Crime Scene Investigation: Ashley Nicole Smith Murder

Introduction 

Criminal investigation is a vital process in the enforcement of the law. It involves numerous activities including crime scene analysis, development of suspects, arrests, prosecution and conviction of the criminals. This process is delicate primarily because it affects other human beings and will influence their future interactions. The victims of any given crime entrust that the police officers will perform their duties to the best of their abilities such that the true identity of the perpetrator is discovered and the necessary course of action is taken. It is for this reason that law enforcement officers are required to adhere to the guidelines of the investigation process to provide accurate analysis of occurrences. The following paper takes keen observation of the various steps in an investigation as they affect the case study of a homicide incident that took place on November 3 rd 2000 at 9170 Old Annapolis Road Columbia. The discussion will identify whether evidence against the suspects were obtained by legal means in the investigations leading up to their arrests. 

Background 

The case study mentioned above incorporates actual events, but the names have been altered to protect the affected parties. The victim of the homicide was Ashley Nicole Smith whereas Scott Jory Jones and Frederick James Johnson were identified as the primary suspects after significant investigations were carried out. There are a number of events taking place that involve police and the residents of the area who collaborate to identify the suspects and ascertain that they were responsible for the murder of the young lady. The incident was reported by two truck drivers, Irvin Fornoff and William Birmingham who spotted a large red puddle of blood when they were making a U-turn at the parking lot approximately 10.46a.m. The police responded within five minutes where PFC Malcolm met with the witnesses. The patrol units of Howard County secured the scene by creating a perimeter barrier that prevented the public from contaminating it. 

Later on, the Howard County Police Department would later respond to the scene. Their efforts to identify the victim were futile as the body was filled with blood and there were no personal identification forms present. However, the officers were accompanied by forensic technicians who would incorporate their skills to collect vital evident from the scene. The fact that the deceased was a young girl led to extensive searches in high school databases to develop conclusive evidence of her identity. The first questioning of Mrs. Smith who had reported that her daughter also enabled her conclusive identification as the black mole at the back of her neck. It was that this time that the HCPD concluded that the victim was Ashley Smith. The investigators are seen to be meticulous about each and every detail of the case whereby every bit is essential for identifying the suspects and their motives for the crime. 

The police after conducting numerous interviews in the Grand Senior High School, the mother of the victim, close friends and neighbors, noted that it would be impossible for the perpetrator of the crime to be a close associate of the deceased. The investigators therefore sought for the public’s assistance where they provided a 24-hour phone tip line was provided that would enable local residents to report any leads regarding the case. In addition, $8,000 was provided as a reward for those who had valid evidence leading up to the capture of the perpetrator. Despite numerous calls usually incorporating rumors, police were able to identify three that were consistent in identifying suspects. The most consistent was young men possibly in their late teens or early twenties. Two of them who were unidentified callers mentioned Scott and Freddy while the other tip by a Ms. Martin identifies Michael Stewart as perpetrators. 

Steps Involved in Effective Crime Scene Investigation 

The case study depicts a clear intent by the Howard County Police Department to perform an ethical investigation in an effort to identify the crime at hand. The responding officer sent to the crime scene through dispatch accurately enforced basic principles of initial arrival to the scene. The primary factor to consider when arriving at a scene is to ensure minimal contamination. The officer confirmed that indeed the body at the scene was of a young white female who had multiple stab wounds. It was after this that he established a perimeter as a means of ensuring minimal contamination of the scene while other patrol units assisted in controlling the crowd. The actions of the officer are a clear indication of adherence to the policy. He ensured calm security of the crowd that had gathered at the scene while the investigators, forensic technicians and the mobile command post made their arrivals soon after. 

In a typical homicide crime, it is usually assumed that the body of the victim may have the various evidence that forensic scientists may use to trace back to the perpetrator. As the body upon its discovery was partially clothed, officers may make yet another assumption that the victim may have suffered from rape. As a primary practice in any given crime scene the forensic technicians collect evidence of DNA from the body and the areas around. Items such as clothes or under wear could effectively carry the proof required. The technicians also collected photo evidence of the puddle of blood and the surrounding area to ensure nothing was left unturned. In this case, the dew rags or neoprene skull caps were collected at the scene in one of the bushes near the body. This is a legal means by which the officers gathered traces of possible perpetrators. The technicians also collected swabbing of the victim’s skin around her ankles for significant traces left. 

Leads to Possible Suspects 

The officers would then make an attempt to discover whether the murder weapon was present at the scene. They split into two groups but there was no luck in finding the murder weapon. The initial eye witness report was a citizen reporting to a police officer, S/CPL Jones, that a blue or a black four door vehicle, was seen speeding through the intersection near the area where the victim’s body was found. This report revealed that two black males were in the vehicle both of them young. This information was vital in identifying two of the primary suspects in the case Scott and Freddy. 

In a second, evaluation, nearly a week after the occurrence of the crime investigators have gathered in the area around the crime scene to conduct a thorough field search to recover the potential murder weapon. Fortunately, one of the PFC officers was approached by a citizen who had turned in the knife assumed to be the used by the perpetrators. The witness, Mr. Myers points out that he had discovered he discovered the knife after conducting his trash emptying service just behind Pizza Hut where the crime took place. He noted that the car blocking from exiting had ran over a shiny object only to discover it was a knife which he quickly collected and forgot about it at the back of his truck. DNA tests to test the samples collected from the victim’s body to that of Mr. Myers were unmatched. 

The 24-hour phone tip line was a critical source for information on the suspects revealing that Scott Jones and Freddy Johnsons were in one way or another involved in the murder. The investigators carry out a surveillance of the suspects where they are able to collect DNA samples collected from cigarette buds that each one of them throws away. It is however Scott Jones who is detained first after violating probation. He is transported from the detention center to the station where the investigators are carrying out the investigation on the murder. He is unaware that he is a primary suspect to the case and hence waives hi Miranda Warnings. He provides confliction information in an interrogation that spans more than 3 hours 20 minutes. However, it is evident that the suspect has information that is yet to be released to the public including the issue of strangling and abdomen stab wounds. 

In the case of Fredrick Johnson, after a warrant for his arrest was issued he was detained in the Southern District Station. It was at the same place that Jones was being interviewed by the investigators Rettig and Case. It was already afternoon when Frederick “Freddy” Johnson was placed in an interview room for questioning. However, when he waived his Miranda Warnings, there was no need to commence with questioning. Jones his accomplice had informed the investigators that it was he who murdered the young girl. Therefore, there was significant evidence against him when Danielle Ritter informed officers that Jones had confided in her about the murder. Johnson was also included in this confession hence leading to his arrest and was immediately charged with 1 st Degree murder. 

Legality of Evidence Collection 

During the occurrence of the trial, the defense attorney attempted to suppress the evidence that significantly incriminated the accused party. In the criminal justice system, it is required that officers of the law undertake legal measures of gathering evidence. This will particularly include evidence that is found to incriminate the suspect at hand. The defense sought to identify that collection of the DNA of both parties as an illegal practice on the part of the police officers. Efforts to suppress this evidence would enable the defense to throw away all the hard work associated with the officer’s discoveries. However, the court could not suppress the evidence of the cigarette buds as the officers collected them after the suspects had thrown them away. In light of this, the buds are no longer the property of the suspects but are for the public. 

The defense also attempted to suppress the evidence of the knife. In this case, citing constitutional challenges that the evidence was contaminated from exposure to the third party, Mr. Myers who discovered it at the parting lot after it was run over by a vehicle. The defense may also cite that the recovery of the evidence nearly a week after the crime took place may call for speculation on the part of the detectives attempting to lower their credibility. However, the knife is depicted as a piece of evidence collected under legal citations. Accurate recording of events taking place will help provide proof of the chronological adherence to the law. The citizen who recovered the knife was tested for significant DNA matching but results showed it was inconsistent. Furthermore, reports from Jones’ mother and sister depicted that the latter saw him purchase the knife at a flea market but did not seem to have it just after the murder a clear indicator he was involved and attempted to cover it up. 

It is also depicted that the defense attempted to suppress the confession evidence collected by the investigators through the numerous interviews. Witnesses and acquaintances to the suspects had revealed significant information about the two being involved in the murder. The Scott Jones and Frederick Johnson both waived their Miranda Warnings to have an attorney present when the investigators brought them in for investigation. The availability of audible and written proof identifies that the communication between detectives and the suspects was acceptable by the law. During the interview, Jones constantly pins the murder to his accomplice Johnson. However, in each of the three occasions his statements are not truthful from start to end despite being the one calling for a sitting with the detectives in the last two cases. He ends up confessing to a number of things that tie him closely to the murder. In this regard, it is possible that he is part of the crime but just refuses to admit it. 

Application of Lessons from Class 

The classroom demonstrates numerous techniques of incorporating detective techniques during the process of crime investigation. For instance, preliminary approach to the efforts made upon arriving at the scene. The classroom approach requires that the officers first receive information during their response and then begin to take appropriate measures to secure the crime scene. This lesson is implemented almost directly as it is required by law. However, there are some practices that require law enforcement officers to identify loopholes in the legislations. In the case of criminal investigations where the crime may have very few witnesses, the detective assigned to investigate is required by law to adhere to the rules of the Fourth Amendment. However, the detectives instead choose to conduct a surveillance through which they are able to obtain the DNA of the suspects. 

Technology and Science in the Investigation Process 

Technology and scientific methods are important factors to consider in the process of conducting a criminal investigation. It is evident that in the initial response to the crime scene, police officers along with forensic technicians arrive to collect evidence of the area. It is important that this practice is conducted immediately to avoid contamination. Without the available technology, physical evidence would drastically be lost upon the clearing of the scene. The photographic and videotape evidence is an essential part of solving this case. As the crime scene is out in the woods and extends to an area where the public frequents, it is important to gather the available evidence as quickly as possible to prevent contamination by the climate and the public. The video evidence ensures that if there was missed evidence it is caught on tape for future reference. If the defense team was to seek an appeal to this case, such evidence would be essential to make an informed decision. 

The most compelling evidence in the modern day criminal investigation is the use of scientific evidence. This incorporates the use of forensic science where technicians collect biological data to identify the possible suspects of the crime. In this case, the body of the victim was used as a source of scientific evidence to gather proof. There were significant traces of the suspects’ DNA remaining on the body of the victim. As a result, forensic science would play an important role in identifying the validity of such assumptions. This incorporation is also essential as a primary source of proof to recognize the match between samples collected from the body and those associated with the suspects in question. Scientific methods are also incorporated to determine the cause of death. After appropriate evidence was collected from the scene, the body was shipped to the forensic examiner’s office for autopsy. These methods demonstrate that the as technology and science continue to improve, it will be a major factor towards improved accuracy of detail. 

References 

Douglas, J., Burgess, A. W., Burgess, A. G., & Ressler, R. K. (2013). Crime classification manual: A standard system for investigating and classifying violent crime . New York: John Wiley & Sons. 

Fraser-Mackenzie, P. A., Bucht, R. E., & Dror, I. E. (2013). Forensic judgment and decision making. In (Eds) T. R. Zentall and P. H. Crowley Comparative decision making . Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Salo, B., Sirén, J., Corander, J., Zappalà, A., Bosco, D., Mokros, A., & Santtila, P. (2013). Using Bayes’ theorem in behavioural crime linking of serial homicide. Legal and Criminological Psychology , 18(2), 356-370. 

Westera, N. J., Kebbell, M. R., Milne, B., & Green, T. (2016). The prospective detective: developing the effective detective of the future. Policing and Society , 26(2), 197-209. 

Westera, N. J., Kebbell, M. R., Milne, B., & Green, T. (2016). Towards a more effective detective. Policing and society , 26(1), 1-17.