations, including forensic investigations [ 15 , 16 , 31 ]. Forensic science and behavioural science are often seen as two different disciplines. However, a new mindset is emerging with the proposition that the two disciplines ought to be bridged. Rossy et al.’s (2018) handbook proposes that the next step in the development of this new mindset would be the crossover of the two disciplines achieved through learning from each other’s expertise and exploring new opportunities for improving evidence recognition at a crime scene [ 2 ]. This principle is emphasized in the influential paper ‘the Sydney declaration’ by Roux et al. (2022) stating that interdisciplinary interactions between forensic practice and (among others) scientific disciplines such as criminology can improve knowledge of deviant and criminal behaviour, allowing for a better understanding of traces [ 7 ].

Nowadays, crime scene examiners try to understand the environment of a crime scene by ‘thinking as an offender’ [ 14 ]. However, to do so, they rely on their own experience, as criminology and the psychology of criminal behaviour are barely included in their training programs [ 2 , 28 ]. Stark (1987), Rossy et al. (2018) and Roux et al. (2022) state that criminologists understand the ecology of a crime and thus have a substantial ability to decipher peculiarities of a scene which they could use as a guide in search for traces [ 2 , 7 , 32 ]. It is hypothesized that incorporating psychological knowledge of human behaviour into the investigative stage of a crime scene could lead to the consideration of more relevant hypotheses and therefore could also improve the recognition of evidence, which would ultimately improve the investigation process.

Incorporating psychological theories on behaviour in forensic investigations is emerging in several countries around the world [ 2 , 33 ]. As a result, direct involvement of psychologists at crime scenes is also emerging [ 2 , 30 ]. In the Netherlands, nowadays, most investigative psychologists provide recommendations on interrogations or other investigative strategies and assist in offender profiling [ 33 , 34 ]. Interestingly, in some districts in the Netherlands, investigative psychologists may also advise crime scene examiners during investigations at crime scenes by pointing out peculiarities at the scene. Investigative psychologists base their observations and interpretations of a crime scene on a behavioural perspective. Some claim to recognize deviant (behavioural) 4 cues, which might be missed by forensic experts [ 33 , 35 ]. As mentioned efficacious in the paper of Alison et al. (2011) the developing field of behavioural investigative advice is broadening to provide investigative recommendations, which have to be based on replicable, transparent, and valid knowledge and research [ 30 , 33 ]. However, empirical studies have yet to assess the effects of this psychological perspective.

Although knowledge from behavioural sciences is likely to help broadening the view at the crime scene, incorporating investigative psychologists also entails risk. The biggest risk is causing bias. It is known that additional information is prone to cause bias in decision making, and therefore any additional information must be well managed to minimize the risk of cognitive bias [ 13 , 16 , 19 , 20 ]. As suggested by Dror et al. (2021), van den Eeden (2018) and de Gruijter et al. (2017) the moment and order in which information is added to an investigation is important [ 20 , 36 , 37 ]. This also applies to information provided by an investigative psychologist. If behavioural knowledge would contribute to improving the quality of the CSI, it is essential to consider how and when this information should be added. To the best of our knowledge, it has not yet been investigated whether the investigative psychologist’s advice has an influence on the recognition and selection of evidence by a crime scene examiner.

1.4. The present study

The aim of this study is to investigate whether crime scene examiners would detect deviant (behavioural) cues in a case concerning a deceased person at-home based on their experience, or whether they would possibly detect these cues only after receiving the report of an investigative psychologist. Therefore, the primary research question of this paper is: “Does the report of an investigative psychologist influence the decisions of a crime scene examiner during the investigation of a deceased person in a home?”. We examine to what extent (1) investigative psychologists detect deviant behavioural 4 cues compared to forensic examiners when investigating a crime scene, (2) forensic examiners are able to find the relevant traces that can be associated with these deviant behavioural cues and (3) the availability of a psychological report drawing attention to these behavioural aspects helps forensic examiners in finding more relevant traces.

We expect that the process of forming hypotheses, and searching for and securing traces can be improved with knowledge from different disciplines, such as forensic science and behavioural sciences. Furthermore, this study will provide insight into CSI decision-making in general. Together, this knowledge is critical in improving CSI.

2.1. Mock crime scene

This study uses a virtual 3D mock crime scene staged in a ‘real’ house and had a similar study setup as the study of de Gruijter et al. (2017) [ 17 ]. The mock crime scene was ambiguous and was designed specifically for this study. Noticing the presence of specific cues would lead the participants toward the ground truth: domestic homicide. Other aspects could lead them towards a second possible alternative interpretation of the scene: suicide. The crime scene concerned the victim's home, so participants could get an idea of the victim’s persona and lifestyle (who is the victim, how does she live, what are her daily activities and preferences). Deviant cues are elements present at the crime scene indicating behaviour that did not fit that image of the victim. These cues were labelled as deviant behavioural cues. To make the scene as realistic as possible, the deviant behavioural cues were discussed with two crime scene examiners from the Netherlands Forensic Institute and two crime scene examiners from the Dutch Police. With their input a realistic scenario was created based on aspects of real cases. In this scenario deviant behavioural cues were embedded. Together with two scientists experienced in the creation of mock crime scenes (from the University of Amsterdam and the VU University) the final scenario was created. An in-depth description of the ground truth scenario and the alternative scenario, and the way the virtual crime scene was constructed can be found in Appendix A . Fig. 1 shows some photos of the scene.

A selection of photos of the scene of the mock crime scene.

There were 15 pre-determined forensic traces/items present, multiple forensic examinations could be performed on each trace. Furthermore, there were 24 behavioural cues integrated into the scene, leading to 10 traces that are likely to be only found when a participant notices the deviant behavioural cues (e.g. a messy bathroom, while the rest of the house was tightly cleaned, leading to the towels on the floor that could be a possible trace). These 10 traces are called ‘the deviant behaviour’ traces (for more information see Appendix B and C ). Within these 25 collectable traces, a distinction was made between traces with a ‘high’ and a ‘low’ evidential value (for more information see Appendix C ) 5 . The division was based on the link between the trace and the perpetrator. For example, a DNA sample from the used gun had a ‘high’ evidential value as this could link a suspect to the crime, while a DNA sample from the blood pool found under the victim had a ‘low’ evidential value as this would not link a potential suspect to the crime. It should be noted that a ‘low’ value trace is not necessarily unhelpful and still possibly contributes to solving a crime as it helps to reconstruct the event. The classification of the traces on the forensic/deviant behaviour and ‘high’/’low’ categories was performed by three assessors having substantial agreement (interrater reliability, κ = 0.68 (p < 0.001) [ 38 ]. Traces that were rated differently were re-evaluated until an agreement was reached.

2.2. Participants

2.2.1. crime scene examiners.

A total of 40 crime scene examiners from six different police regions participated in this study. The participants were recruited via police management whereafter they could voluntarily sign up for the study. The group consisted of 27 men and 13 women within an age range of 28–66 years (M = 44, SD = 11) and experience range of 2–38 years (M = 13, SD = 9).

2.2.2. Investigative psychologists

14 investigative psychologists (nine females and five males) participated in this study. The age range was 29–62 (M = 39, SD = 9) with 1–19 years of experience (M = 7, SD = 5.7). Among this group, six participants had experience with deceased person cases.

2.3. Design

The design required two phases in the study. In the first phase, investigative psychologists and crime scene examiners examined the same virtual 3D mock crime scene providing the data to examine the first research question [1] to what extent are investigative psychologists able to detect deviant behavioural cues compared to forensic examiners when investigating a crime scene and second research question, [2] to what extent are forensic examiners able to find the relevant traces that can be associated with deviant behaviour . Both groups received the same prior information 6 and investigated the same crime scene.

In the second phase, the forensic examiners were split into two groups, the experimental and the control condition, to answer the third research question [3] to what extent does the availability of a psychological report drawing attention to these behavioural aspects help forensic examiners in finding more relevant traces . Participants in the experimental condition were presented with extra information in the form of a behavioural report halfway through the experiment regarding deviant behavioural cues that were present in the virtual crime scene. The behavioural report was composed for this research and was written by two investigative psychologists (who did not participate in this study) and partially based on literature [ 39 , 40 ]. Crime scene examiners in the control condition only received general forensic information based on the virtual crime scene halfway through the experiment. The general forensic information gave no advantage over the experimental group. We chose this design over a design with a control group that receives no information at all, in order to keep the experiment as uniform as possible for all groups. The forensic information had no substantive value. In our opinion, it is more important to make sure both control and experimental group have an ‘intervention’, as participants who receive information may have the idea that they should do something with it.

The experimental group consisted of 21 participants and the control group of 15 participants 7 . There was no significant difference in age, region, education, sex, and experience between the two groups.

2.4. Procedure

At the start of the experiment, with the aid of an intake questionnaire, background information was gathered about each participant regarding their age, gender, level of education, police district, years of experience with deceased person cases and experience with virtual crime scene experiments. Participants were told that the goal of the experiment was to obtain more insight into the decision-making process at a crime scene, so the real purpose of the study was not disclosed to the participants prior to the experiment. Once the informed-consent form was signed, laptop navigating controls were explained to the participants.

Prior to the virtual investigation, all participants (both forensic examiners and investigative psychologists) received information containing preliminary findings of the investigation. This information included a witness statement from a relative of the victim indicating a possible suicide and a search warrant from the public prosecutor (see Appendix D ). Participants had 40 min to investigate the virtual 3D mock crime scene on a laptop. Additionally, participants were provided with overview photographs of the scene on paper. Participants were instructed to imagine that the mock crime scene was a real case, and that they had to conduct their investigation as trained. The participants received the following instructions; ‘Walk’ through the virtual crime scene and think out loud during this process, so we can gain insight in your thought patterns. When you are done, write down the possible scenarios you are considering, i.e. homicide, suicide, natural cause and accident, and rank them according to probability and write down items you want to secure and/or samples you want to collect. After you have written down all the items you want to secure/collect, write down which specific examination you want to perform on an item and justify why and select a maximum of six traces 8 for fictitious further investigation and justify why.

Hereafter a short pause followed. The participants received additional information 9 depending on the investigative condition to which the participant was randomly assigned. Participants in the experimental condition received a short behavioural report based on the crime scene, while participants in the control condition received general forensic information (see Appendix E ). The participants received the following instructions: ‘walk’ through the virtual crime scene again. When you are done, you can – if desired - change the ranking of your scenarios, add items to secure and/or change the six items/traces you selected to submit for future investigation.

Lastly, with a short exit questionnaire, all participants were asked to write down their thoughts on the goal of the experiment. Participants also received a 6-item questionnaire that used a 7-point Likert-scale to monitor participants’ view on the study and the presence of an investigative psychologist at the crime scene. In total, it took participants 1 h to complete the experiment. For a schematic overview of the experimental procedure, see Table F.1 .

2.5. Assessing test scores

The data scoring method used for this study was based on that used in de Gruijter et al. (2017) [ 17 ]. The data generated by the participants before and after they received the additional information was coded in four sections: (1) most likely scenario, (2) deviant behavioural cues mentioned (3) items secured and (4) items selected for further investigation (dependent variables).

• (1) For the most likely scenario there were four possibilities: domestic homicide, suicide, natural cause and accident [ 41 ]. Homicide was coded with a 1 and suicide with a 0. As no participant chose the options natural cause and accident as most probable scenario, these options were not coded.
• (2) Deviant behavioural cues mentioned were scored (not mentioned = 0 and mentioned = 1).
• (3) In a similar manner, a list of all items/traces that could be secured was scored (not secured = 0 and secured = 1). Beforehand, a list of all potential traces and items was drawn up by the researchers, and this was supplemented with additional entries from participants.
• (4) Items selected for further investigation were listed in a top 6; all items were given the same weight.

2.6. Statistical analysis

For the first phase, the scores on the variables were compared between crime scene examiners and investigative psychologists to assess the decision-making process of the participants during the experiment. The dependent variable (1) selection most likely scenario was evaluated with a chi-square test. Descriptive statistics, independent samples t -test and one-sample t-tests were used to analyse the dependent variables (2) items mentioned, (3) total number of items secured and (4) items selected for further investigation.

For the second phase, we used a repeated-measures ANOVA, to assess whether the behavioural report given to the crime scene examiner in the experimental condition had any effect on the dependent variables (i.e., total number of items secured and items selected for further investigation). The scores of the participants before and after they received the additional information were compared between the two conditions. For all analysis a significance level of 0.05 was considered statistically significant. In addition, a post-hoc power analysis was executed to investigate the effect of sample size.

3. Results 10

3.1. phase 1: crime scene examiners vs. investigative psychologists.

This paragraph states the results of the comparison between crime scene examiners (N = 36) and investigative psychologists (N = 14) in the first phase of the investigation, i.e. before any additional (behavioural or basic forensic) information was provided. In doing so, this section answers to what extent (1) investigative psychologists detect deviant behavioural cues compared to forensic examiners when investigating a crime scene (2) forensic examiners are able to find the relevant traces that can be associated with this behaviour.

3.1.1. Most likely scenario

Participants provided scenarios and ranked them after their CSI. The scenario they ranked as most likely differed between the crime scene examiners and the investigative psychologists. A chi-square analysis showed a significant effect of profession (crime scene examiners and investigative psychologists) χ2 (1) = 4.20, p < 0.05. Investigative psychologists selected domestic homicide significantly more often (13 out of the 14 psychologists) as the most likely scenario than crime scene examiners (23 out of the 36 crime scene examiners).

3.1.2. Deviant behavioural cues

During the experiment, participants talked out loud. At phase one, there was a significant difference in the number of deviant behavioural cues mentioned between the crime scene examiners (control ( n  = 15) and experimental ( n  = 21) condition) ( M  = 7.5, SD  = 3.9) and investigative psychologists ( M  = 14.3, SD  = 3.2) t (45) = 5.503, p  <  0.001 , indicating that investigative psychologist named significantly more deviant behavioural cues than the crime scene examiners.

Additionally, for each deviant behavioural cue it was examined how often they were mentioned. This resulted in the observation that (proportionally) almost all cues were mentioned more often by investigative psychologists, than by forensic examiners (figure G.2.). The items that were mentioned (proportionately) the most by investigative psychologists were the strange positioning of the victim, the type of glass next to the victim, the different types of books on the bookshelf, the games with a murder theme and healthy products in the fridge. From these results it can be concluded that investigative psychologists tried to get an impression of the victim’s persona and lifestyle by trying to answer questions such as: what kind of person is the victim, what are her daily activities and which cues at the crime scene can be associated with this person, and which cues deviate from the expected behaviour? This information is useful to decide which cues may be relevant. It may lead crime scene investigators to consider more relevant hypotheses, thereby improving the recognition of evidence.

3.1.3. Suicide vs. domestic homicide

Crime scene examiners who stated domestic homicide ( n  = 23) as most probable scenario, mentioned significantly more deviant behavioural cues than crime scene examiners who thought suicide was the most plausible scenario ( M  = 8.9 vs. M  = 4.8, p  =  0.002 ). Similar results were found within the group of investigative psychologists. Psychologists who thought domestic homicide ( n  = 13) was the most probable scenario, mentioned significantly more deviant behavioural cues than the one participant who thought suicide was the most plausible scenario ( M  = 14.9 vs. M  = 8.0, p  =  0.030 ).

Considering this, there seems to be a ‘cut-off point’ in the number of deviant behavioural cues noticed after which participants switch from the suicide scenario to the homicide scenario. All participants who noticed more than 10 deviant behavioural cues thought domestic homicide was the most probable scenario. The only investigative psychologist who thought that suicide was the most likely scenario saw eight deviant behavioural cues, which supports the idea of this apparent ‘cut-off point’. See Figure G.3. for a visualization of the data. More information on the suicide vs. domestic homicide scenario within the crime scene examiners group (control vs. experimental) will be described in 3.3.

3.2. Phase 2: crime scene examiners: control condition vs. experimental condition

This paragraph shows the results related to the research question to what extent the availability of a psychological report drawing attention to these behavioural aspects helps forensic examiners in finding more relevant traces. It shows the comparison between the control condition ( n  = 15; participants receiving basic forensic information) and the experimental condition ( n  = 21; participants receiving additional behavioural information).

3.2.1. Most likely scenario

The analysis of the variable ‘most likely scenario’ demonstrates whether forensic examiners change the ranking of their most likely scenario after being informed with the additional (behavioural or basic forensic) information. Prior to receiving this information, no significant effect between the groups (experimental - domestic homicide 11/21, suicide 10/21; and control – domestic homicide 12/15, suicide 3/15 11 ) was present on the selected most likely scenario χ2 (1) = 3.74, p > 0.05. In this study, none of the participants changed the scenario they ranked as most likely after receiving the additional information, indicating that the availability of a behavioural report did not influence the final scenario.

3.2.2. Total number of items secured

The analysis on the total number of items secured by the crime scene examiners showed a significant difference in the number of items secured before and after the participants received the additional information ( F (1,34) = 6.250, p  =  0.017 ). Crime scene examiners in the experimental condition secured more traces. However, a directional one sample t -test (one-tailed) showed this was not significant ( M  = 12.7 vs M  = 13.4, p  = 0.245). In percentages, 28.6% of the participants in the experimental condition secured additional evidence after receiving additional information. Of this group, 19.6% selected 3 additional items and 9.5% selected 2 additional items. Participants in the control condition, did not secure additional evidence ( M  = 13.1 vs. M  = 13.1) (see Table F.2 ). 12

3.2.3. Traces of deviant behaviour

When solely looking at the secured deviant behavioural items, i.e., traces that are likely to be found only when a participant notices the deviant behavioural cues, the data show a significant interaction effect (for the experimental and control condition before and after the additional information ‘condition*time’) ( F (1,34) = 7.083, p  =  0.012 ). Participants in the experimental condition secured more deviant behavioural items ( M  = 3.8 vs. M  = 4.4) after they received the additional information, while participants in the control condition did not ( M  = 3.9 vs. M  = 3.9). When the deviant behavioural items were split in items with a ‘high’ evidential value and a ‘low’ evidential value, there was a significant interaction effect ( F (1,34) = 4.823, p  =  0.035 ) for items with a ‘high’ evidential value 13 . This interaction effect (‘condition*time’) for the deviant behavioural items with a ‘high’ evidential value can be explained by the different effect of the factor ‘time’ between the experimental condition ( M  = 2.9 vs. M  = 3.3) and the control condition ( M  = 2.7 vs. M  = 2.7). This interaction implies that there is a tendency to secure more deviant behavioural items with a high evidential value after having received behavioural information than before having received any information, or after having received just basic forensic information.

3.2.4. Items selected for further investigation

The next step for the participants was to select six items for further investigation. The two groups did not differ on the deviant behavioural and forensic items selected for the top six before they received the additional information (see Table F.3 ). After having received the additional information, none of the participants in the control condition changed their top six selection. However, participants in the experimental condition selected significantly more deviant behavioural items ( M  = 1.5 vs. M  = 2.0, p  =  0.004 ) and significantly less forensic items ( M  = 4.5 vs. M  = 4.0, p  =  0.004 ) (see Table F.4 ).

3.2.4.1. Deviant behavioural items

When concentrating on the selection of deviant behavioural items with a ‘high’ evidential value the analysis shows a significant interaction between condition and time ( F (1,34) = 9.320, p  =  0.004 ). This interaction was caused by a significant difference between the number of behavioural items with a high evidential value selected before and after having received information in the experimental condition ( M  = 1.3 vs. M  = 1.8, p  =  0.002 ), which was not present in the control condition ( M  = 1.4 vs. M  = 1.4). Hence, participants selected significantly more deviant behavioural items with a ‘high’ evidential value for analysis after they received behavioural information than before having received behavioural information.

3.2.4.2. Forensic items

For forensic items, there was also a significant interaction effect for the different conditions before and after the information had been given ( F (1,34) = 7.650, p  =  0.009 ). When this data was split in forensic items with a ‘high’ and ‘low’ evidential value, results show that neither participants in the experimental condition nor in the control condition made any changes to the selected forensic items with a ‘high’ evidential value, meaning that no analysis could be computed on this data. This indicates that the significant effect can be explained by changes the participants made in the experimental condition in the forensic items with a ‘low’ evidential value. The number of forensic items with a ‘low’ evidential value indeed decreased significantly after the participants received information in the experimental condition ( M  = 2.8 vs. M  = 2.3, p  =  0.004 ). The experimental group exchanged forensic items with a low evidential value for deviant behaviour items with a high evidential value after having received the behavioural report. Such change was not present in the control condition.

3.3. Phase 2: crime scene examiners (experimental condition): suicide vs. domestic homicide

An observation the researcher made during the experiment was that most of the participants in the experimental condition who chose suicide were very certain 14 of their case and claimed not to see the benefit of the extra behavioural information because they already ‘knew’ what happened, while crime scene examiners selecting domestic homicide seemed more likely to incorporate the new information into their scenario. Therefore, it was decided to analyse differences between participants in the experimental condition who chose a suicide scenario and those who chose a domestic homicide scenario. From the 21 forensic examiners who received the deviant behavioural information, 10 selected suicide as the most probable scenario and 11 domestic homicide.

3.3.1. Total number of items secured

The number of items secured by these two groups (suicide vs. domestic homicide) was analysed with a directional one sample t-tests. The results showed that the 11 participants who chose domestic homicide as the most likely scenario selected significantly more items after having received the additional information than before ( M  = 13.7 vs. M  = 15.0, p  =  0.008 ). This effect can be explained by the increase of deviant behavioural items ( M  = 4.1 vs. M  = 5.3, p  =  0.005 ), especially those with a ‘high’ evidential value ( M  = 3.5 vs. M  = 4.1, p  =  0.026 ), indicating that the information provided in the behavioural report caused participants who selected domestic homicide to secure more evidence (see Table F.5 ). This effect did not occur for the participants who selected suicide as the most likely scenario ( M  = 11.5 vs. M  = 11.6, p  = 0.343).

3.3.2. Items selected for further investigation

Changes in the six items selected for further investigation were also compared between the participants who chose domestic homicide as the most probable scenario, and those who chose suicide. The participants in the domestic homicide group selected significantly more deviant behavioural items ( M  = 1.7 vs. M  = 2.4, p  =  0.011 ) and significantly less forensic items ( M  = 2.6 vs. M  = 2.0, p  =  0.011 ) after having received the behavioural information, whereas the participants who chose suicide did not change their top six selection significantly (see Table F.6 ).

3.3.2.1. Forensic items

A paired sample t -test showed that after receiving the additional behavioural information, the domestic homicide group significantly decreased the number of forensic items selected ( M  = 4.3 vs. M  = 3.6, p  =  0.011) . No one in this group made any changes to the selected forensic items with a ‘high’ evidential value. This indicates that this effect can be completely explained by the forensic items with a ‘low’ evidential value, F (1,19) = 11.358, p  =  0.003 . Hence, crime scene examiners considering a homicide scenario selected less forensic items with a ‘low’, and more items with a ‘high’ evidential value after receiving additional information.

3.3.2.2. Deviant behavioural items

A paired sampled t -test indicated that significantly more deviant behavioural items were selected after receiving the additional information by the group selecting domestic homicide ( M  = 1.7 vs. M  = 2.4, p  =  0.011 ). No significant difference was found for the group selecting suicide as the most probable scenario ( M  = 1.3 vs. M  = 1.5, p  = 0.168). Deviant behavioural items with a ‘high’ evidential value showed a significant difference before and after the additional information ( F (1,19) = 14.801, p  =  0.001 ). When the data is further explored with a paired sample t -test, it showed that crime scene examiners who thought domestic homicide was the most likely scenario submitted significantly more deviant behavioural items with a ‘high’ evidential value for further investigation after they received extra information ( M  = 1.6 vs. M  = 2.4, p  =  0.004 ). Crime scene examiners who considered a suicide scenario as most likely did not show a significant difference in the deviant behavioural items with ‘high’ evidential value they submitted before and after they received extra information ( M  = 1.0 vs . M  = 1.2, p  = 0.168).

4. Discussion

The primary research question was whether the report of an investigative psychologist would influence the decisions of a crime scene examiner during the investigation of a deceased person in a home. The behavioural information from investigative psychologists positively influences the recognition and selection of relevant traces. A significant difference was found between crime scene examiners who only received general forensic information and crime scene examiners who received behavioural information coming from a psychologist. The latter group secured significantly more deviant behavioural items. More specifically, they selected more deviant behavioural items related to the offender. For the top six selection of items to investigate, examiners who received behavioural information replaced forensic items with a ‘low’ value for deviant behavioural items with a ‘high’ evidential value. This indicates that the additional behavioural information made crime scene examiners select more items with a ‘high’ evidential value and therefore will receive more forensic information on the offender.

Also, the number of deviant behavioural cues noticed seems to be highly important for participants to make their decision on their most likely scenario, given that noticing a high number of relevant traces that can be associated with behaviour led them to consider a homicide scenario (the ground truth). This may indicate that having a broader view and identifying more relevant aspects of the potential crime and the persons involved aids crime scene examiners in creating relevant scenarios. When searching for recovering, and securing traces can be substantiated with knowledge from disciplines such as behavioural sciences, it is possible that more scenarios are considered and more relevant traces can be secured and that crime scene investigations can be standardly improved. Data used to analyse to what extent investigative psychologists, compared to forensic examiners, can recognize deviant (behavioural) cues in a case with a deceased person in a home showed that investigative psychologists see significantly more deviant behavioural cues than forensic examiners. Further research will have to show to what extent this finding can be generalized.

4.1. Crime scene examiners vs. investigative psychologists

When looking into the number of deviant behavioural cues mentioned, it was found that overall, investigative psychologists mentioned significantly more cues than the forensic examiners. Remarkably, crime scene examiners who selected domestic homicide as the most likely scenario saw significantly more cues associated with deviant behaviour than the crime scene examiners selecting suicide as the most likely scenario. The results showed that when 10 or more deviant behavioural cues were seen, participants chose domestic homicide as their most likely scenario. The paper of de Gruijter et al. (2017) has shown that there are large differences among crime scene examiners when it comes to their selection of traces, and that important traces can be easily missed advocating the urge for improving scene investigation procedures [ 22 ]. Why certain participants noticed these cues and others did not, and what is needed to create a broader view deserves attention in future research.

In our study, participants received prior information indicating suicide. Possibly, participants who noticed less than 10 deviant cues were more likely to select suicide as most likely scenario as a result of our prior information. This would be in line with the results by van den Eeden et al. (2016) who demonstrated that prior information influences the interpretation of a crime scene [ 19 ]. Besides the crime scene investigation, it is known prior information influences almost every field in forensic science (Dror et al., 2006; Dror et al., 2011, Elaad et al., 1994, Kassin et al., 2003, Bogaard et al., 2014, Nakhaeizadeh et al., 2014, Osborne et al., 2014; as cited in van den Eeden et al., 2016). Therefore, information management is a crucial (and difficult) aspect of the CSI. When the information is correct, it can improve the CSI, when it is incorrect, it can hinder the CSI. This does not mean that we should refrain from giving information to crime scene investigators. It means that we have to find out how information management can be organised in CSIs.

We also found that investigative psychologists try to gain an overall impression of the victim, trying to answer questions as: What kind of person is the victim and what daily activities can be expected associated with this person? This information is useful to decide what deviates from that perception and may therefore be relevant. These findings are in line with the papers of Rossy et al. (2018), Baechler et al. (2020) and Roux et al. (2022) indicating that behavioural sciences can help create a broader image of the scene and therefore be of added value in searching for and securing traces as well as for the creation and examination of hypotheses at the crime scene [ 2 , 7 , 14 ].

The study shows that the combination of behavioural and forensic knowledge could contribute to improving the quality of the CSIs. Nowadays, in some cases, investigative psychologists work together with crime scene examiners at the crime scene. A different future perspective could be that crime scene examiners themselves are trained in evaluating crime scenes based on more behavioural aspects and by doing so creating a broader image of the scene and the people involved. In this way, you would avoid adding extra people and additional information to the CSI. Future research should show how this can best be integrated into the investigation of a crime scene.

4.2. Confirmation bias

When the data on crime scene examiners selecting suicide as the most likely scenario were compared to those selecting domestic homicide after receiving the behavioural information, the results showed that the group selecting suicide differed significantly from the group selecting domestic homicide after they received the behavioural information. This study shows that the participants selecting domestic homicide secured significantly more items linked to the offender after receiving this information, while this effect was not shown for the group selecting suicide as the most likely scenario. Participants selecting domestic homicide chose significantly more deviant behavioural items with a ‘high’ evidential value in their top six selection than participants selecting suicide.

The fact that the crime scene examiners who selected suicide as most likely scenario, were not influenced by the extra information given, is in line with the literature reviews of Klayman (1995) and Nickerson (1998) [ 42 , 43 ] and (among others) studies of Kassin & Dror (2013) and Kukucka et al. (2020) [ 44 , 45 ]. They found that information that contradicts an existing belief is likely to be ignored. This phenomenon is better known as confirmation bias. This is in line with observations made during the experiment, as most of the participants who chose suicide, were very certain of their case, and did not see the usefulness of the extra information. On the other hand, crime scene examiners selecting domestic homicide were more likely to incorporate new information into their scenario, which is also in line with the phenomenon confirmation bias, as the additional information confirmed their pre-existing beliefs [ 42 , 43 ]. None of the participants changed their scenario after the additional information. On this point literature seems to be contradicting. A study by de Gruijter et al. (2017) showed that crime scene examiners were able to change their scenario when provided with information after having already constructed a provisional scenario [ 17 ]. On the other hand, it is well known that once someone had formed an idea, it is likely they will stick with it [ 43 , 46 ]. This discrepancy might be present because the study by de Gruijter et al. (2017) gave information on trace analysis results, and possibly more value may be attached to this kind of information. It would be useful to study the value and influence of different kinds and sources of information on decision making. Also, when making use of a new source of information, it is essential for crime scene examiners to explicitly evaluate any new information and consider possible alternative scenarios to make sure the information is not just neglected.

4.3. Limitations

This study was set up empirically to gain insight into the decision-making process of crime scene examiners and investigative psychologists under controlled conditions. However, there are limitations to our method. Firstly, no standards and procedures currently exist for investigative psychologists at a scene of crime. Our study shows that additional psychological information can positively influence the recognition and selection of relevant traces, but psychological information could also potentially focus the attention of crime scene examiners towards less relevant traces. It is known that additional information is prone to cause bias in the decision making, and therefore additional information must be well managed to minimize the risk of cognitive bias [ 13 , 16 , 19 , 20 ].

As suggested by Dror et al. (2021), van den Eeden (2018), and de Gruijter et al. (2017) information must be handled consciously. The utility of the information for the task should be empirically researched and the moment and order in which information is added to an investigation is important [ 20 , 36 , 37 ]. This also applies to information provided by an investigative psychologist. The kind of knowledge and information they could bring to an investigation should be studied more thoroughly, as well as the most effective moment to add this information to the CSI. To prevent a crime scene examiner from biased decision-making, an initial judgment of the crime scene should be based on the crime scene itself. After this judgment, information may be added and evaluated for different scenarios. Also, to ensure transparency of the forensic decision-making process, any information received during the investigation and decisions made should be well documented.

Next, a virtual crime scene is not the same as a ‘real-life’ crime scene. This was also the most mentioned point of improvement participants wrote down on the exit questionnaire. The question how well crime scene examiners could interpret the artificial scene as a real crime scene, using a 7-point Likert scale, scored a 4.5 ( SD  = 1.5). Verbally this corresponds with ‘neutral’ to ‘I somewhat agree’. For investigative psychologists the score was slightly higher: 5.2 ( SD  = 1.8) corresponding to ‘I somewhat agree’. These scores are higher than the outcomes (score: 3.5) found during the study of de Gruijter et al. (2017) [ 17 ]. This improvement may be explained by the progress 3D technologies have made. By including forensic experts in the creation of the mock crime scene, it was ensured that traces were left in realistic places to make the investigation as realistic as possible. For future research it would be interesting to let a new group of participants ‘walk’ trough the virtual crime scene with a virtual reality headset to make the virtual scene more realistic and interactive and compare this data with the data of this study [ 47 ].

During the exit questionnaire, participants were also asked to write down their thoughts on the goal of the experiment. Against expectations, only one of the crime scene examiners in the experimental condition noticed that he had received information from a behavioural report. All other participants thought the experiment was about the decision-making process on the crime scene. This was favourable for the study as it indicates that the participants were not influenced by knowledge about the real purpose of the study.

Another point that may have influenced the data is that during the experiment it was noticed that a part of the crime scene examiners based their selection of items for further investigation on the chance that the trace would produce a (e.g.) good fingerprint or DNA profile (motivated reasoning 15 ). Based on that consideration, they sometimes prioritized less important traces over important traces. This same observation was made during the study of de Gruijter et al. (2017) [ 17 ].

Another limitation came forward from the power analysis, which showed that the estimated significance levels were based on very low to moderate powers (0.051–0.393). Power is affected by sample size and the size of the effect [ 48 , 49 ]. In our case the low power is most probably the result of the small sample size. Increasing the sample size would possibly result in a larger power.

It is noticeable that even though all the crime scene examiners said they were very open towards advice from colleagues (7-point Likert scale: M  = 6.4, SD  = 0.6), especially those selecting suicide as the most likely scenario, many did not use the additional information provided to them. Crime scene examiners were also asked with a 7-point Likert scale what they thought of the presence of an investigative psychologist at the crime scene. Overall they responded positively and on average gave a score of 4.6 ( SD  = 1.5), verbally corresponding to ‘neutral’ to ‘I somewhat agree’. Most participants who scored neutral on this question stated that they did not have any experience with investigative psychologists at the crime scene yet.

5. Conclusion

Evidence-based studies on the selection and collection of traces as well as for the creation and examination of hypotheses at the crime scene is scarce. Yet, these studies are of the uttermost importance as decisions made at the crime scene play a key role throughout the further forensic reconstruction and legal processes. The lack of knowledge on forensic decision-making processes asks for more proactive and foundational work within forensic disciplines rather than forming research questions in a reactive way when problems occur in the field or a new procedure gains popularity. This study demonstrates that incorporation of behavioural sciences into the crime scene investigation can provide a diverse perspective leading to clues and traces that were otherwise likely to be ignored. Crime scene examiners who received information on deviant behavioural cues recognized and collected more and different traces at the virtual crime scene than those who did not receive this information. However, the study also shows that this information is likely to be ignored when it contradicts an existing belief. This suggests a need for a more structured crime scene approach to evaluate new information and consider alternative scenarios during an investigation. The results of this study provide valuable information that can be used to make crime scene examiners aware of bias in their decision-making and can be used to form a next step in bridging the forensic and behavioural sciences by learning from each other’s expertise. Our final note is that, when searching for and securing traces can be substantiated with knowledge from different disciplines, it is possible that more relevant traces can be secured with better coherence among different forensic examiners.

Funding statement

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Ethics approval statement

Rosanne de Roo: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data Curation, Writing - Original Draft, Visualization, Project administration. Madeleine de Gruijter: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Writing - Review & Editing, Supervision. Christianne de Poot: Writing - Review & Editing, Supervision. Josita Limborgh: Resources, Writing - Review & Editing, Supervision. Paul van den Hoven: Resources, Writing - Review & Editing, Supervision.

Declaration of competing interest

No conflict of Interest.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the contribution of the crime scene investigators and investigative psychologists who participated in our study, and their managers who supported their participation. We thank T. van Neerbos and J. Groenink for their participation and help in designing the study. Furthermore, we would like to thank the national police unit ( Landelijke Eenheid ) for their technical help visualizing the mock crime scene used in this study, and A. Knes for her valuable feedback on an earlier version of this paper. Finally, we would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their suggestions and helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.

1 See figure G.1. for a visual of the current steps of a forensic investigation and a simplification of the interaction at the crime scene between the search for traces and scenario construction.

2 The chance that e.g. a trace would produce a good fingerprint or DNA profile.

3 Perceiving all information from one assumed correct hypothesis, thereby overlooking other explanations.

4 The term deviant behaviour encompasses behaviour that deviates from established social norms, rules, standards or expectations.

5 During the experiment, participants were not aware of the distinction the researchers made between the forensic and ‘deviant behaviour’ traces as well as the high and low evidential values of these traces.

6 Crime scene examiners helped in creating realistic ‘prior information’ for more information see Appendix D .

7 Four participants were excluded from the analysis because they based their conclusion on (strong) misinterpretations of the virtual crime scene. Therefore their results could not be compared to those from the other participants, e.g. one participant stated that the scenario had to be domestic homicide as he/she thought the cartridge case was from a revolver, while the gun next to the victim was a 0.22 mm, concluding that there had to be another person involved), causing their results to be no longer useable. However, it is quite interesting that those misinterpretations, which also led to strong differences in the collected traces, only occurred in the control condition (during phase 1). Adding those subjects would have made the already significant results more significant, and would thus have strengthened our conclusions regarding the added value of a behavioural scientist at the crime scene.

8 Forensic examiners usually have set limitations on the number of evidence they may submit for further investigation. The six traces they selected gave insight into which pieces of evidence they thought were most important 17 .

9 Note that participants were not aware that there was a second phase to the experiment.

10 In Appendix H, all the outcomes of the analysis can be found.

11 We are very aware of the differences between the groups with regard to the ‘most likely scenario’ they initially choose. Participants were randomly assigned to a condition prior to the start of the study, and phase 1 was identical for both groups. We do not have an explanation for this difference this occurred. Based on the statistics this is most probably an unfortunate coincidence.

12 All the output of the ANOVA’s can be found in tables in Appendix F .

13 For more information on the evidential value see section 2.1 . and Appendix C .

14 The ‘certainty’ of participants was not measured quantitively. This observation is based on comments the participants made.

15 Reasoning processes (a.o. information selection and evaluation and decision-making) are influenced by motivations or goals.

Appendix A. In-depth description mock crime scene

Creation of the scenario.

The basis of the scenario was to create an ambiguous crime scene with several deviant behavioural cues with the underlying idea that only upon noticing the deviant behavioural cues, the ground truth would be found. The term deviant behaviour encompasses behaviour that deviates from established social norms, rules, standards or expectations. To create such a scenario, meetings were held with investigative psychologists, forensic examiners, and scientist experienced in creating mock crime scenes.

The deviant behavioural cues were partially based on information provided by two investigative psychologists from the Netherlands [ 39 ]. Some elements (cues) used were adopted from real past cases, in which the investigative psychologists had given advice on deviant behavioural cues present at the crime scene. To prevent biasing results, direct colleagues of these particular investigative psychologists were excluded from participation. Part of the deviant behavioural cues was also derived from literature on mock crime scenes [ 17 , 19 , 22 ], and crime scene staging [ 40 , 50 , 51 ], to make the chance of participants recognizing specific cues, as minimal as possible. To make the scene as realistic as possible, the ideas for the deviant behavioural cues were discussed with two crime scene examiners from the Netherlands Forensic Institute and two crime scene examiners from the Dutch Police. With their input, the cues were embedded into a realistic scenario based on aspects of real cases. In addition, the crime scene examiners helped in creating realistic ‘prior information’ the participants received before starting their investigation (see procedure section). Lastly, together with two scientists experienced in the creation of mock crime scenes (from the University of Amsterdam and the VU University), some details were altered or added to create the final scenario.

Construction of the scenario

Most mock crime scene studies reviewed for this paper were executed in an academic setting. For example, a training house at the Dutch Police Academy was staged and used for research [ 16 , 17 , 22 ]. However, there are two major problems with the use of these academy houses. Firstly, the environment is often known to the participants, which might bias the results. Participants have indicated that they recognize elements that do or do not ‘belong’ in the academy house, and therefore are primed to recognize which items are relevant to the scenario. Secondly, people do not live in the academy houses. Therefore, these houses do not have many personalized characteristics that one would normally find in ‘real’ homes. To overcome these impediments, it was decided to create a mock crime scene in a ‘real’ house in Amsterdam, the Netherlands for the purposes of carrying out this study.

The mock crime scene consisted of a death case in an apartment. The hallway, bathroom, living room and kitchen were included in the scenario. To make the scene as realistic as possible, almost all actions associated with the ground truth were re-enacted. There were 24 deviant behavioural cues integrated into the scene, leading to/giving clues toward 10 traces/items connected to the crime (e.g. a messy bathroom, while the rest of the house was tightly cleaned, leading to the towels on the ground that could be a possible trace). These 10 traces are known as forensic-behavioural traces. In addition, there were 15 pre-determined forensic traces/items present at the scene on which multiple forensic examinations could be performed. For a detailed overview of the traces and cues presented at the scene, see Appendix B , Appendix C .

With the help of the ETVR (Expert team Visualization & Reconstruction) department of the Dutch Police, the mock crime scene was scanned. With the aid of a Faro scanner (Faro Focus 3D X330) the scene was recorded and subsequently uploaded to the program Unity (version 2018.3). Unity is a program in which the data from the Faro scanner can be incorporated into a 3D environment. Unity allows you to virtually ‘walk’ trough the crime scene. As a result, participants can investigate the scene behind a computer and do not have to be physically present. The program allows the creator to add 2D elements (e.g. pictures) into the virtual environment. With this application, a pictures of content (e.g. of a garbage bin and content of drawers) were added to the virtual crime scene. To avoid guiding information that might result from only adding pictures that are relevant to the scenario, ‘filler pictures’, of the content of all the drawers and of multiple details not relevant to the scenario were added [ 52 ]. Additionally, Unity was programmed in such a way that the additional pictures of, for example, the content of a garbage bin, would only become visible when the participant was within a close proximity to the bin. In this way, participants had to go through and investigate the whole scene and could not just ‘walk’ toward locations where pictures were added.

The ground truth – domestic homicide

A female student, Sophie Overtoom (SO), 25 years old, lived alone in a well-kept and tidy house. SO was interested in Forensic Science and (illegally) in possession of a gun (0.22 caliber). On the night of the crime, SO dressed herself nicely as she had a date with a new boyfriend. The ex-boyfriend of SO named X, found out that SO was dating another guy. On the night of the crime, X came by the house of SO to convince her that they had to become a couple again. X rang the front door. SO opened the door for him. X hung his coat on the coat rack and went into the living room to talk with SO. When X realized that SO did not want to go back into a relationship with him, X was overwhelmed with emotions. As a last resort, he grabbed SO’s weapon and ammunition from the cabinet in the living room and pointed it at her. SO sat down in the chair in the living room and tried to calm down X. SO called her date to cancel it, in an attempt to calm down X. X took a cigarette out of his coat and lit it. While he was smoking, he paced up and down the house. While doing this, he saw a number of things that were not his, but from another man. X realized that SO her new boyfriend had been to the apartment. X got so angry with this thought that he loaded the weapon and shot SO trough the head. Startled by his act X rushed into the bathroom. He changes his cloths in the bathroom and put on some old clothes of his that were still lying in the apartment.

X threw his clothes in the laundry basket. Next, X tried to conceal the murder as a suicide. He put the weapon next to the victim and put a bottle of wine and glass beside her to stage the case as a suicide. X realized that it was not wise to leave his clothes in the laundry basket and quickly grabbed his clothes out and while doing this, he threw a few towels on the floor. However, X forgot his underwear which remained in the laundry basket and also forgot his coat in his haste.

Alternative scenario – suicide

Since the relation of Sophie Overtoom (SO) and her ex-boyfriend (X) ended, SO suffered from depressive complaints. On the night of the crime, SO dressed herself up for a date with her new flirt. She grabbed a bottle of wine and a glass and put these next to her. After waiting on her date for a while she felt like he blew her off. Feeling depressed and left alone again, SO loaded her .22 gun, sat down in the chair in the living room and shot herself.

Appendix B. Behavioural cues

Behavioural cues (n = 24) present at the mock crime scene and the information the participants could retrieve from it leading to traces with a behavioural element (n = 10).

Appendix C. Traces at mock crime scene

Traces present- and elements related to the scenario at the mock crime scene, divided between traces with behavioural element or forensic element, the corresponding category and evidential value per item

*Mixture indicates that the information on the trace would lead to both the victim and the perpetrator.

Number of traces per category divided in ‘high’ value traces and ‘low’ value traces

Appendix D. Prior information participants

Preliminary findings.

Date: 19-02-2019. Time 04:00 p.m.

Female victim, Sophie Overtoom (SO), of 25 years old. Lives alone according to the GBA (municipal personal records database). No antecedents (history with police). Found by sister who was worried after SO did not show up on their regularly lunch meeting. Victim has struggled lately with depressive complaints according to the sister.

Witness statement sister of victim – Marieke Overtoom

“When Sophie (Victim) did not show up on our regularly lunch appointment I went by her house. I rang the doorbell a couple of times. When she did not open the door, I picked up the set of spare keys I have at my place. When I walked in, I saw Sophie with her head down on the chair in the living room. It was dark inside. I opened one of the curtains to let some light in. After doing this, I saw the gun and the blood. I stepped back immediately, called the police and walked out of the apartment. I did not touch anything. My baby sister has lately been struggling with depressive complaints. She and her boyfriend broke up 3 months ago.”

Public prosecutor

The public prosecutor has given permission for a house search.

Appendix E. Additional information provided in phase 2

Crime scene examiners in the experimental condition received a short behavioural report based on the crime scene, while crime scene examiners in the control condition received basic forensic information.

Behavioural report

When I entered the room, I noticed a big black jacket on the coat rack, it seemed to me this was rather a men’s jacket than a women’s jacket. On the cabinet in the hallway I saw a bulls eye target. The whole house is very orderly and clean. However, in the bathroom I saw towels on the floor next to the laundry basket. I found this remarkable because there were also towels in the laundry basket and towels hanging on the radiator. Didn’t the prior information say that the victim lived alone? It seemed to me that there was a male boxer short in the laundry basket and I also noticed two toothbrushes. In the living room I didn’t see any signs of a struggle. There is an agenda on the table in the living room. This contains a hospital appointment for Monday and for today (Wednesday) it showed a lunch appointment with probably the sister of victim. There are also plans for the rest of the week. Next to the victim was a bottle of wine with an ordinary water glass next to it, both standing on the floor. I notice that there are many beautiful wine glasses in the cupboard, I don't know if this means anything, but I notice it. Besides I found it odd that the bottle and glass were on the floor and not on one of the tables next to her. The bulls eye target in the hallway, the flyer on the living room table with “How do you track down the almost perfect murder", the forensic science books in the bookcase and the games with a murder theme, it seems to me as if the victim had an interested in forensic science/CSI. It is remarkable that on the one hand, the victim seemed to live a healthy lifestyle; There are many organic products and vegetarian cookbooks in the house. There was also a flyer that quoted: "Keep calm and be vegetarian". Yet, on the other hand there is a can of Monster energy drink in the fridge and there is a bag of meat sticks in the cupboard, which I don't think fit in the ‘healthy lifestyle’ picture. The thing that stood out most for me was the cigarette in the bin. I don't get the impression that the victim was a smoker, based on the house and the lifestyle of the victim. The victim lived alone according to the prior information, but it strikes me that there are a few things in the house that, I think, do not seem to suit her but rather someone else.

General forensic information

I did not see signs of a forced entry at the front door. Furthermore, I did not see anything strange in the hallway. I see a drop of blood on the laundry basket and faint spots on the sink that might also be blood. The house looks neat, I see no signs of a struggle. I notice the blood pattern on the head of the victim, it seemed to me that it had different directions. Maybe she sat first in an upright position and only later in this position.

The kitchen looks undisturbed. The balcony door is locked on the inside and to me it does not look like a robbery.

Appendix F. Tables

Overview of the experimental set-up

Mean scores and standard deviations (SD) of data crime scene examiners on the secured items on phase 1 and phase 2 of the experiment for the experimental and control condition, with p-value (one-tailed).

*a directional one sampled t -test (one tailed) was used.

Mean (M) and standard deviation (SD) of data crime scene examiners on phase 1 of the experiment in the experimental and control condition with p-value

*a independent sampled t -test was used.

Mean scores for the items selected for further investigation of data crime scene examiners on phase 1 and phase 2 of the experiment for the experimental and control condition, with p-value.

*a paired sampled t -test (two tailed) was used.

Mean scores and standard deviations (SD) on the secured items on phase 1 and phase 2 of the experiment between crime scene examiners choosing the most probable scenario domestic homicide vs suicide, with p-value (one-tailed).

Mean scores for the items selected for further investigation on phase 1 and phase 2, between crime scene examiners choosing the most probable scenario domestic homicide vs suicide, with p-value.

Appendix G. Figure legend (print in color)

The current steps of a forensic investigation and a simplification of the interaction at the crime scene between the search for traces and scenario construction.

Proportion of deviant behavioural cues (N = 24) mentioned per profession (crime scene examiners and investigative psychologists).

Horizontal 2-sided bar graph of number of deviant behavioural cues (total n = 25) mentioned per scenario by group (crime scene examiners (n = 36) and investigative psychologists (n = 14))

Appendix H. ANOVA output

The reason the outcomes of the repeated-measures ANOVA are in some cases the same on the factor ‘time’ (before and after they received additional information) and on the interaction ‘time*condition’, is because, in those cases, participants in the control condition did not change anything after having received the extra ‘forensic’ information.

Outcomes score total items secured, forensic items secured and deviant behavioural items secured over phase 1 and phase 2, between the experimental and control condition

Outcomes score forensic items selected for further investigation and deviant behavioural items selected for further investigation over phase 1 and phase 2, between the experimental and control condition

Outcomes score for total items secured, forensic items secured and deviant behavioural items secured over phase 1 and phase 2, between crime scene examiners choosing the most probable scenario domestic homicide vs suicide

Outcomes score for forensic items selected for further investigation and deviant behavioural items selected for further investigation over phase 1 and phase 2, between crime scene examiners choosing the most probable scenario domestic homicide vs suicide

Crime Scene Processing: Documentation and Evaluation

• First Online: 03 January 2022

Cite this chapter

• Maha Ghanem 3 &
• Haidy M. Megahed 3  

795 Accesses

Thorough and complete documentation of observations at the crime scene is crucial. Failure of complete documentation of evidence at the crime scene may result in challenges at court and unsuccessful prosecution and may affect the credibility and reputation of the first responders.

Any incident, whether criminal or noncriminal must be documented thoroughly. Even accidental injuries can be open to civil litigation such as those made by insurance companies or equipment manufacturers.

Crime scene documentation may include notes, photography, videos, sketches, measurements, or reports. None of which are a substitute for the other.

During documentation, it is vital to be aware that there may be many other people (attorney’s, attorneys’ investigators, crime lab analysts, etc.) who are involved in the case and were not able to visit and assess the scene of the crime by themselves and observe the placement of physical evidence within it. The aim of documentation is to deliver an enduring record of the scene and provide physical proof. It is the fundamental initial step of the chain-of-custody.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Crime Scene Investigation: An Introduction

The Use of Trace Evidence in Missing Persons Investigations

Chain of Custody: Scaling the Investigation to the Event

Barry AJ (2004) Processing a crime scene. In: Techniques of crime scene investigation, 7th edn. CRC, New York, pp 98–112

Google Scholar  

Bevel T, Gardner R (2002) Bloodstain pattern analysis with an introduction to crime scene reconstruction, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton

Doyle A (1930) Methodical approach to processing the crime scene. Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Burlington

Fisher B (2003) Techniques of crime scene investigation, 7th edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton

Book   Google Scholar  

Forensic Science Bureau (2019) Crime scene section technical manual. Austin Police Department. https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Police/Forensics/CS_Technical_Manual.pdf . Accessed 7 June 2020

Hochrein M (2002) Polar coordinate mapping and forensic archaeology within confined spaces. JFI 52(6):733–749

Laboratory and Scientific Section United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2009) Crime scene and physical evidence awareness for non-forensic personnel. https://www.unodc.org/documents/scientific/Crime_scene_awareness__Ebook.pdf . Accessed 7 June 2020

LeMay J (2011) Crime scene documentation. In: CSI for the first responder, A concise guide. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 9–25

Little D (2018) Using 3D laser scanners in crime scenes: understanding advantages and disadvantages. Weber State University. https://apps.weber.edu/wsuimages/BIS/PrimaryResearch/Darwin%20Little%20BIS%20Final%20Paper%202018%20(3).pdf . Accessed 8 June 2020

Miller M (2013) Crime scene investigation. In: James S, Nordby J, Bell S (eds) Forensic science: an introduction to scientific and investigative techniques. CRC Press, New York, pp 121–135

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs (2000) Fire and arson scene evidence: a guide for public safety personnel. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181584.pdf . Accessed 8 June 2020

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs (2013) Preliminary documentation and evaluation of the scene. In: Crime scene investigation: a guide for law reinforcement. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/178280.pdf . Accessed 7 June 2020

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice (2000) Completing and recording the crime scene investigation. In: Crime scene investigation: a guide for law enforcement. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/200160.pdf . Accessed 7 June 2020

Wade C, Trozzi Y (2003) Handbook of forensic services FBI laboratory publication. Federal Bureau of Investigation Quantico, Virginia. https://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/PDF/fbi-handbook-of-forensic-services-2003.pdf . Accessed 7 June 2020

Wow Essays (2019) Research paper on photography modern criminal investigation. https://www.wowessays.com/free-samples/research-paper-on-photography-in-modern-criminal-investigation/ . Accessed 8 June 2020

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

Maha Ghanem & Haidy M. Megahed

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

School of Allied Health Sciences, Sharda University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India

Jaskaran Singh

School of Bioengineering and Biosciences, Lovely Professional University, Jalandhar, Punjab, India

Neeta Raj Sharma

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Ghanem, M., Megahed, H.M. (2021). Crime Scene Processing: Documentation and Evaluation. In: Singh, J., Sharma, N.R. (eds) Crime Scene Management within Forensic science. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4091-9_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4091-9_2

Published : 03 January 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-16-4090-2

Online ISBN : 978-981-16-4091-9

eBook Packages : Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedical and Life Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Criminal Justice

IResearchNet

Academic Writing Services

Crime scene photography and sketching.

This article delves into the pivotal role of crime scene photography and sketching within the realm of the criminal justice process , with a particular focus on the United States. Opening with an exploration of their definitions and overarching significance, the introduction outlines the critical functions these forensic techniques fulfill. The body of the article bifurcates, first scrutinizing crime scene photography, elucidating its historical development, techniques, and legal considerations. Subsequently, the discussion seamlessly transitions to crime scene sketching, emphasizing its complementary nature with photography, techniques, and integration into investigations . The exploration extends to specialized cases, underscoring the unique challenges and applications in homicide, sexual assault, and arson investigations. The article culminates with a thorough conclusion, summarizing the indispensability of these techniques, emphasizing collaborative methodologies, and recognizing the dynamic landscape of technology in forensic practices. Throughout, the narrative is grounded in formal scientific language, bolstered by in-text citations from relevant studies, scholarly articles, and legal sources, ensuring a robust and authoritative exploration of crime scene photography and sketching in the context of the US criminal justice process.

Introduction

Crime scene photography and sketching constitute integral components of forensic investigation, serving as meticulous tools for documenting and preserving crucial evidentiary details at crime scenes. Crime scene photography involves the systematic capture of visual data through the lens of a camera, aiming to create a comprehensive visual record of the scene. On the other hand, crime scene sketching employs graphic representation to illustrate the spatial relationships and dimensions of key elements within the crime scene. Both techniques play a pivotal role in cataloging physical evidence, spatial layouts, and contextual information, providing investigators, legal professionals, and forensic experts with a tangible and lasting record essential for reconstructing events and building persuasive cases.

The significance of crime scene photography and sketching in the criminal justice process cannot be overstated. These forensic practices serve as foundational pillars in the investigative chain, offering a visual narrative that can unravel complexities and nuances surrounding a crime. By meticulously capturing the details of a crime scene, investigators can preserve evidence, document the conditions at the time of discovery, and establish the integrity of the investigative process. The admissible and reliable nature of photographic and sketching evidence in court adds weight to the prosecution’s case, aiding in the establishment of guilt or innocence. Moreover, these techniques contribute to the transparency and accountability of the criminal justice system by providing a standardized and objective means of presenting crime scene information.

The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive exploration of crime scene photography and sketching, focusing on their definitions, historical contexts, and the indispensable roles they play in the criminal justice process, with a specific emphasis on the United States. By delving into the techniques, best practices, and legal considerations associated with these forensic tools, this article aims to offer a thorough understanding of their applications and impact on criminal investigations. Through in-depth examination and analysis, readers will gain insights into the collaborative nature of crime scene photography and sketching, their evolving role in specialized cases, and the ongoing advancements in technology that continue to shape the landscape of forensic practices.

Crime Scene Photography

Crime scene photography is the systematic capture and documentation of visual evidence at the scene of a crime through the use of photography equipment. Its primary role lies in the meticulous preservation of critical evidentiary details, ranging from the overall layout of the crime scene to minute traces of physical evidence. Through the lens of a camera, investigators aim to create a visual record that not only captures the initial state of the crime scene but also aids in the subsequent analysis and reconstruction of events.

The historical evolution of crime scene photography traces its roots to the late 19th century, with pioneers like Alphonse Bertillon and Arthur Conan Doyle recognizing its potential in forensic investigations. Early practitioners faced challenges posed by limited technology, but over time, advancements in cameras, film, and processing techniques have revolutionized crime scene documentation. The development of standardized protocols and the integration of photography into forensic practices have significantly enhanced the reliability and admissibility of photographic evidence in legal proceedings.

Crime scene photography holds paramount importance in investigations by providing a visual account of the crime scene’s original state. It captures the spatial relationships, positioning of evidence, and the overall context, offering investigators a comprehensive visual resource for analysis and reconstruction. The documented images become critical references throughout the investigative process, aiding in the development of theories and the identification of key elements relevant to the case.

Beyond documentation, crime scene photography plays a crucial role in establishing and maintaining the chain of custody. By creating a visual timeline of evidence collection, photography helps ensure the integrity of the investigative process. Adhering to strict protocols and accurately recording the sequence of events through photographic evidence enhances the credibility of the collected items, making them more likely to be accepted as admissible evidence in court.

Modern crime scene photography has transitioned to digital formats, leveraging the advantages of high-resolution cameras and advanced technology. Digital photographs offer the benefits of immediate review, enhanced storage capabilities, and the ability to easily share visual data with other investigators and experts. The integration of 3D imaging and virtual reality further expands the scope of crime scene documentation, providing a more immersive and detailed representation.

Achieving optimal lighting conditions and selecting appropriate angles are critical aspects of effective crime scene photography. Proper lighting ensures clarity and visibility of details, reducing the risk of overlooking significant elements. Varied angles capture different perspectives, allowing for a more comprehensive understanding of the crime scene. Techniques such as oblique lighting and close-up shots are employed to highlight specific features and nuances.

The legal admissibility of crime scene photographs is contingent on adherence to established protocols and ethical standards. Photographs must accurately represent the scene without distortion or manipulation. Legal considerations involve ensuring that the photographic evidence is relevant, reliable, and free from bias. The photographer may be required to testify about the authenticity and accuracy of the images in court, emphasizing the importance of maintaining professionalism and precision in crime scene photography. Understanding and navigating the legal landscape surrounding photographic evidence is crucial for investigators to ensure the successful integration of visual documentation into the criminal justice process.

Crime Scene Sketching

Crime scene sketching is a meticulous method of graphic representation used to complement the information captured through crime scene photography. While photography captures the visual details, sketching provides a structured and illustrative depiction that enhances the overall understanding of the crime scene. It serves as a complementary tool by emphasizing spatial relationships, physical dimensions, and the relative placement of key elements within the scene. The synergy between crime scene sketching and photography allows investigators to present a more comprehensive and detailed account of the crime scene.

Unlike two-dimensional photographs, crime scene sketches excel in capturing the three-dimensional aspects of a crime scene. This capability is particularly crucial when dealing with complex spatial relationships, such as the positioning of evidence in multi-level environments or outdoor scenes. By employing perspective techniques and accurately representing the depth and height of objects, crime scene sketches provide investigators with a nuanced understanding of the physical layout, facilitating more precise reconstructions of events.

Crime scene sketching can be executed through traditional manual methods or digital tools. Manual sketching, often performed by forensic artists or investigators, involves the use of paper, pencils, and measuring tools to create a hand-drawn representation of the crime scene. Digital tools, on the other hand, leverage software applications that allow for more precision, flexibility, and the integration of additional data. Both methods have their merits, and the choice between them often depends on the specific requirements of the investigation and the available resources.

Accurate measurements and scaling are fundamental to the effectiveness of crime scene sketches. Investigators use measuring tools, such as tape measures and rulers, to ensure that the proportions and distances depicted in the sketch are true to the actual crime scene. Scaling is essential for creating accurate representations, and forensic sketch artists employ mathematical principles to convert real-world measurements into proportional sketches, maintaining the integrity and reliability of the visual documentation.

Crime scene sketches often include identifiable landmarks or reference points to enhance their utility. Incorporating landmarks helps establish spatial context and aids in orienting the viewer to the scene. These can range from fixed structures within the crime scene to recognizable objects or features in the surrounding environment. Including landmarks in crime scene sketches facilitates a more intuitive understanding of the scene’s layout and assists investigators in navigating through the visual representation.

The collaborative use of crime scene sketches and photography enhances the overall effectiveness of forensic investigations. While photography captures the details, sketches provide a structured layout, combining to offer a holistic view of the crime scene. The two methods complement each other by compensating for the limitations of one another, ensuring that investigators have a comprehensive set of visual data for analysis and reconstruction.

Crime scene sketches are valuable tools for presenting information in a courtroom setting. During legal proceedings, forensic sketch artists may testify about the creation process, the accuracy of measurements, and the overall reliability of the sketch. The visual impact of a well-executed crime scene sketch can significantly aid in conveying complex information to judges and juries. The integration of sketches alongside photographic evidence reinforces the credibility of the investigative process and contributes to a more compelling presentation of the case.

In summary, crime scene sketching plays a vital role in forensic investigations, offering a complementary perspective to photography by emphasizing three-dimensional aspects, employing various techniques and tools, and seamlessly integrating into the investigative process. The accuracy and reliability of crime scene sketches make them invaluable tools for presenting complex spatial information in legal proceedings.

Forensic Photography and Sketching in Specialized Cases

Forensic photography and sketching play pivotal roles in specialized cases, where the unique challenges and considerations demand a nuanced approach to documentation and analysis. This section explores their application in homicide investigations, sexual assault cases, and incidents involving arson and property crimes.

Homicide scenes present distinct challenges for forensic photographers and sketch artists. The often chaotic and emotionally charged environments require a delicate balance between capturing the necessary evidence and respecting the sensitivity of the situation. Additionally, the presence of multiple victims, complex crime scenes, and potential alterations by first responders necessitate meticulous documentation to ensure an accurate representation of the crime scene at the time of discovery. Forensic professionals must navigate these challenges while preserving the integrity of the evidence and adhering to established protocols.

In high-profile homicide cases, the role of forensic photography and sketching becomes even more pronounced. The public and media scrutiny intensifies, underscoring the need for precision and transparency in documenting the crime scene. Forensic experts may find themselves under increased pressure to produce compelling visual evidence that can withstand the rigor of legal scrutiny. The collaboration between forensic photographers and sketch artists becomes critical in presenting a comprehensive and convincing narrative, aiding investigators in building a robust case against the perpetrator.

Sexual assault cases demand a heightened level of sensitivity and privacy considerations when employing forensic photography and sketching. The invasive nature of these crimes requires a careful and empathetic approach to documentation, recognizing the trauma experienced by survivors. Forensic professionals must prioritize the well-being of the individuals involved, ensuring that the documentation process is conducted with the utmost respect for privacy. Clear communication and collaboration with law enforcement, victim advocates, and medical professionals are essential to navigate the complexities of these cases.

Forensic photography and sketching in sexual assault cases play a crucial role in building a strong and comprehensive case for prosecution. By documenting injuries, collecting physical evidence, and illustrating the scene, forensic professionals contribute to establishing a clear timeline of events. This visual documentation becomes a vital component in corroborating survivor testimonies, aiding in the identification of perpetrators, and presenting a compelling case in court. The integration of forensic visuals enhances the credibility of the investigation, supporting the pursuit of justice for survivors.

Arson investigations pose specific challenges for forensic photographers, as fire scenes are dynamic and can alter rapidly. The documentation of fire scenes requires capturing the initial conditions, identifying potential points of origin, and documenting the extent of fire damage. The use of specialized techniques, such as infrared photography, becomes crucial in revealing heat patterns and identifying areas of interest. Forensic sketching aids in representing the spatial relationships within the scene, assisting investigators in reconstructing the progression of the fire and identifying any potential signs of arson.

In property crimes, including arson, forensic photography and sketching extend beyond the immediate fire scene to encompass the documentation of property damage. This documentation is instrumental in assessing the financial impact, aiding insurance claims, and providing a comprehensive record for legal proceedings. Sketching becomes particularly useful in illustrating the layout of structures, the extent of damage, and potential points of entry or exit. By combining photographic evidence with detailed sketches, forensic experts contribute to a thorough understanding of the incident, supporting both criminal investigations and civil processes.

In conclusion, the application of forensic photography and sketching in specialized cases underscores their adaptability to diverse challenges within the criminal justice landscape. Whether navigating the intricacies of homicide investigations, addressing the sensitivity of sexual assault cases, or documenting the complexities of arson and property crimes, forensic professionals play a critical role in enhancing the investigative process and contributing to the pursuit of justice.

The synthesis of crime scene photography and sketching stands as a cornerstone in the edifice of forensic investigations, providing an intricate and irreplaceable visual narrative that transcends the limitations of other forms of evidence. As demonstrated throughout this exploration, the significance of crime scene photography lies in its ability to meticulously preserve crucial evidentiary details, offering investigators a tangible and enduring record of the crime scene. Simultaneously, crime scene sketching complements photography by emphasizing spatial relationships and capturing three-dimensional aspects, thereby enriching the investigator’s understanding of the crime scene. Together, these forensic techniques play a pivotal role in documenting, preserving, and presenting evidence, contributing substantially to the success of criminal investigations.

The collaborative nature of crime scene photography and sketching cannot be overstated. These forensic processes intersect with various other disciplines within the forensic realm, forging connections that enhance the overall investigative process. Collaboration with disciplines such as forensic anthropology, DNA analysis, and ballistics creates a comprehensive investigative framework. Crime scene photographs serve as crucial reference points for experts in different fields, facilitating the correlation of findings and the synthesis of a cohesive narrative. Moreover, the collaboration between photography and sketching emerges as a dynamic partnership, compensating for each other’s limitations and delivering a more robust representation of the crime scene. This synergy not only aids investigators but also bolsters the reliability and admissibility of evidence in legal proceedings.

The landscape of forensic photography and sketching is undergoing continuous evolution, spurred by advancements in technology and innovative techniques. The advent of digital cameras and sophisticated software has revolutionized the way crime scenes are documented, providing investigators with tools that offer higher resolution, immediate review capabilities, and efficient data sharing. In the realm of sketching, digital tools have expanded the horizons of precision and flexibility, allowing for more intricate and accurate representations of crime scenes. The integration of 3D modeling and virtual reality technologies further augments the forensic toolkit, offering immersive experiences that enhance the understanding of crime scenes. As technology continues to progress, forensic professionals must adapt and embrace these advancements, ensuring that their methodologies remain at the forefront of investigative practices.

In summation, crime scene photography and sketching serve as indispensible pillars in the edifice of forensic science. Their combined impact is felt not only in the meticulous documentation of crime scenes but also in the collaborative synergy with other forensic processes, reinforcing the reliability and admissibility of evidence in legal proceedings. As technology and techniques progress, the future promises even more refined and sophisticated approaches, ensuring that these crucial forensic tools remain at the forefront of unraveling the complexities of criminal investigations. The continuous pursuit of excellence in forensic photography and sketching is not merely a professional imperative but a commitment to justice, truth, and the integrity of the criminal justice process.

Bibliography

• Bevel, T., & Gardner, R. M. (2008). Bloodstain Pattern Analysis (3rd ed.). CRC Press.
• Fisher, B. A. J., & Fisher, D. R. (2012). Techniques of Crime Scene Investigation. CRC Press.
• Fisher, R., & Fisher, B. (2015). Techniques in Crime Scene Investigation. CRC Press.
• Fossum, T. W. (2018). Forensic Documentation Sourcebook: The Complete Paperwork Resource for Forensic Photography. Elsevier.
• Houck, M. M., & Siegel, J. A. (2010). Fundamentals of Forensic Science (2nd ed.). Academic Press.
• Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., Buckley, J. P., & Jayne, B. C. (2013). Criminal Interrogation and Confessions (5th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
• Lee, H. C., & Harris, H. A. (2014). Forensic Science: An Introduction to Scientific and Investigative Techniques. CRC Press.
• Osterburg, J. W., & Ward, R. H. (2013). Criminal Investigation: A Method for Reconstructing the Past. Anderson.
• Pyrek, K. M. (2010). Forensic Science Under Siege: The Challenges of Forensic Laboratories and the Medico-Legal Death Investigation System. Elsevier.
• Ramsland, K., & Fisher, B. (2016). Forensic Art and Illustration. CRC Press.
• Robinson, M. B. (2006). Crime Scene Photography (2nd ed.). Academic Press.
• Rudnik, A. (2010). Crime Scene Photography (3rd ed.). Elsevier.
• Saferstein, R. (2019). Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Science. Pearson.
• Staggs, S., & Adcock, G. (2007). Crime Scene Photography. Focal Press.
• White, P., & Franke, H. (2019). Crime Scene Photography (4th ed.). Academic Press.

A Simplified Guide To

Crime scene investigation, how it’s done, samples that may be collected at a crime scene.

A wide variety of physical evidence can be collected at a scene that is deemed valuable (“probative”) for collection and investigation:

• biological evidence (e.g., blood, body fluids, hair and other tissues)
• latent print evidence (e.g., fingerprints, palm prints, foot prints)
• footwear and tire track evidence
• trace evidence (e.g., fibers, soil, vegetation, glass fragments)
• digital evidence (e.g., cell phone records, Internet logs, email messages)
• tool and tool mark evidence
• drug evidence
• firearm evidence

The type of evidence collected will vary with the type of crime. In the case of a burglary, for example, it would be common to perform tasks in the order listed below. This will help ensure that evidence isn’t inadvertently damaged or destroyed:

• Photograph and document the scene
• Collect trace materials (especially from probable points of entry)
• Collect low-level DNA evidence by swabbing areas of likely contact
• Collect other items that may contain biological evidence
• Locate and collect latent fingerprints

Who Examines Crime Scenes

The number and type of professional(s) responsible for investigating a scene and collecting evidence largely depends on the type of crime and the resources of the law enforcement agency. Larger agencies often have dedicated, highly trained crime scene specialists, while smaller agencies may require that first responders or detectives process the scene in addition to their other duties.

In many instances, a case will be investigated by a detective who is responsible for interviewing persons of interest and victims, pursuing leads and piecing together the information that is developed from the materials collected at the scene. The detective works in tandem with a team of crime scene personnel who search the scene and collect the evidence. The crime scene investigation team may consist of crime scene photographers and evidence collection personnel specializing in gathering specific evidence such as latent prints, DNA, trace evidence and the like.

In the United States, there are no national requirements that must be met to serve as a crime scene investigator; however, investigators can achieve four levels of certification through the International Association for Identification (IAI) that demonstrate their proficiency:

• Certified Crime Scene Investigator
• Certified Crime Scene Analyst
• Certified Crime Scene Reconstructionist
• Certified Senior Crime Scene Analyst

Other certifications commonly achieved include the Evidence Photographer Certification from the Evidence Photographers International Council, Inc. and Board Certified Medicolegal Death Investigator of the American Board of Medicolegal Death Investigators (ABMDI).

How a Crime Scene Investigation is Conducted

The circumstances that investigators encounter at the scene will largely dictate the approach used to process the scene. A homicide will likely require different treatment and processing than a burglary. However, to ensure a thorough process, the seven steps outlined below are often followed. These steps can be conducted in a different order, combined or even skipped altogether to meet the needs of the situation.

5. Document and process the scene - With a plan in place, the crime scene team conducts a thorough, coordinated investigation of the scene, collecting all probative evidence. This entails detailed documentation with digital and video cameras or, if available, a 3-D scanner. For some situations, sketches and diagrams are also created. During the evidence-collection process, it is crucial that the crime scene investigator follow proper procedures for collecting, packaging and preserving the evidence, especially if it is of a biological nature. Biological evidence can be destroyed or damaged by weather conditions, individuals can inadvertently contaminate it, or it can be overlooked entirely if alternate light sources are not used to inspect the scene.

6. Conduct a secondary survey/review - To ensure that the scene has been thoroughly searched, a second survey of the area is conducted as a quality control step.

7. Record and preserve evidence - To make certain that all evidence is accounted for, an inventory log is created. The descriptions recorded into the log must match the photo of the evidence taken at the scene and the description included in the crime scene report. For instance, if a gun is collected, the serial number of the firearm in the evidence log must match the serial number shown in the photo that was taken at the scene. This paper trail establishes the chain of custody that will follow the evidence throughout the lifecycle of the case.

How and Where Tests on the Evidence are Conducted

The most probative evidence will be sent to either a forensic laboratory or, if the laboratory does not have an expert in that forensic discipline, to an outside analyst for examination. To help identify the evidence that is most valuable, the crime scene personnel may conduct initial screening tests, called presumptive tests, at the scene. These tests can be useful in determining the type of substance present—whether it’s a toxin or a drug, a stain that contains body fluids, or even whether a dried red substance found in the kitchen is blood or ketchup.

Presumptive tests allow investigators to narrow the field of possibilities to a certain class of substance, but they are not specific enough to confirm the presence of specific compounds. In addition to helping provide clues to indicate how the crime occurred and who may have been involved, presumptive tests can also help reduce the quantity of evidence that is submitted to the lab to include only the most important items. This helps to expedite processing at the laboratory.

As technology advances and devices become more portable and affordable, additional testing of evidence will likely be conducted at the scene.

Back to top of page ▲

Find Out More

• Introduction
• Applications
• How It’s Done ◀
• Common Terms
• Resources & References

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Crime Scene Investigation: Guides for Law Enforcement

These guides are intended for use by law enforcement and other responders who have responsibility for protecting crime scenes, preserving physical evidence and collecting and submitting the evidence for scientific examination.

If crime scene investigators do not act methodically, they risk contaminating or losing evidence. Approach a crime scene investigation as if it will be your only opportunity to preserve and recover evidence. Combine a scientific assessment of physical evidence with case information and witness statements as you assess the scene.

The steps presented on these Web pages are a guide to recommended practices for crime scene investigation. 

Special Circumstances. In addition to general  procedures, you also can find guides for investigating crime scenes where:

• A death has occurred .
• There is electronic/digital evidence (pdf, 65 pages) .
• An explosion, and possibly a bombing, has occurred (pdf, 64 pages) .
• A fire, possible arson, has occurred .

Cite this Article

Read more about:.

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

NCJRS Virtual Library

Handbook of crime scene investigation, additional details.

United States

810 Seventh Street, NW , Washington , DC 20531 , United States

160 Gould Street , Needham Heights , MA 02194-2310 , United States

No download available

Availability.

• Find in a Library

Related Topics

• (888) 506-6011
• Current Students
• Main Campus

• Associate Degrees
• Bachelor’s Degrees
• Master’s Degrees
• Post-Master’s Degrees
• Certificates & Endorsements
• View All Degrees
• Communications
• Computer Science
• Criminal Justice
• Humanities, Arts, and Sciences
• Ministry & Theology
• Social Work
• Teaching & Education
• Admission Process
• Academic Calendar
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Military Education Benefits
• Transfer Students
• Tuition & Costs
• Financial Aid
• Financial Aid FAQ
• Online Student Testimonials
• Student Services
• Resource Type
• Program Resources
• Career Outcomes
• Infographics
• Articles & Guides
• Get Started

7 Steps of a Crime Scene Investigation

Embed this Image On Your Site

Infographic transcript, advance your career in criminal justice.

A career in criminal justice can lead you to many roles along the path of crime scene investigation. If you’re interested in earning your criminal justice degree online, Campbellsville University offers three options.

Crime scene examination is complex. How officers approach the crime scene of a burglary differs from that of a homicide. Indoor, outdoor and conveyance crime scenes all have unique aspects to consider.

Still, these seven steps of a crime scene investigation remain no matter where or what the crime. (1)   Find out how these steps apply to any investigation.

1. Identify Scene Dimensions

• Locate the focal point of the scene
• Establish a perimeter large enough to contain relevant evidence

It’s better to establish a larger scene than needed. (2)

2. Establish Security

• Tape around the perimeter
• Depending on the number of people, consider security guards

3. Create a Plan & Communicate

• Determine the type of crime that occurred
• Identify any threats to evidence, such as weather
• Consider if additional resources are necessary
• Communicate with your team about how to proceed

Outdoor crime scenes are more vulnerable to loss due to the elements. (3)

4. Conduct Primary Survey

• Identify potential evidence
• Capture photographs and take good notes

5. Document and Process Scene

• Using the plan from step three, begin processing the scene
• Collect all evidence and keep detailed documentation

It is imperative to follow proper procedures for collection so that no evidence is destroyed or contaminated.

6. Conduct Secondary Survey

• Conduct another walkthrough to ensure everything has been processed and recorded

7. Record and Preserve Evidence

• Use an inventory log to account for all evidence
• Create thorough descriptions that match photographs taken at the scene
• Follow a clear chain of custody throughout the investigation

By following those simple steps and getting the right education, you’ll be ready to join the field as a crime scene investigator!

Interested in Crime Scene Investigation?

A career in criminal justice can lead you to many roles along the path of crime scene investigation, from the front lines to evidence processing. If you’re interested in earning your online criminal justice degree, Campbellsville University offers three options, including an online A.S. in Criminal Justice , an online B.S. in Criminal Justice Administration and an online M.S. in Criminal Justice .

1. forensicsciencesimplified.org 2. forensicmag.com 3. nfstc.org

How To Become A Crime Scene Investigator: Job Outlook And Specializations

Published: Sep 23, 2024, 12:40pm

Popular television shows like NCIS, CSI and Bones have brought the field of crime scene investigation right into our living rooms. While being a crime scene investigator is often less glamorous than how it appears on TV, it can still be a challenging, rewarding career for detail-oriented, analytical workers who want to use their skills to help solve crimes by gathering and examining evidence.

This article explores how to become a crime scene investigator, including education and training requirements, relevant certifications, salary information and job outlook. We also list several professional organizations that provide valuable resources for these workers. Read on to learn more about how to become a crime scene investigator.

Why You Can Trust Forbes Advisor Education

Forbes Advisor’s education editors are committed to producing unbiased rankings and informative articles covering online colleges, tech bootcamps and career paths. Our ranking methodologies use data from the National Center for Education Statistics , education providers, and reputable educational and professional organizations. An advisory board of educators and other subject matter experts reviews and verifies our content to bring you trustworthy, up-to-date information. Advertisers do not influence our rankings or editorial content.

• Over 3,868 accredited, nonprofit colleges and universities analyzed nationwide
• 52 reputable tech bootcamp providers evaluated for our rankings
• All content is fact-checked and updated on an annual basis
• Rankings undergo five rounds of fact-checking
• Only 7.12% of all colleges, universities and bootcamp providers we consider are awarded

Key Takeaways

• Entry-level crime scene investigators often work under more experienced investigators as they gain experience and earn relevant certifications. Some pursue a degree, such as a bachelor’s degree in crime scene investigation, forensic science, biology or a related discipline, before completing internships, gaining other relevant work experience and earning certifications.
• Completing a certificate program in crime scene investigation provides you with the skills and knowledge you need to qualify for some entry-level roles.
• Because crime doesn’t just happen during regular business hours, crime scene investigators may work evenings, weekends and holidays. They may also need to be on call outside of their regular working hours.

What Is a Crime Scene Investigator?

Crime scene investigators document, gather and identify physical evidence at crime scenes. Their work may involve collecting and studying evidence like fingerprints, DNA and biological material, trace evidence, footwear impressions, tire track patterns, digital evidence and blood spatter patterns.

These professionals secure crime scenes to prevent contamination and preserve physical evidence. They may take photographs or measurements. They also attend autopsies to help pathologists collect evidence from bodies. They then document their findings in reports that lawyers use during trials.

Since much of their work occurs at crime scenes, crime scene investigators spend a lot of time working in the field. They may also appear in court to discuss evidence they gathered.

How To Become a Crime Scene Investigator

Crime scene investigators need specialized training and education in addition to relevant work experience. Below are the steps for how to become a crime scene investigator.

Pursue an Educational Path

There is more than one educational path to becoming a crime scene investigator. Generally these jobs require education and training beyond high school. Some positions stipulate applicants hold a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice, biology, computer science, forensic science or a related field, while others require only an associate degree or certificate.

Degree Finder

Many crime scene investigators become law enforcement officers, then complete a crime scene investigation training program through their agency’s training academy. Some agencies even explicitly require their crime scene investigators to work first as police officers. This pathway allows professionals to gain practical work experience and develop their crime scene investigation skills on the job. You may not necessarily need a degree if you choose this route.

Gain Relevant Work Experience

On-the-job training, including internships and part-time or full-time positions, is essential to launching your career as a crime scene investigator. New crime scene investigators often work with experienced professionals to develop their skills. While work experience requirements vary, many crime scene investigator roles seek applicants with between six months and two years of relevant work experience.

Earn Certifications or Licenses

Currently, there is no national licensing requirement for crime scene investigators, although some states may offer state-specific licensure or certifications. Earning a professional credential validates your skills and experience as a crime scene investigator. There are several types of certifications for crime scene investigators, which we explore below.

Crime Scene Investigator Salary and Job Outlook

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), detectives and criminal investigators , which includes crime scene investigators, earned a median annual salary of $91,100 in 2023. The BLS projects employment for these positions will grow 2% from 2023 to 2033.

Crime Scene Investigator Specializations

As a crime scene investigator, you may be able to specialize in a particular area within the field by earning a degree that offers specializations, completing a certificate program or earning professional certification in a subfield. Popular crime scene investigation specializations include:

• Accident investigation
• Arson investigation
• Bloodstain pattern analysis
• Crime scene photography
• Crime scene supervision
• Fingerprint analysis
• Footwear and tire track examination
• Trace evidence examination

Certifications for Crime Scene Investigators

Below are a few reputable organizations that offer certifications for crime scene investigators. Your state may also offer credentials for these professionals.

International Association for Identification (IAI)

The IAI offers three types of crime scene investigator certifications: Certified Crime Scene Investigator, Certified Crime Scene Analyst and Certified Senior Crime Scene Analyst. To be eligible for these credentials, you must have worked full time in a related position within the previous five years. You must also possess excellent moral character, integrity and high ethical and professional standing. Additional requirements vary by credential.

Each certification costs $300 for IAI members and $400 for nonmembers. You must renew your credential every five years.

ASIS International

ASIS International ’s certification for crime scene investigators is the Professional Certified Investigator (PCIⓇ). For this certification, you need three to five years of related experience, including two years in case management. You must also work full time in a relevant role, be willing to abide by ASIS’s policies and code of conduct and hold no criminal convictions that could reflect negatively on the profession or the organization.

The application fee is $550 for ASIS members, with reduced rates of $430 and $450 for those in countries identified as emerging markets. You must renew your certification every three years.

Professional Organizations for Crime Scene Investigators

There are many professional organizations for crime scene investigators. Some groups focus on forensics as a whole, while others specialize in certain subfields. Professional organizations for crime scene investigators include:

Association for Crime Scene Reconstruction (ACSR)

ACSR focuses on supporting forensic professionals, criminalists and those who work in crime scene reconstruction. It provides consultation services, training, conferences and journals. The organization offers several membership tiers, including regular, distinguished and student. The annual membership fee for each tier is $40. You may need an endorsement from an existing member to qualify for certain membership categories.

The IAI caters to law enforcement and forensic science professionals. Its benefits include an annual conference, training opportunities and networking events. Membership fees range from $45 to $95 annually, or a lifetime fee of $950.

International Crime Scene Investigators Association (ICSIA)

ICSIA provides professional support for law enforcement professionals who process crime scenes. Member benefits include training opportunities, procedural guides, articles and other resources. The annual membership cost is $25.

International Institute of Certified Forensic Investigation Professionals (IICFIP)

IICFIP offers services to professionals working in a variety of fields related to investigation, including law enforcement, private security and forensic auditing. There are several membership tiers, each with their own eligibility requirements. Member benefits include discounts on conferences and workshops as well as access to recommendation letters, publications and certification programs.

American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS)

AAFS offers membership in 12 different disciplines. Benefits include free and discounted access to resources like webinars and books, mentorship, grants and scholarships, expert witness referrals and networking opportunities. Membership requirements vary by level. The annual membership fee is $75.

Featured Online Schools

Learn about start dates, transferring credits, availability of financial credit and much more by clicking 'Visit Site'

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About How to Become a Crime Scene Investigator

Is it hard to become a crime scene investigator.

Becoming a crime scene investigator takes time, as you must study and gain relevant work experience. If you are analytical and detail-oriented, you may thrive in this career.

How do I start a career in CSI?

There is more than one way to start a career in CSI. Many crime scene investigators first work as law enforcement officers to gain relevant work experience, while others earn a degree and complete internships or work in a related field to gain experience.

What degree is best for a crime scene investigator?

While you may not necessarily need a degree to become a crime scene investigator, earning one may give you an edge over other candidates during your job search. Some positions require bachelor’s degrees in criminal justice , forensic science , biology or a related field, while others require only associate degrees or certificates.

Where do CSIs get paid the most?

The top-paying states for police officers and criminal investigators, which includes crime scene investigators, are Alaska, Hawaii, Maryland, New York and California. In 2023, average wages in these jurisdictions ranged from $115,910 to $121,770, according to the BLS.

Are CSIs in high demand?

The BLS projects employment for detectives and criminal investigators, which includes CSIs, will increase 2% from 2023 to 2033. This growth equates to a total of 2,600 new jobs in addition to the field’s existing 113,400 workers.

Do CSIs work every day?

Many crime scene investigators work full time. Since crimes can happen at any time, these professionals’ schedules may include evening and weekend hours, and they may be on call at times outside of the traditional 9-to-5 work schedule.

• Best Online Criminal Justice Degree Programs
• Best Master’s In Homeland Security Online
• Best Master’s In Forensic Science Online Programs
• Best Master’s In Criminology Online Programs
• Best Ph.D. In Public Administration Online
• Best Online Paralegal Degrees
• Best Online Public Administration Degrees
• How To Become A Criminal Investigator
• How To Become A Lawyer
• Careers In Law
• What Can You Do With A Master Of Public Administration? 10 MPA Jobs To Know
• Online Associate Degrees In Criminal Justice
• Is Law School Worth It? How To Decide If Law School Is Right For You
• Is Law School Worth It? 5 Factors To Consider
• Tips For Law School Personal Statements: Examples, Resources And More
• Paralegal Vs. Lawyer
• The Top 13 Pre-Law Majors
• 5 Types Of Law Degrees And Careers For Graduates
• What Can You Do With A Law Degree? Careers, Salaries And Job Outlooks

Where To Earn An Online Criminal Justice Associate Degree In 2024

Where To Earn A Ph.D. In Criminal Justice Online In 2024

Best Master’s In Criminology Online Programs Of 2024

Best Master’s In Homeland Security Online Of 2024

Best Ph.D. In Public Administration Online Of 2024

Where To Earn An Online Forensic Psychology Master’s Degree In 2024

Sheryl Grey is a freelance writer who specializes in creating content related to education, aging and senior living, and real estate. She is also a copywriter who helps businesses grow through expert website copywriting, branding and content creation. Sheryl holds a Bachelor of Arts in Mass Communications from Indiana University South Bend, and she received her teacher certification training through Bethel University’s Transition to Teaching program.