Evidence is any item(s) that is found at a crime scene and has either a direct or indirect link to the committed crime. It is fundamental legal requirement that, any evidence identified at a crime scene, be categorically logged in a systematic way.
Different administrative departments, like the police and detectives, have their unique ways of recording collected evidence systematically (Cordner, 2016) . However, the one common policy that cuts across all the administrative departments, is the fact that all the evidence collected at the crime scene should be clearly and categorically recorded, under the supervision of senior sergeants. Together with the evidence, a confirmation catalog of the evidence collected at the crime scene should be transported to the evidence lockers that are often located at the departmental headquarters for further investigation. The confirmation catalog should be authenticated by at least two signatories. The essence of this is not only validating the document, but also to confirm that the items collected are in exact form and shape as found at the crime scene. Therefore, the signatories should be relevant leadership figures, with express authority to validate the evidence logs before they are dispatched to the relevant station.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The competence of any security organ with investigative or prosecution powers is highly dependent on its commitment to the process of handling evidence, as per the available legal frameworks. It is expected of every player within the team that is the department at large, to perform their duty with all diligence due (Atkinson, 2015) . This is to say that the department, through its senior leadership, should oversee every step of cases under investigation, especially those ones that are high profile. It is important to note that the investigation of economic crime presents a special challenge to investigative authorities. This is due to the possible monetary benefit that could be accrued following any willful, calculated interference with them. The nature of such like cases demands that they be handled more transparently. An investigative organ, such as the reputable counternarcotic unit for which I work, could ensure accountability of its work by employing numerous self-regulatory measures. An example of which would be to perform oversight over all of its officers by engaging technology. Fitting field officers with audiovisual recorders, such as body cams would have ensured the entire proceedings from the raid on the Colombian drug cartel are entered into official records. It also would have allowed higher ranking officers direct participation in the raid through the monitoring of events at the scene from a central command at the headquarters. This in turn would have compelled junior officers, more specifically the two sergeants, to carry themselves out at the crime scene with the professionalism that’s required of them. (White, 2014) . The fact that the recordings could later be used as case files and for case review purposes, further improves on the quality of investigations.
Public officers are sworn in under oath, to protect and uphold constitutionalism. Any action other than that which is sanctioned under law violates the constitution and is likely to precipitate anarchy. More specifically, the mishandling of evidence compromises ability of the judicial arm of government to dispense justice in a manner that is free and fair. The two sergeants in misconducting themselves expose unit operations to the risk of impunity whereby even junior officers commit offenses in the hope of going unpunished. The general public expects a high degree of integrity of state organs that have been entrusted with important responsibility. Such is the case with the counternarcotic unit which is obligated to tame the abuse of drugs. The counternarcotic unit stands to lose its legitimacy before the court of public opinion in the event information of the financial infidelity of two of its officers leaks into the public domain (Masip, 2015) . If and when this happens, the operations of the agency will experience a great downgrade. The law is well aware of the fact that power is likely to corrupt good morals. Consequently, it has definite provisions for the responsible exercise of power and rewards abuse of public office with severe punishment. It also promises punishment for any parties that withhold their knowledge of criminal activity from state security organs. In light of this, I will have left to me several angles from which to approach the issue at hand, which is the abuse of office which I too hold, by two of my peers (Masip, 2015) . Of all options available to me, I would give precedence to, personally approaching the two sergeants to register disquiet with their misconduct. I’ll make certain to let them know that it would be in the best of their interests to turn themselves in. The law is compassionate towards remorseful first-time offenders hence by turning themselves in they’re likely to enjoy the benefit of less severe punishment. The advantage of this is that I spare myself the risk of alienating myself from fellow officers by not in any way appearing to compromise police force confidentiality codes.
Alternatively, I could choose my course of action to be the institution of disciplinary measures against the culpable officers, by say for instance, filing official report of their misconduct with senior executive officers within the department. This holds the consequence either of punishment, in case the senior officers are men of great honor and integrity or of cover-up by amongst other things witness intimidation, in the unlikely event the departmental heads are parties complicit in the crime (Cordner, 2016) . And therefore, filing a report consolidates power to take the appropriate measures to correct the faults, by either plucking out contaminated elements within the department lawfully, or to adjust the evidence handling procedures to seal the loopholes that are creating these advantages. This act will wholesomely rebuild the operational procedures with the aim of perfecting the service delivery by the department maintaining its already cited reputation.
References
Atkinson, L. R. (2015). Regulating the surveillance state, upstream and down: a law & economics approach to the intelligence framework and proposed reforms. Stan. J. Int'l L. , 1.
Cordner, G. W. (2016). Police administration. Routledge.
Masip, J. &. (2015). Police detection of deception: Beliefs about behavioral cues to deception are strong even though contextual evidence is more useful. Journal of Communication, 65(1) , 125-145.
White, M. D. (2014). Police officer body-worn cameras: Assessing the evidence. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services .
