Anda di halaman 1dari 3

APPLYING THE PRINCIPLES TO CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION

Most working detectives hold that their work is unique, that few tasks
even come
close. To some degree this is true, but the authors of this text maintain that the
criminal
investigator’s job is largely just another kind of inquiry—a reconstruction of the
past.
Because others with a similar concern for the past (ranging from historians to
geologists)
employ the scientific method in their endeavors, so too must the detective.
Section II,
therefore, provides coverage of managing criminal investigations, a general
treatment of
methods of inquiry, the use of induction and deduction in scientific reasoning,
and the
sources of information available for reconstructing past events. This section deals
with the
investigation of some of the more common penal law crimes (i.e., those against
the person,
those against property). Categorizing crimes in this way may well be useful for
didactic
reasons, but the distinction fades when subjected to more careful analysis: a
burglar’s aim
is to steal property of value in order to then pawn or sell it, yet a person feels not
only its
loss but also a sense of having been violated; likewise, arson adversely affects
individuals
directly or through increased insurance rates, just as homicide seriously affects
direct victims
as well as their loved ones.
When perusing the chapters in this section, the reader will quickly note that
motive
is very important to the development of suspects. For some crimes, however,
ascertaining
motive can be difficult. For instance, murder is generally committed for a variety
of
reasons; therefore, in any treatment of criminal investigation, it is necessary to
expand on
the motivation a perpetrator might have had for committing the crime. Despite
the fact
that it can often be the key to the solution of crimes, motive is seldom treated in
criminal
investigation texts, except with regard to the informant looking for monetary or
other
compensation from the police.
There are two kinds of motive: general and specific. A general motive is one that
applies
to most—if not all—offenders; for example, the burglar or robber looking for
profit with the
least effort. A specific motive is one that relates the offender to the victim or
object of the crime,
which has been selected for a specific reason. An example might be the owner of
a business who
has lost customers to a competitor and “arranges” to burn down the rival’s
building.
With a specific motive established, a list of potential suspects can be compiled
through
the process of deduction. Using this as the generalization, the particulars (a list of
individuals
perceived to have such a motive) can be compiled. The list may then be shortened
by
determining who had the opportunity with respect to time and place, and who
possessed
the temperament to commit the crime or arrange for its commission. Although
motiveis not an element that must be proved in court, juries generally feel more
comfortable
about convicting a defendant who can be shown to have one. Consequently,
establishing a
particularized motive has both investigative and probative significance.
Without a particularized motive, the investigation of crimes having a universal
motive
(for example, rape and robbery) is rendered more difficult. A compensation,
however, is the
fact that these crimes often have an eyewitness. Except in cases of date rape, this
is apt to
be more useful in proving guilt than in identifying and apprehending the
perpetrator.
This section emphasizes investigative activities that point to likely suspects, to the
honing of any list developed, and to the search for additional evidence.
Depending on
what any new evidence supports or fails to support, the original hypothesis
regarding the
suspect(s) is either enhanced, downgraded, or rejected. Considerably more space
is allotted
to homicide than to other crimes because:
1. It has a greater impact on a community than does any other felony; the
public expects this crime to be handled competently and expeditiously.
2. It is the ultimate challenge to an investigator, demanding the highest
professional standards if the case is to be proved in court.
3. Success in solving homicide requires familiarity with all possible
investigative moves; each new development calls for an evaluation of
the next step to be taken.
4. The skills acquired in solving a homicide can serve well when applied
to other crimes.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai