Advertisement

Convincing LEO: Successful Interaction Between the Archaeologist and Law Enforcement Officials in Crime Scene Investigations

  • Michael J. Hochrein
Chapter

Abstract

Law enforcement consultations with, and the use of, civilian experts in processing crime scenes are typically influenced by three considerations: possible cost, questions over the expert’s ability to recognize and reveal potential evidence, and concern for the dissemination of sensitive information to non-law enforcement entities in a pending investigation. The author calls upon his experience as an anthropology student, contract archaeologist, law enforcement agent, and forensic archaeologist, to help explain the relationship between law enforcement officials, or “LEOs,” and the archaeologists with whom they may consult. The perspectives of both professionals are examined using case histories and experience in applying crime scene processing protocols, both successfully and unsuccessfully. Suggestions are offered on how a cooperative and continuing relationship might be developed between the civilian, and law enforcement, investigators.

Keywords

Law enforcement officer Archaeological field recoveries Crime scene investigations Archaeological techniques 

References

  1. Adovasio, J. M. (2010). Forensic sedimentology: Past, present, and promise. A paper presented at the Symposium, “ARPA at 30: Lessons Learned for the Future,” 75th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, St. Louis, Missouri, April 14–18, 2010.Google Scholar
  2. Anfinson, S. (2009). Commentary: It takes more than the right classes. The SAA Archaeological Record, 9(1), 34–36.Google Scholar
  3. Childs, S. T. (2009). Commentary. The SAA Archaeological Record, 9(1), 37–39.Google Scholar
  4. Congram, D., & Bruno, D. A. (2007). [Don’t] smile for the camera: Addressing perception gaps in forensic archaeology. Archaeological Review from Cambridge, 22(2), 37–52.Google Scholar
  5. Connor, M. A. (2007). Forensic methods: Excavation for the archaeologist and investigator. Lanham: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dirkmaat, D. C., & Adovasio, J. M. (1997). The role of archaeology in the recovery and interpretation of human remains from outdoor contexts. In W. D. Haglund & M. H. Sorg (Eds.), Forensic taphonomy, the post-mortem fate of human remains (pp. 39–64). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dirkmaat, D. C., Hefner J. T., & Hochrein M. J. (2001). Forensic processing of the terrestrial mass fatality scene: Testing new search, documentation and recovery methodologies. A paper presented before the 53rd Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, Seattle, Washington, DC, February 19–24, 2011. https://www.academia.edu/7687403/Forensic_Processing_of_the_Terrestrial_Mass_Fatality_Scene_Testing_New_Search_Documentation_and_Recovery_Methodologies. Accessed 12 Feb 2018.
  8. Doelle, W. H. (2009). Commentary: Will this degree get me a job with your firm? The SAA Archaeological Record, 9(1), 29–30.Google Scholar
  9. Fuoco, M. A. (2008). 12-year-old assaulted, Wecht tells courtroom. Pittsburgh Post Gazette, May 03, 2008. http://www.pittsburghpostgazette.com/pg/08124/878826-85.stm. Accessed 12 Feb 2018.
  10. Gardner, R. M., & Bevel, T. (2009). Practical crime scene analysis and reconstruction. Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Griffen, P., Kocher, C. J., & Stocker, D. K. (2014). The school practitioner model and the investigator. Investigative Review, 6(1), 11.Google Scholar
  12. Gumerman, G., IV, & Smiley, F. E. (2009). Commentary. The SAA Archaeological Record, 9(1), 24–26.Google Scholar
  13. Hochrein, M. J. (1997). Buried crime scene evidence: The application of geotaphonomy in forensic archaeology. In P. Stimson & C. Mertz (Eds.), Forensic dentistry (pp. 83–99). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hochrein, M. J. (2002). An autopsy of the grave: Recognizing, collecting, and preserving forensic geotaphonomic evidence. In W. D. Haglund & M. H. Sorg (Eds.), Advances in forensic taphonomy, method, theory, and archaeological perspectives (pp. 45–70). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hochrein, M. J., Gabra, J., & Nawrocki, S. P. (1999). The buried body cases content analyses project: Patterns in buried body investigations. Proceedings of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, V, 212–213 http://academia.edu/7482972/The_Buried_Body_Cases_Content_Analyses_Project_Patterns_in_Buried_Body_Investigations. Accessed 12 Feb 2018.Google Scholar
  16. Hochrein, M. J., Dirkmaat, D. C., & Adovasio, J. M. (2000). Beyond the grave: Applied archaeology for the forensic sciences. A paper presented before the 52nd Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, Reno, Nevada, February 23, 2000. https://academia.edu/7687456/Beyond_the_Grave_Applied_Archaeology_for_the_Forensic_Sciences#1 . Accessed 12 Feb 2018.
  17. Hunter, J., & Cox, M. (2005). Forensic archaeology: Advances in theory and practice. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  18. Kettner, M., Ramsthaler, F., Horlebein, B., & Schmidt, P. H. (2008). Fatal outcome of a sand aspiration. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 122, 499–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marx, R. J., Hochrein, M. J., & Fasano, A. (2014). More pieces of the puzzle: FBI evidence response team approaches to scenes with commingled evidence. In B. Adams & J. Byrd (Eds.), Commingled human remains: Method, recovery, analysis and identification (pp. 57–85). San Diego: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Menez, L. L. (2005). The place of a forensic archaeologist at a crime scene involving a buried body. Forensic Science International, 152, 311–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Milne, R. (2013). Forensic intelligence. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  22. Nawrocki, S. P. (2008). The University of Indianapolis archeology and forensics laboratory. In M. W. Warren, H. Walsh-Haney, & L. E. Freas (Eds.), The forensic anthropology laboratory (pp. 65–91). Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Neusius, S. W. (2009). Preparing archaeologists for careers in applied archaeology. The SAA Archaeological Record, 9(1), 18–22.Google Scholar
  24. Rebmann, A. (1998). Bonding with the badge working effectively with law enforcement. Response, The Journal for Search and Rescue, 16(2), 25–27.Google Scholar
  25. Reinecke, G. W., & Hochrein, M. J. (2008). Pieces of the puzzle: FBI evidence response team approaches to scenes with commingled evidence. In B. J. Adams & J. E. Byrd (Eds.), Recovery, analysis and identification of commingled human remains (pp. 31–55). Totowa: Humana Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Resnick, B., Berkin, J., & Trocki, P. (2009). Commentary. The SAA Archaeological Record, 9(1), 31–33.Google Scholar
  27. Rowe, A. (2006). Speaking to the scientists. Law and Order Magazine, 54(1), 87.Google Scholar
  28. Sandweiss, D., & Delcourt, S. (2009). Commentary: The M.A. in applied archaeology and current trends in graduate education. The SAA Archaeological Record, 9(1), 27–28.Google Scholar
  29. Schotsmans, E. M., Fletcher, J. N., Denton, J., Janaway, R. C., & Wilson, A. C. (2014). Long term effects of hydrated lime and quicklime on the decay of human remains using pig cadavers as human body analogues: Field experiments. Forensic Science International, 238, 141.31–141.e13.Google Scholar
  30. Snow, D. R. (2009). Commentary. The SAA Archaeological Record, 9(1), 23–24.Google Scholar
  31. Sonderman, R. C. (2001). Looking for a needle in a haystack: Developing closer relationships between law enforcement specialists and archaeology. Historical Archaeology, 35(1), 70–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thacker, H. L., & Kastner, J. (2004). Alkaline hydrolysis. In Carcass disposal: A comprehensive review. Report prepared by the Agricultural Biosecurity Center Consortium, Carcass Disposal Working Group for the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, per Cooperative. Agreement 02-1001-0355-CA. http://krex.k-state.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/2097/662/Chapter6.pdf?sequence=13. Accessed 04 Oct 2014.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael J. Hochrein
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Justice, Law and Security, Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation (retired)La Roche CollegePittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations