Forensic Photography in the Modern Criminal Justice System

Introduction 

Photography is an important and valid means of documenting evidence in the criminal justice system. The contemporary society has witnessed an evident shift in the sophistication of criminal activities in the past century as such necessitating modern techniques of reporting, documentation, and presentation of evidence. The concept of forensic photography developed and expanded with the modernization of the criminal justice system and its relevance largely relies on the importance of photographic realism. Photography is widely acknowledged as the most important aspect of the crime scene documentation since photos hold the power of demonstrability. It is said that “one picture is worth a thousand words,” therefore illustrating the importance of pictorial testament. In the forensic industry, photography is the most critical protocol applied. Photography is used in documenting and presenting evidence related to suspects, convicted criminals, analysis of the crime scenes, victims, autopsies and other evidence essential in making a conviction. 

Primarily, forensic photograph supports the activities of the department of forensic science, toxicology, and the examiner’s sections. Forensic photography encompasses the act of reproducing the crime scene for the benefit of the court and in efforts of aiding the investigation process. The significance of a forensic photography to no small extent depends on the camera techniques and the qualifications of the photographer. While in many cases forensic photography may be frustrating and time-consuming, they often yield reliable evidence that is important in the criminal justice system. Forensic photography often makes the difference between an accurate conviction or exoneration due to its varied uses and benefits in the criminal justice system such as provision of evidence used in court in addition to facilitating the entire investigation process. 

The Modern Age of Forensic Photography 

Forensic photography also known as forensic imaging or crime scene photography is recognized as a valid evidence collection technique in modern society. The process provides criminal investigators with photos of bodies, places, and pieces of stuff that were involved in the crime. The advancements in information and communication technology in recent years indicates that new techniques like alternate light photography, ultraviolet, and infrared photography, digital imaging technologies have improved the activities, reliability, and validity of forensic photography. Digital imaging has enabled the process of capturing, editing, presenting and transfe r ring of images at a faster pace than it would be the case in the utilization of a film (Rohatgi, 2015). Moreover, through digital imaging, forensic photographers can now import individual frames of a video to a different platform or media with the intention of applying the necessary enhancements in efforts of understanding the crime scene. 

Formerly, photographers used to rely on the procedures of a dark room through trial and error. However, currently, advancements in computer techniques enable photographers to analyze the crime scene and the photographs in a computer a process that is not only faster but also reliable. Indeed, there are many procedures that are related to digital imaging that were previously unavailable with the traditional means of photography (Palmitto, 2004) . Currently, forensic photography has the ability to correct the outlook of an image an attribute that was previously unavailable. Undeniably, so long an image contains a scale of reference it is possible for an individual to correct and change the angle of a shot. The aspect of alteration of perspective is particularly important in cases where measurements are an important element in the evidence (Wittmann, 2017) . Moreover, the dawn of the 21 st century saw the rise of cameras that use 360-degree imagery and the inclusion of GPS data in each shot an element that increases the contextualization of the photographs for evidentiary purposes. 

In addition to still photography, videotaping has become an important and common activity in many regions across the globe. There are many advantages to applying videotaping including the fact that they are easy to use, inexpensive and in many cases, faster than still photographs that require a lot of focus. Videotaping is important in profiling the offender since it offers a continuous analysis of the crime scene an aspect that provides insight on the psychological and behavioral aspects of the perpetrator (Wittmann, 2017) . Videotaping offers the court a complete an uninterrupted reproduction of the crime scene. Undeniably, a photographer involved in videotaping may begin with the extreme perimeters and gradually proceed to specific objectives that are important to the case. As such, videotaping complements and supplements still photography through offering continuity to the images that merely depict minute details of the same objects. While important in capturing the crime scene in a continuous notion, videotaping lacks the sophistication of still photography such as lighting, focusing application of zoom feature. 

The General Uses of Forensic Photography 

Primarily, forensic photography is used to provide a permanent record of the crime scene. In many cases, the original evidence often undergoes changes. For instance, in homicide cases, the original evidence is lost during the postmortem procedures and eventual burial or cremation activities. In cases where the victims are alive, injuries often heal and eventually fade from sight an aspect that illustrates the loss of the original evidence. Moreover, forensic photography provides evidence that is not vulnerable to human error, omission, and defects such as sight problems which are common among witnesses. As such in the court of law, forensic evidence is more reliable than ten witnesses since the witness can give different accounts of the same event while an image provides one distinct description (Greek, 2005). Forensic photography is also important in aspects of the crime that undergo changes in the future, for example, biological evidence that is often collected for further analysis. In this case, forensic photography provides evidence of how the crime scene, particularly, the aspect that has undergone changes was prior to the alterations. Essentially, the main objective of forensic photography is to record and capture the crime scene before any alterations occur. 

Furthermore, some aspects of the crime scene require to close up photographs that might be important to the case but cannot be captured with the human eye. For instance, in efforts of documenting blood stains or minor cuts or tears in clothing, it is necessary for close up photography to be applied. Several tools are applied in the analysis and search of evidence that cannot be apprehended by the human eye. Special light sources are utilized to perceive the alternate spectrums, semen is evaluated in the ultraviolet spectrum , a nd fibers fluoresce are assessed under various wavelengths of light. In cases involving shootings, the infrared film is applied to record the Gun Shot Residue (GSR) on clothing since it is a daunting task to see the GSR in clothing (Rohatgi, 2015). Moreover, forensic photography is applied in cases that involve items of small size that necessitate special techniques such as photomicrography which encompasses the use of bellows or extension tubes between the lens and the camera with the intention of increasing magnification. Photomicrography is particularly useful in the evaluation, documentation, and presentation of bullets and headlamp filters. Moreover, photography through a microscope is also applied in the process of collecting and recording of trace evidence (Sargaiyan, et al., 2015). Trace evidence encompasses small pieces of evidence such as paint, hairs, and fibers which would otherwise be unnoticeable to the human eye. 

Forensic photography has transformed the aspect of an impression in the criminal justice system. The effective documentation of an impression involves various stages of evaluations. Initially, the photographer captures the impression through the application of contrast enhancing the film and the necessary light (Rohatgi, 2015). Eventually, the item that causes the print whether it is a shoe or tire is photographed. In the evaluation process, the pictures are contrasted in actual size and the impression from the object that resulted in the impression. Further analysis involves making test impressions and taking pictures of them which are then printed on a transparent material with the intention of making an overall overlay (Wittmann, 2017) . The overlay is eventually used to compare the test impression, the impression at the crime scene and the unknown impression. 

Forensic photography also provides clarifications on the issues and uncertainties relating to the crime scene and associated matters. Many scholars emphasize the importance of photography as an investigative aid since it provides visible evidence (Palmitto, 2004) . It provides actual and reliable evidence of the events and as such offers leads to the investigators on what to probe further in the search of facts associated with a particular crime. Due to their ability to provide actual evidence, forensic photographs are often used in the identification of the perpetrator in the event there is a suspect who is not in custody (Greek, 2005). The theory of identification is grounded in the fact that everything across the globe is unique and distinct. Using this logic, a particular item or individual is only identical to itself or oneself. As such, the identification process involves comparing an object or an individual with other samples to ascertain originality. In the identification of the suspect, the photograph of the suspect is displayed along with images of other individuals, which are then presented to the witnesses. For validity, it is important for all of the photos to be similar in shape, color and subject matter. The witnesses then pinpoint the subject and the rest of the photos are kept for the purpose of presentation in court. As such physical evidence is used to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the perpetrator was at the crime scene. 

The identification process associated with forensic images extend beyond suspect identification to encompass situation identification that includes determining if a crime was committed and if so how it was committed. In the situation analysis, it is important for the investigators to keep an open mind in efforts of avoiding mistakes by maintaining subjectivity (Singh, Kumar, Nanra, & Kumar, 2012). It is important for the investigator to be aware of all elements of the crime under investigation and if the analysis is applied effectively the investigator will determine the type of crime committed and how it was committed. 

Additionally, forensic photographs are important in imprint identification. The core aspect of imprint identification is that the unique characteristics of an individual are often transferred to the areas and places that they come in contact with. Initially, it is important to identify the imprint before comparing it to the suspect (Peterson, Sommers, Baskin, & Johnson, 2010) . If there are sufficient characteristics that link the suspect to the place of the imprint then the allegations against the individual are substantiated since the imprint provide a further connection between the criminal and the crime. Imprint identification connected to forensic photography is an important factor since it attempts to achieve individualism a core factor of the identification process. It is important for the photographing of imprints such as fingerprints, tire marks, paintings and shoe printing to be done carefully considering the role of prints in the identification process. Action identification, on the other hand, encompasses recognition of actions that directly link the suspect to the crime scene (Ogle, 2004). Human beings have different habits that eventually develop into personal characteristics that are different for every individual. During the crime, it is deduced that the personal attributes of the person prevail as such facilitating the modus profiling of the suspect. 

Moreover, after witness identification of the suspect, it is important for the investigators to eliminate innocent people through using physical evidence beyond the accounts of the witnesses. Forensic photography is also important in the confrontation between the investigator and the suspect prior to court appearance. In many cases, investigators question the individuals with the intention to prove that indeed the suspect committed the crime. Forensic photography allows the investigator to adequately prepare for the interview since he or she has a clear vision of how the actions transpired and are merely seeking clarification from the suspect (Greek, 2005) . During the interrogation, the investigator compares the words of the suspect with what he or she has deduced from the forensic photography to make a sound decision on the crime under investigation. As such physical evidence, particularly forensic photographs are essential to the investigator in confronting the suspect with sufficient physical evidence. Forensic images give the investigator confidence in the bid to establish the truth from the suspect during interrogations. 

The Importance of Forensic Photography in the Judicial Perspective 

Another important role of forensic photography is to present evidence for the benefit of the court. The judicial authorities in different countries and regions across the globe realized the value of forensic photography immediately after their discovery and the concept is now an integral part of many law enforcement and judicial departments. In the USA, the Criminal Procedure Act allows the presentation of evidence by photographs. Currently, many crime scenes investigations begin with photographing each of the room or areas of the crime and keeping the best shots for future reference (Singh, Kumar, Nanra, & Kumar, 2012). Photos at the scene provide insight on conditions of room after the crime, articles or publications left on the scene, trace evidence such as pieces of hair, impressions such as those of shoes, signs of activities of struggle prior to the crime among other details that are important in the effective of the crime scene and resultantly the crime. In a judicial proceeding, a picture is considered more important than several witnesses (Thompson, 2008). Witness give different versions of similar events due to the objectivity and subjectivity of what an individual witnesses and how he or she perceives the events that are taking place. Moreover, to err is the human mind which can forget details or consciously omit some details. As such, forensic photography accounts for the difference by providing one account as captured in the scene of the crime. 

In the court of law forensic photography is used in making the conclusion that essentially connects the suspect to the crime. A person is convicted when the physical evidence illustrates beyond doubt that the individual was not only at the crime scene but also committed the crime (Julian, Ketty, Roux, & Robertson, 2011). In court, the prosecutor uses the physical evidence in addition to other types of evidence to illustrate that the individual committed the crime. 

Moreover, in the court proceeding, forensic evidence is used by the investigators to question not only the suspects but also the victims and the witnesses. Moreover, lawyers in the court of law can use the photos to refresh the memories of the witnesses and the victims which is crucial in determining facts during the case proceeding (Rohatgi, 2015). Apart from assisting in the comprehension, photos provide physical proof that eliminates the need for the court to conduct an inspection in loco and for the witness to provide further elaboration on aspects showcased in the photos. As such, photographs are valuable in savings courts’ time a critical factor considering the extensive number of cases requiring court’s attention on a daily basis. 

Admissibility of Forensic Photography in Court 

The presentation of forensic photography in the court of law relies on the element of accuracy and sufficient representation of the crime scene. The quality of visual aids contains a large impression on the value of the case. Indeed, the complexity of a case further increases in events where the case involves a jury. In many circumstances, the extensiveness of a case makes it complicated and difficult to explain to a jury, therefore validating photographic displays that often sum up the case (Palmitto, 2004) . The influence of forensic evidence in the court is evident when lawyers in either side may fight to include or exclude the photos depending on whether they help or hurt the case on either side. 

Accountability of the evidence is ascertained through determining the individuals who were in possession of the evidence since the time it was initially collected. The aspect of keeping track on which individuals handled the evidence is commonly referred to as the chain of evidence. The chain of safekeeping of the forensic photographs is also known as the chain of custody (Robinson, 2010). In many cases chain of custody is maintained by limiting the number of individuals that handle the evidence from the time the photographs were taken to the time there are exhibited in court. Moreover, it is necessary to record the details of every individual that handles the images. The authenticity of the photographs relies on their evident representation of the crime scene as reported by the first respondents (Singh, Kumar, Nanra, & Kumar, 2012). For photos to be valuable in the court, they should have an evidentiary value in the scale, focus, and exposure and be precisely capture and document the crime scene. It is necessary to acknowledge in case the forensic photographs have any irregularities or inaccuracies, their admissibility in the court of law is destroyed. 

Examples of Application of Forensic Photography 

In the case of Ted Bundy, a notorious serial killer in the 1970s, it was through forensic photography of a bite on his victim's Lisa Levy buttock that ultimately led to his conviction. In August 1975, Bundy was arrested for merely refusing to stop at a police checkpoint. Upon the search of his car, the police officers found handcuffs, crowbar along other questionable items that pinpointed to a possible kidnapping. Upon further investigation, police found a link between items recovered in Bundy's car and the description of one of his victims in DaRonch (Crime Investigation, 2010). At this point, the investigators were confident that he was responsible for the murder spree but lacked evidence as such he was merely charged with attempted kidnapping. During the trial, he was convicted for kidnapping and sentenced for 15 years in prison. 

In the meantime, authorities continued with the investigations eventually linking Bundy to the murder of Cary Campbell which occurred in early 1975. During the pre-trial for the murder in June 1977, Bundy escaped but was captured in a week later. Several months later in December 1977, Bundy escaped from prison and rented an apartment near the Florida State University (Crime Investigation, 2010). On January 14 th , 1978, Bundy broke into the Florida State University's Chi Omega house where he strangled two women after raping one of them and viciously biting on her buttocks and nipples. He also beat and tortured two other women. A few weeks later in February 1978, Bundy killed 12-year-old Kimberly Leach after kidnapping and mutilating her. He was arrested a week later in Pensacola for driving a stolen car. While there were several physical evidence and eyewitness evidence that linked Bundy to the kidnap of Kimberly and the death of Florida State University students’ it was the mold of bite on one of his sorority house victim that led to his conviction (Crime Investigation, 2010). Indeed, the bite mark on Lisa Levy buttock matched Bundy's distinct crooked and chipped teeth which ultimately provided proof of his involvement in the murder of the Florida State university students. 

Despite the occurrence of the crime more than four decades ago, it is acknowledged that authorities have embraced the advantages of forensic photography for more than a century. The only limitation was the lack of technological advancements that are evident in the current society (Ogle, 2004). Various physical evidence such as a mask similar to the one that was previously recovered in Bundy's car was found in the crime scene of the murder of another woman in Florida. Moreover, eyewitnesses placed Bundy at the kidnap scene of 12-year-old Kimberly in addition to the eyewitness that affirmed he saw Bundy at the sorority house during the night he attacked and killed two female students. However, as mentioned, forensic evidence holds more ground than eyewitnesses and other minor physical evidence that often link suspects to the crime scene (Robinson, 2010). The identification of a perpetrator's unquestionable involvement in a crime involves embracing the aspect of uniqueness that distinguishes the individual from the others. In this particular case, Bundy has crooked and chipped teeth which left distinct marks after a bite compared to the event where the criminal had no crooked teeth. As such, photographic evidence played a major role in the conviction of Bundy who later confessed to killing more than fifty women prior to his death by electric chair as postulated in the sentencing. 

In another case where forensic photography played a major role is the famously known Atlantic Child murders that occurred almost four decades ago. In a two-year time span, between 1979 and 1981, 29 individuals where the majority were children were killed in Atlanta through strangling. The then suspect, Wayne Williams was stooped while driving away from a river where the police officers had recovered several bodies. Prior to being stopped, officers who were close to the area merely heard a splash on the water and gave a chase which eventually led to the arrest of Wayne Williams. Since the police did not see him drop the body, and there was little evidence that linked him to the strangling of all the children the police let him go (DeLong, 2018). However, they took fibers from his car in an attempt for further investigation. The entire case was grounded on forensic evidence gathered from fibers found on the scene of the crime and the bodies of the victims. 

Throughout the investigations, police recovered more than 30 types of fibers that linked William to two murders. The fibers were from different surfaces in Williams' house, his vehicle, and his dog. Williams was not charged with the murder of all his 29 victims but was arrested for the murder of Nathaniel Cater and Jimmy Ray Payne since hairs and fibers from his car were recovered from the bodies (DeLong, 2018). The famed FBI criminal profiler, Douglas, observed the crime scenes and the bodies and weighed on William's profile fit on the murders. Since many of the children were black, Douglas initially profiled that the killer was an African-American since he had access to the African-American children. Douglas also hypothesized that the murders gave Williams a sense of control of his life citing how his adult life has been characterized by failures (DeLong, 2018). After the trial, Williams was convicted for the two murders each for a life sentence. Lack of further evidence led to the closure of other cases related to the Atlanta child murders but Williams was branded the serial killer behind the killings. It is important to point out forensic photography played an active role in the identification of the fibers on the bodies of the victims which provided evidence that linked Williams to the murders (Julian, Ketty, Roux, & Robertson, 2011). In this particular case, the lack of fiber connection would have deemed the case moot in court. As such, it is evident that forensic photography plays a major role in the entire criminal justice system. 

Conclusion 

The functionality of the criminal justice system as an entity relies on the collection of valuable information and the subsequent accurate description of the data. Effective investigation relies on both subjective and objective information with the intention to discern the truth. The investigation process encompasses the collection and analysis of clues from the crime scene and places them with the relative association. The crime scene contains micro and macro-information that is important in the development of a case by the prosecutor. Forensic photography plays an important role since it captures the crime scene prior to any alterations. Forensic photography is important in both the investigative and judicial stages of a case. They are applied in the identification process and during the interrogation of the suspect. In court, images provide a precise picture of the occurrences of the crime. Moreover, they are used in the questioning of the victims, witnesses and the suspect. The conviction of Tim Bundy and Wayne Williams illustrate the importance of forensic photography including the application of high technology cameras that capture trace evidence such as fibers. 

References 

Crime Investigation. (2010). Ted Bundy. Retrieved October 22, 2018, from Crime Investigation. 

DeLong, W. (2018, April 3). Wayne Williams and the mystery of the Atlanta child murders. Retrieved October 23, 2018, from All that's, is interesting. 

Greek, C. E. (2005). Visual criminology: using photography as an ethnographic research method in criminal justice settings. Florida State University: Dissertations in Criminology and Criminal Justice School , 1-70. 

Julian, R., Ketty, S., Roux, P. C., & Robertson, J. (2011). What is the value of forensic science: An overview of the value of the effectiveness of forensic science in the Australian Criminal Jus. Australian Journal of Forensic Science , 217-229. 

Ogle, R. R. (2004). Crime scene investigation and reconstruction. New York: Pearson Education. 

Palmitto, J. M. (2004). Criminal investigation. Dallas: University Press of America. 

Peterson, J., Sommers, I., Baskin, D., & Johnson, D. (2010). The Role and impact of forensic evidence in the criminal justice process. US Department of Justice. 

Robinson, E. M. (2010). Crime Scene Photography. London: Elsevier. 

Rohatgi, R. (2015, February 16). Importance of still photography at scene of crime: A forensic vs. Judicial Perspective. Retrieved October 23, 2018, from Crime Scene Investigator Network: https://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/importance-of-still-photography-at-scene-of-crime.html 

Sargaiyan, V., Bharddwaj, D., Singh, P., Sharma, R., Siddiqui, N. S., & Bhatele, S. (2015). Forensic photography: A review. IJOCR, 3 (2), 60-65. 

Singh, H., Kumar, P., Nanra, R., & Kumar, A. (2012). Why is the crime scene photographed? There is no a single answer. The Internet Journal of Forensic Science, 5 (1). 

Thompson, T. J. (2008). The role of the photography in the application of forensic anthropology and the interpretation of clandestine scenes of crime. Photography and Culture , 163-182. 

Wittmann, A. (2017). Overview of forensic photography. Journal of Forensic Science and Criminal Investigation, 2 (2), 1-2.