Question 1
Information from the case reminds us of the premise upon which criminal investigation is built upon. It is believed that during criminal activity, the perpetrator(s) often leave behind evidence that has to be used to prove a case against them. This is the work of criminal investigators. In the case involving the petit family, the two perpetrators, Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky left behind a trail of evidence. Patrol officers and criminal investigators ought to have worked together to retrieve evidence that could be used to incriminate the two perpetrators.
The patrol officers put together did a preliminary investigation to determine the solvability factors of the crime. This initial report by patrol officers probably served as the basis to continue with investigations. Hayes and Komisarjevsky also left behind a trail of evidence that could be used to solve the case. It is for this reason that I think the crime had solvability factors. These factors include the availability of incriminating evidence, information about the suspects and their names, and the presence of traceable property such as text messages and video recording. Though we are not told if the suspects were apprehended at the scene of the crime or were seen by any witnesses, it is clear that the investigation eventually led to them.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The role of investigators starts right at the crime scene. Crime scene investigators have the role of studying the crime scene for potential evidence. They then collect, preserve, and document evidence. I think the investigators, in this case, also identified the victims in the crime scene. The investigators should then use the scientific method and use deductive and inductive reasoning to trace the suspects. They could do this through witnesses or evidence collected within the crime scene, such as the cans of gasoline.Additionally, the investigators traced the victims' daytime activities to discover the CCTV footage of them buying gasoline using the victims' gasoline cans. With this information, detectives then proceed to identify, locate, and arrest the suspects in the case. After the arrests, the criminal investigators must find further evidence such as texts from the suspects' phones. They then put together the evidence and prepare a sound case for the prosecution.
From the criminal investigation history, Locard’s exchange principle aided this case since the perpetrators left behind a trail of evidence, which was later traced back to them. Hayes and Komisarjevsky’s initial plan was to rob the home and leave the family bound and unharmed but got distracted in the process. They then left behind a trail of evidence such as using the family's cans to fetch gasoline, raping, and photographing the incident while at it. Hence, Locard’s principle teaches that criminals often leave evidence behind. Hence, it is the investigator's role to use forensic skills to put together the evidence and secure convictions.
Question 2
Based on the history of criminal investigation, scientific knowledge, and technical and legal skills are necessary for solving crimes. Investigators must go beyond the traditional role of just catching criminals to using scientific and technical skills to collect and process evidence to secure prosecutions. In this case, the criminals had left behind a heap of evidence but had burnt down the crime scene. This may have made it difficult to extract evidence from the scene. However, with the use of the scientific method and technical skills, they were able to link the suspects to the crime scene. This brings to light the importance of forming investigative units that are equipped enough to extract evidence and use them to solve cases. A case like this presents a challenge to investigators where the evidence is not readily available at the crime scene but needed critical thinking and forensic skills to retrieve. This could only be possible in the presence of a well-coordinated team of highly-trained investigators.
