criminal investigation process essay

Introduction to Criminal Investigation: Processes, Practices and Thinking

(7 reviews)

Rod Gehl, Justice Institute of British Columbia

Darryl Plecas, University of the Fraser Valley

Copyright Year: 2017

Publisher: BCcampus

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by Ann Koshivas, Professor, North Shore Community College on 11/29/22

I am excited that there is a book in the OER library on criminal investigations. The principles of criminal investigation are well described and it is easy to read and understand. It is a comprehensive book for a community college criminal... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

I am excited that there is a book in the OER library on criminal investigations. The principles of criminal investigation are well described and it is easy to read and understand. It is a comprehensive book for a community college criminal investigations course. There are some parts that might be confusing because the text is based on Canadian law but the general principles are explained well and applicable to the US as well.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

As far as I can tell the book is accurate but I am not as familiar with Canadian Law and case precedents so I cannot speak as to those aspects of the book. From what I can tell, the book is accurate.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

It is a relatively new book but the law frequently changes so it will need to be updated. In addition, technological advances as they relate to criminal investigations are constantly being made so the book will need to be updated based on that as well.

Clarity rating: 5

The text is easy to read and well organized.

Consistency rating: 5

There are no issues with consistency. The book is consistent in terns of use of terminology and framework.

Modularity rating: 5

This book could easily be used to assign specific chapters. Each chapter stands alone but the content follows a logical manner in its explanation of criminal investigations.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

This book is well organized.

Interface rating: 5

The interface was fine. There was nothing confusing or distracting. It was well organized and easy to read.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

I found no major problems with grammar. The text was understandable and easy to read.

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

There was nothing culturally offensive about this book.

The length of this book makes it appealing for an introductory course in criminal investigations. The author covers the areas thoroughly and is concise.

Reviewed by Richard Riner, Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice/ Criminology, Buena Vista University on 12/16/21

This is a short text, 203 pages versus 519 pages for the book I am currently using for the Criminal Investigations course. It covers the basics, but that is about all it does. The book takes a very broad look at the investigative process, which... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 3 see less

This is a short text, 203 pages versus 519 pages for the book I am currently using for the Criminal Investigations course. It covers the basics, but that is about all it does. The book takes a very broad look at the investigative process, which makes it appropriate for those with no formal introduction into police work or investigations, but for those who are familiar with the process and might be looking for an in-depth examination of specific issues that can occur within the scope of an investigation, this book does not seem to be intended for that purpose. For example, a death investigation is different enough in nature and procedure that most texts devote a chapter to examining the inherent complexities and procedural challenges that accompany the investigation into the death of another human being. This book discusses major cases, and while death investigations certainly fall within that category, there is not a lot of material devoted to them, and that material is under the topic of Forensics.

Content Accuracy rating: 4

The book was written by and for students in Canada, while my background in law enforcement in the United States. However, the fact that many current and former law enforcement officials were consulted for the creation of this book lead me to believe that form a policy and procedure standpoint the book is accurate. In order to do due diligence for this section, I researched Canadian procedures (a very educational exercise) and found everything in the book to be accurate.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 4

Because the book is written from a broader frame of reference, it's utility will outlast many books in the field. Criminal Justice is an ever-changing field, and the more specific the material the more susceptible it is to changes in the landscape with regard to policy and procedure. By staying broad in scope the book discusses issues and practices that have relevant for many years and will remain so for the foreseeable future. This book will age well.

The book is written in a straightforward language without a heavy reliance on jargon. The cases cited are not what I am used to being the book was written essentially for a Canadian audience, but the explanation of the importance and relevance of the cases would be easily understood. Anyone with an interest in investigations would be able to read this book and understand the message of the authors.

Consistency rating: 4

The voice in which the book was written remains consistent throughout. The terms used to refer to the various concepts or practices are such that once a person understands them they will be able to apply them later in the text to aid in understanding later concepts.

The text is broken down into chapters, as most texts are, but them the authors have further broken the text down into topics within each chapter. This makes locating a passage of text easily done. From an instructor stand point this is a feature I would find especially useful during the presentation of textbook material in class. Having the chapters broken down in this manner will make the task of learning easier for students as well.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 3

When teaching about the process of a criminal investigation, I find it helpful to address topic in the order that an investigator is likely to deal with them when carrying out an investigation, beginning with the initial response to the scene of the crime, and ending with testimony during the trial. This text is not organized in such a way. The order in which topics are presented is not inherently confusing, but for someone who "walks" students through the process means there would be a fair amount of jumping back and forth between chapters to approach the material chronologically.

There were no issues with navigating the book. I downloaded a PDF of the text so it could accessed offline. And while there not active links in the table of contents that a person could click to go directly to a specific chapter, finding a particular passage or topic was fairly easy. The charts that accompany the text were clear both with regard to the quality of the image and clarity of the concepts. There were not a great deal of photos in the text, perhaps only one of a photo array, but it was a good quality photo.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

I did not notice issues with grammar within the text.

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

Since the text was created for a Canadian audience, I may not be the most qualified person to judge the cultural relevance if this particular text. However, I did not find any material that I would deem inappropriate of offensive. This text deals with material and incidents that can be upsetting or shocking to people, and does so in a manner that would not offensive to readers.

Overall, this could be a useful and instructive text for the right audience. Outside of Canada, its potential utility lessens. The text has some very good characteristics, which have been described earlier, and some that could be improves in later iterations of the text.

Reviewed by Graham Rankin, Visiting Assistant Professor, Chemistry, Western Oregon University on 7/29/21

There are extensive references including legal citations for Canadian Supreme Court decisions, and an an excellent list of study questions with answers at the end of the text. However, there is no glossary or index included which makes it more... read more

There are extensive references including legal citations for Canadian Supreme Court decisions, and an an excellent list of study questions with answers at the end of the text. However, there is no glossary or index included which makes it more difficult to find the definition of a term or individual pages where a topic is covered.

Appears to be fairly accurate. I am not familiar with Caradon law so I am assuming these sections are accurate. Because the Forensic Science chapter is very superficial some aspects, while not inaccurate, are incomplete. For instance, Ballistics is considered outmoded and Firearms Identification is preferred. Accelerant and Arson are discouraged from use as Fire Debris Analysis, Suspicious Fire and Ignitable Liquid Determination are the recommended terms. Only the jury can determine if the presence of an ignitable liquid was used by the accused as an accelerant in the commission of the crime of arson. Also Bite Mark Evidence is now considered pseudoscience and may not be presented in court.

Publication date is 2016 which is reasonably recent, however an updated edition should be considered in light of new developments in analysis of trace evidence, DNA genealogical matching, and digital evidence, especially cell phone tracing of a suspect's movements.

Clarity rating: 4

Generally very clear, except for the too brief Forensic Science chapter. Also the correct packaging of evidence needs to be included as the uniformed officer may be tasked with this at the crime scene.

With the exception of Chapter 10 it is very consistent.

Each chapter is divided into Topics with study questions at the end of each chapter.

Very good. Example forms for Crime Scene management and Evidence log are included.

Interface rating: 4

Scenarios could be expanded to encourage critical thinking by requiring the reader to formulate a hypothesis based on evidence, the test that hypothesis.

none noted.

The importance of photo and line-up procedures to include same race and general description is important for eye witness identification. Cultural issues were discussed in light of interviewing witnesses and suspects.

This text is intended for training police officers who may be involved in crime scene investigation and interviewing suspects and witnesses. In that respect it does a very good job in developing a mindset for the officer to follow in the course of his/her duties. The major downside is this is a Canadian publication and thus will need considerable additional lecture and written information relating to US federal and state legal issues especially Chapter 2. While many of the aspects of rights of the suspect are common, the legal framework and court cases will be different. The overall approach includes case scenarios and study questions at the end of each chapter. Aside from those unique to Canadian law, these are excellent and could be used in a Crime Scene Investigation course in a Criminal Justice department. Some topics in crime scene security, collection and preservation of evidence could be included in introductory courses in Forensic Science. Chapter 10 is the only chapter relating directly to Forensic Science. Some topics like Forensic Pathology are fairly detailed whereas Forensic Chemistry is a short paragraph, mostly a listing of areas of analysis, i.e. fire debris analysis, drug analysis, toxicology. As a result this text would be unsuitable as the sole text for even an Introduction to Forensic Science course.

Reviewed by paul Zipper, Adjunct Faculty, Northern Essex Community College on 4/15/21

The Text was written utilizing Canadian law. This became problematic when addressing legal concepts in the US. There was no index or glossary of terms. The text would have benefited with an index and glossary of terms at the end. read more

The Text was written utilizing Canadian law. This became problematic when addressing legal concepts in the US. There was no index or glossary of terms. The text would have benefited with an index and glossary of terms at the end.

Content Accuracy rating: 3

The major investigative steps in the book was accurate. However when delving deeper into the text, it was clear Canadian terminology and US terminology and laws are different and don't mesh seamlessly. There are minor spelling nuances between the US and Canada. We use the term "offense" Canadians use "offence" as an example.

The 11 chapters were organized and hit the major areas in Criminal Investigation. Necessary updates can fit into the current template.

Clarity rating: 1

The major investigative step are well written. However Canadian Jargon/laws/terminology do not translate into concepts found in US law.

The terminology and framework are consistent- yet not applicable to what we do in the US

Modularity found in this course is a strength. Having used the text the last several semesters, it is easy to use with a traditional 14 week semester. It also covers the major concepts in a manner that is not overwhelming to students. Each week of the semester a major concept is covered and additional case studies and article are utilized to support the chapter we are covering.

The book is well organized. It takes the students through a traditional investigative flow. It has a strong introduction and covers the necessary preliminary steps and investigator/student would need to know before moving on to the next one.

The text is free of interface issues; that being said the text would be enhanced by adding some images and charts to enhance the materials.

Minor grammatical errors

I found no material in the text that would in any way be considered insensitive or offensive.

I think this is an excellent OER. It is well organized and covers major investigative steps in an organized fashion. The major downside is the audience it was written for are Canadian Law Enforcement Officers. I am teaching college students in Massachusetts, USA. A majority of the investigative steps and concepts are transferrable to the US. However, Canadian law and criminal procedure are different than US Federal law and the laws in each of our 50 states and territories. This text works with supplemental materials from the jurisdiction it is taught in being inserted. The instructor needs to point out the differences during class discussion.

Reviewed by William Powers, Adjunct Faculty, Bristol Community College on 5/29/20

Comprehensive instructions from first responding Officer to crime scene preservation, documentation, interviews and interrogation plus (Canadian) legal aspects. read more

Comprehensive instructions from first responding Officer to crime scene preservation, documentation, interviews and interrogation plus (Canadian) legal aspects.

Written in a straight forward, unbiased, usually step by step progression.

Text is based on Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, so legal aspects are not likely to drastically change. Text can be easily edited and updated for changes and new rulings in case law.

Wording is clear, minimal use of technical terminology. The only thing I had to research was the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms for comparison to American Constitution/Bill of Rights.

Proper use of terminology, some easily understood Canadian phrasing.

Book is properly divided by chapter and sub-divided to explain more detailed subject matter.

Good progression of subject matter from Intro through legal aspects to strategic organization and tactical use of crime scene protocols.

The few charts in the book were clear and easily understood. No distortion.

Grammatical Errors rating: 3

Some grammatical and punctuation errors scattered throughout the book. Ch. 7 Topic 2 Witness Types became confusing grammatically. Poorly worded in identifying direct, indirect, circumstantial evidence and witnesses. Ch 8 Note Taking. A quote (?) was opened with parentheses, parentheses were never closed.

Examples were non-offensive.

This text will be useful to a Canadian instructor and classes of prospective Police Officers, especially those that intend to pursue careers in criminalistics. The heavy but necessary reliance on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms limits the books usefulness in other countries. Officers in the United States will be unnecessarily confused by the mixture of Canadian rights and the American Bill of Rights/Constitution. (This reviewer is from the U.S.) I myself will explore the use of Ch 8 as a quality example of proper crime scene security. The chapter shows how a first responding Officer should establish proper limited access to the crime scene, how to use an Officer assigned to maintaining a Crime Scene Security Log to limit access to and document egress times at a scene, and use of an Exhibit Log by a Forensics team supervisor to protect evidence integrity.

Reviewed by Robert Engvall, Professor, Roger Williams University on 11/5/19

This book provides a comprehensive look at introductory criminal investigation. It does a nice job of laying a proper foundation through introducing basic concepts leading through to chapters on crime scene management and forensic sciences. read more

This book provides a comprehensive look at introductory criminal investigation. It does a nice job of laying a proper foundation through introducing basic concepts leading through to chapters on crime scene management and forensic sciences.

This book is entirely accurate in its portrayal of criminal investigation.

This book is particularly relevant given today's increasingly complicated criminal justice climate. Criminal investigations are under increased scrutiny (appropriately so) and this book introduces that important new reality.

This book is clear, concise, valuable to the reader.

This book provides consistency throughout.

Each chapter provides its own information and could easily stand alone as a section of study. The context is set appropriately in the beginning of the book and some basic concepts follow leading through to more complicated crime scene management.

Each chapter stands alone, and is clearly organized. The flow is appropriate as the book takes the reader from context to basics to more complicated and reality based principles.

The book is easy to read, easy to look at, well organized.

Grammar is fine.

The book is appropriate for today's world.

This book truly does provide a solid foundation for a criminal investigation student. It would be of value to any undergraduate criminal investigation course.

Reviewed by Michael Buerger, Professor of Criminal Justice, Bowling Green State University, Ohio on 2/1/18

The text under review is written for Canadian investigators, and rests on Canadian law and case precedents. That limits its applicability to the American market, and in some ways limits the value of an assessment by an American reviewer. Many... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

The text under review is written for Canadian investigators, and rests on Canadian law and case precedents. That limits its applicability to the American market, and in some ways limits the value of an assessment by an American reviewer. Many sections do not have direct applicability, despite the general similarities between the two systems. Even though there are clear parallels in the legal systems, Canadian case law under a national charter will not have broad applicability in the United States context. State laws, federal appellate districts, and Supreme Court decisions are all operant, and the applicable legal rules may differ between jurisdictions when there are no federal precedents (the Scenario #2 domestic violence example on page 53 is such an example, for instance). The overview in Chapter 1 is excellent, and can be applied equally to criminal investigations in any democratic context. Chapter 2’s discussion of “discretion” is a good example of that adaptability, for instance: the overall effect of the first two chapters is positive enough to make me wish there could be an American version.

The approach taken by the authors is a sensible and much-needed addition to the presentation of criminal investigations. Distinguishing between investigative tasks and investigative thinking is a recurring thematic guide, and it is articulated well throughout the book. Though the distinction might be made more explicitly, the authors recognize that criminal investigations begin with the arrival of the first responding unit, almost always a uniformed officer rather than an investigator, and they incorporate that perspective throughout. The roles described on page 13 are equally applicable to Canadian and U.S. criminal justice personnel.

Not all of the examples are as useful as they might be. The example on page 36 – “I really need some money. I’m going to rob that bank tomorrow.” – is far more explicit than the type of circumstantial evidence investigators are likely to encounter. While the statement is useful, it is unrealistically specific: improvements might include the addition of variations on the theme of such utterances, such as: “I really need some money. Maybe I should rob a bank” and “I really, really need money. I’m desperate.” The greater ambiguity embedded in those statements is a greater test of the thinking discipline that the authors promote.

Page 43: the issue of consent may be that simple in Canada, but American cases rest on whether or not the person giving consent has authority to do so: cohabitants, roommates with specific areas of privacy vs. general-use spaces, landlords rather than tenants, and similar variations are not addressed here.

The distinction between Tactical and Strategic responses is a valid one, but it is dragged out a bit more than it needs to be on pp. 48-51; it is laborious reading, leaning to the tendentious. The concept is clear, but the explanation drags. One of the issues related to that distinction is the role of first-responding patrol officers, and subsequent follow-up investigation by detectives

The discussion of the stabbing incident that occupies pages 55-57 is important for establishing the “step-down” requirement when an exigent circumstances scene is brought under control. It is described in Canadian terms, but has American analogs.

The presentations focus more on philosophy than technique, and the links between the two are not consistent throughout. While the overview of forensic evidence is a good introductory treatment, I expected at least some reference to collection techniques, since the lab work is dependent upon crime scene work.

I cannot speak to the accuracy of the Canadian legal components, but the elements that apply to the fundamental of the work are sound.

Relevance and longevity should be good. Changes in law, and changes in or addition to the forensic techniques will require periodic updating, but that should be accomplished easily.

The writing is clear, although repetitive in some places, leaning to the tendentious in a few spots. My only real concern would be that the some readers might get lost in the philosophy of thinking, to the detriment of understanding the associated techniques.

Consistency of approach and terminology, and associated linkages in different sections, is good.

Modularity rating: 4

The modules are a strength of the book; my only criticism is that they are more uneven in their content than I would expect. A number of one-short-paragraph modules are ripe for at least some further development.

The text is clear, and easy to follow.

I experienced no interface problems at all.

Allowing for the different systems of punctuation, the book is error-free in terms of grammar. There are some annoying proofreading errors that stand out, however: Page 62: a comma rather than a period at the end of the second sentence of the “Common Error #3” paragraph. Page 65: redundant “situation” in the third paragraph (lower case followed by a capitalized Boldface). Page 82, final paragraph: “articles of evid. . . ase” are proofreading errors Page 92: Need a space between “crime.” and “Understanding” Page 120, third line of the “Like photo lineups” paragraph: the semi-colon should be a comma. A comma after “suspect” in the second line would help clarify the subordinate clause issue.

Cultural references are mostly absent, and for good reason, I think. They are a larger element in investigations, more fragmented in their application, and deserve separate, free-standing treatment. I saw no references that raised red flags for offensive content.

The first “Interviewing” paragraph at the bottom of page 123, carrying over to page 124, begins with the premise that “In fact, the person is not even definable as a suspect at this point,” but immediately shifts to a previously-discussed point (perpetrators acting as witnesses or reporters in order to deflect suspicion) and remains on that point to the end. Far more persons are interviewed who do not fit this category than are those who are, and the narrow focus on “suspect” for this portion is disconcerting.

The main focus of the chapter is on offenders, which at some point the investigation must be, but the broader preliminary interview phases need better development. Chapter 7 deals more with typologies than techniques, so a broader treatment of non-suspect witness interviews (and recontact interviews) would be helpful.

Table of Contents

• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: Some Important Basic Concepts
• Chapter 3: What You Need To Know About Evidence
• Chapter 4: The Process of Investigation
• Chapter 5: Strategic Investigative Response
• Chapter 6: Applying the Investigative Tools
• Chapter 7: Witness Management
• Chapter 8: Crime Scene Management
• Chapter 9: Interviewing, Questioning, and Interrogation
• Chapter 10: Forensic Sciences
• Chapter 11: Summary

Ancillary Material

About the book.

Introduction to Criminal Investigation, Processes, Practices, and Thinking is a teaching text designed to assist the student in developing their own structured mental map of processes, practices, and thinking to conduct criminal investigations.

Delineating criminal investigation into operational descriptors of tactical-response and strategic response while using illustrations of task-skills and thinking-skills, the reader is guided into structured thinking practices. Using the graphic tools of a “Response Transition Matrix”, an “Investigative Funnel”, and the “STAIR Tool”, the reader is shown how to form their own mental map of investigative thinking that can later be articulated in support of forming their reasonable grounds to believe.

Chapter 1 introduces criminal investigation as both a task process and a thinking process. This chapter outlines these concepts, rules, and processes with the goal of providing practical tools to ensure successful investigative processes and practices. Most importantly, this book informs the reader how to approach the investigative process using “investigative thinking.”

Chapter 2 illustrates investigation by establishing an understanding of the operational forum in which it occurs. That forum is the criminal justice system and in particular, the court system. The investigative process exists within the statutory rules of law, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and case law rulings adjudicated by the courts. Considering the existence of these conditions, obligations, and case law rules, there are many terms and concepts that an investigator needs to understand to function appropriately and effectively within the criminal justice system. The purpose of this chapter is to introduce some of the basic legal parameters and concepts of criminal justice within which the criminal investigation process takes place.

Chapter 3 describes the functions and terms of “evidence”, as they relate to investigation. This speaks to a wide range of information sources that might eventually inform the court to prove or disprove points at issue before the trier of fact. Sources of evidence can include anything from the observations of witnesses to the examination and analysis of physical objects. It can even include the spatial relationships between people, places, and objects within the timeline of events. From the various forms of evidence, the court can draw inferences and reach conclusions to determine if a charge has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Considering the critical nature of evidence within the court system, there are a wide variety of definitions and protocols that have evolved to direct the way evidence is defined for consideration by the court. In this chapter, we look at some of the key definitions and protocols that an investigator should understand to carry out the investigative process.

Chapter 4 breaks investigation down into logical steps, establishing a progression that can be followed and repeated to reach the desired results. The process of investigation can be effectively explained and learned in this manner. In this chapter the reader is introduced to various issues in the progression that relate to the process of investigation.

Chapter 5 examines the operational processes of investigation. In this chapter we introduce the three big investigative errors along with graphic illustrations of “The Investigative Funnel” and the “S T A I R Tool” to illustrate how each of these concepts in the investigative progression.

Chapter 6 provides the reader the opportunity to work through some investigative scenarios using the S T A I R Tool. These scenarios demonstrate the investigative awareness required to transition from the tactical investigative response to the strategic investigative response. Once in the strategic response mode the reader is challenged to practice applying theory development to conduct analysis of the evidence and information to create an investigative plan.

This chapter presents two investigative scenarios each designed to illustrate different steps of the S T A I R tool allowing the student to recognize both the tactical and the strategic investigative responses and the implications of transitioning from the tactical to the strategic response.

Chapter 7 illustrates the investigative practices of witness management. Witness statements will assist the investigator in forming reasonable grounds to lay a charge, and will assist the court in reaching a decision that the charge against an accused person has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

It is important for an investigator to understand these practices as they allow an investigator to evaluate witnesses and collect witness evidence that will be acceptable to the courts.

Chapter 8 describes crime scene management skills. These skills are an extremely significant task component of investigation because evidence that originates at the crime scene will provide a picture of events for the court to consider in its deliberations. That picture will be composed of witness testimony, crime scene photographs, physical exhibits, and the analysis of those exhibits, along with the analysis of the crime scene itself. From this chapter, the reader will learn the task processes and protocols for several important issues in crime scene management.

Chapter 9 examines the interviewing, questioning, and interrogation techniques police use to aid them in investigations. The courts expect police to exercise high standards using practices that focus on the rights of the accused person, and minimize any physical or mental anguish that might cause a false confession. In meeting these expectations, the challenges of suspect questioning and interrogation can be complex, and many police agencies have trained interrogators and polygraph operators who undertake the interrogation of suspects for major criminal cases. But not every investigation qualifies as a major case, and frontline police investigators are challenged to undertake the tasks of interviewing, questioning, and interrogating possible suspects daily. The challenge for police is that the questioning of a suspect and the subsequent confession can be compromised by flawed interviewing, questioning, or interrogation practices. Understanding the correct processes and the legal parameters can make the difference between having a suspect's confession accepted as evidence by the court or not.

Chapter 10 examines various forensic sciences and the application of forensic sciences as practical tools to assist police in conducting investigations. As we noted in Chapter 1, it is not necessary for an investigator to be an expert in any of the forensic sciences; however, it is important to have a sound understanding of forensic tools to call upon appropriate experts to deploy the correct tools when required.

Chapter 11 summarizes the learning objectives of this text and suggests investigative learning topics for the reader going forward. Many topics relative to investigative practices have not been covered here as part of the core knowledge requirements for a new investigator. These topics include:

Major Case Management Informant and confidential source management Undercover investigations Specialized team investigations

About the Contributors

Rod Gehl , is a retired police Inspector, and an instructor of criminal investigation for International Programs and the Law Enforcement Studies Program at the Justice Institute of British Columbia. These ongoing teaching engagements are preceded by 35 years of policing experience as criminal investigator and a leader of multi-agency major case management teams. From his experiences Rod has been a keynote speaker at several international homicide conferences and has assisted in the development and presentation of Major Case Management courses for the Canadian Police College. For his contribution to policing he has been conferred the Lieutenant Governor’s Meritorious Service Award for homicide investigation.   Rod’s published research on the “The Dynamics of Police Cooperation in Multi-agency Investigations”, was followed by his article, titled, “Multi-agency Teams, A Leadership Challenge”, featured in the US Police Chief Magazine. Rod retains a licence as a private investigator and security consultant and continues to work with regulatory compliance agencies in both public and private sector organizations for the development of their investigative training and systems.

Darryl Plecas is Professor Emeritus at University of the Fraser Valley where he worked for 34 years, most recently holding the Senior University Research Chair (RCMP) and Directorship of the Centre for Public Safety and Criminal Justice Research. As Professor Emeritus he continues to co-author work with colleagues and supervises graduate students. He also serves as Associate Research Faculty at California State University – Sacramento, and as an annually invited lecturer to the Yunnan Police College in Kunming, China. He is the author or co-author of more than 200 research reports, international journal articles, books, and other publications addressing a broad range public safety issues. He is a recipient of numerous awards, including UFV’s Teaching Excellence Award, the Innovative Excellence in Teaching, Learning and Technology Award from the International Conference on College Teaching and Learning, the Order of Abbotsford, the CCSA Award of Excellence, and the British Columbia Lieutenant Governor’s Award for Public Safety. His most recent co-authored book “Evidenced Based Decision Making for Government Professionals” was awarded the 2016 Professional Development Award from the Canadian Association of Municipalities.

Contribute to this Page

• Need Assistance? Con tact our support team
• Verify Certificates

• Anti-Financial Crime
• Anti-Money Laundering
• Fraud & Investigations
• Risk Management
• Certified Money Laundering Prevention Professional (CMLP)
• Certified Anti-Financial Crime Professional (CFCP)
• Certified Audit and Investigations Professional (CAIP)
• Certifications
• Online Courses
• Expert Webinars
• Learning Paths
• Completion Certificates
• Global Community
• Live Tutoring
• Resource Hub
• Interactive LMS
• Jobs by FCA

Exploring the Criminal Investigation Process: Techniques and Procedures Explained

Have you ever been captivated by a mystery novel or crime thriller, marveling at the investigator’s ability to solve seemingly unsolvable cases? The world of criminal investigations is just as complex and fascinating as fiction, relying on a range of techniques and strategies to uncover the truth and bring justice to light. In this article, we’ll delve into the various aspects of the investigation process, from the vital role of physical evidence and the dynamics of investigation teams to the intricacies of financial investigations and the importance of learning from past incidents.

Key Takeaways

Criminal investigation is a process of gathering and evaluating evidence to identify suspects and establish reasonable grounds for suspicion.

It involves techniques such as physical evidence collection, data analysis, theory development, suspect identification, adapting to changing circumstances and securing the crime scene.

An effective investigation team requires reliable members with diverse skillsets who can work together through open communication & prompt resolution of conflicts.

The Role of Physical Evidence in Investigations

Physical evidence is the backbone of criminal investigations , providing objective and dependable data that can corroborate or refute investigative theories. As the saying goes, “the proof is in the pudding,” and in the world of criminal investigations, the proof is in the relevant evidence.

Maintaining the integrity and usefulness of evidence in the investigation requires understanding the specifics of the case and familiarizing oneself with all permissible investigative measures, including the management and analysis of gathered evidence. Moreover, investigators must be adaptable to changing circumstances, as sticking to only flexible general rules may not be sufficient in every case. Proper acquisition and handling of evidence are crucial for a successful forensic investigation, ultimately building a strong case against the suspect with the evidence obtained.

Collection and Preservation

In criminal investigations , even a single error in the collection and preservation of evidence can determine the outcome of a case. Adhering to the correct protocols for collecting and preserving evidence, such as documenting the scene, gathering and securing the evidence, and preserving the chain of custody, is vital for forming reasonable grounds for suspicion or belief in the investigative process. It is crucial to preserve evidence effectively to ensure a fair and accurate outcome.

The procedure for gathering physical evidence must be thorough. It includes:

Documenting the scene

Recognizing and safeguarding the evidence

Obtaining trace materials and DNA evidence

Properly preserving and transporting the evidence.

Adherence to these guidelines helps investigators maintain the integrity and admissibility of evidence in court, which is crucial for the successful resolution of the case.

Analyzing Evidence

Once the evidence is collected and preserved, it’s time for the investigation team to roll up their sleeves and dive into the world of analysis. Techniques employed to examine and interpret physical evidence include microscopy, chromatography, and DNA analysis. The primary components of an investigation involve gathering documents and administering interviews, with covert surveillance playing a key role in obtaining a variety of data, including location, activities, health status, and potential evidence for legal proceedings.

As the investigation unfolds, newly revealed information may call for multiple interviews and adjustments to investigative strategies. Hence, investigators must keep a clear grasp of the purpose of the interviews and overarching investigation objectives .

Presenting Evidence in Court

After all the hard work of collecting and analyzing evidence, the final hurdle is presenting the evidence in court. To do this effectively, investigators must:

Maintain an accurate record of all activities related to the investigation

Document and authenticate the chain of evidence

Employ strategies such as organizing the evidence, utilizing visual aids, and preparing witnesses

Presenting physical evidence in court encompasses labeling the evidence, presenting it to witnesses, having witnesses offer it, and securing its admissibility based on the judge’s ruling. Ultimately, the successful presentation of evidence in court hinges on the investigator’s ability to clearly and convincingly demonstrate its relevance and reliability.

Investigation Team Dynamics

Behind every successful criminal investigation, there is a skilled and cohesive investigation team. The role of an investigation team is to:

Gather pertinent facts , data, and evidence

Establish the chronological order of events that transpired leading up to a particular incident or crime

Have a team leader who directs the investigation and liaises with stakeholders and external parties

Comprise specialists with specialized insights and experience in investigating specific types of incidents or crimes

Successful investigations hinge on:

Effective communication and coordination

Role understanding and collaborative efforts among team members

Resolving conflicts within the team

Maintaining focus on the investigation’s objectives

Ensuring a swift and efficient conduct of the investigation.

Assembling the Team

Assembling a skilled investigation team is like putting together a puzzle – each piece must fit together perfectly to create a complete picture. The success of an investigation depends on the diversity of skills and expertise within the team. To form an investigation team, individuals with the requisite skills, expertise, and qualifications must be carefully selected, ensuring that they can provide their unique perspectives and expertise to the investigation process .

Team members should possess reliability, trustworthiness, and the ability to work together to acquire data and evaluate evidence. In some cases, outside counsel or experts may be engaged to provide specialized knowledge or guidance during the investigation.

Communication and Coordination

A well-oiled machine runs smoothly and efficiently, and the same applies to an investigation team. Clear and effective communication among team members is essential to ensure a successful investigation process. The role of communication and coordination in investigations involves keeping all team members up-to-date and exchanging information in an organized and expeditious manner. This can result in enhanced collaboration, more effective decision-making, and augmented efficiency.

Examples of effective communication and coordination in investigations include:

Utilizing a shared document system to store and share information

Holding regular team meetings to discuss progress

Employing a common language to communicate.

Resolving Conflicts

In any team, conflicts can arise due to divergent perspectives, misunderstandings, and inadequate communication. Open communication is essential when addressing conflicts within the team, as it facilitates the exchange of ideas and perspectives, ensuring that all team members are aligned. Addressing issues promptly is also crucial, as it prevents the situation from worsening and facilitates a more effective resolution. In some cases, considering the complexity of the situation or the team’s inability to reach a resolution, it may be prudent to seek outside assistance when addressing conflicts within the team.

The Investigative Thinking Process

The investigative thinking process is the beating heart of criminal investigations, pumping life into the collection and analysis of data, the development of theories, and the identification of suspects. Like a mental map guiding investigators through the twists and turns of a case, the investigative thinking process encompasses:

Data collection and analysis

Theory development and validation

Suspect identification

Adapting to changing circumstances.

The ultimate aim of investigative thinking is to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate a belief, identify potential suspects, and lead to an arrest and formal charges. This process is a mental exercise that requires investigators to critically evaluate the evidence at hand, sift through the data, and draw meaningful conclusions. It’s a journey through the maze of information, where each turn could lead to a new discovery or a dead end. The goal is not just to find the truth, but to meticulously construct a case that can withstand the scrutiny of the legal system. It’s a delicate balancing act of being thorough yet efficient, skeptical yet open-minded, and persistent yet adaptable. Every piece of evidence, every testimony, and every clue is a part of the puzzle that can lead to the resolution of the crime.

Data Collection and Analysis

Data collection and analysis form the foundation of the investigative thinking process. This involves gathering and examining information from various sources, such as witnesses, documents, and physical evidence, to support investigative theories. The procedure for data collection and analysis entails gathering data from multiple sources and evaluating it to validate investigative theories. Data collection and analysis are essential for criminal investigations, as they assist in identifying and analyzing evidence, formulating investigative theories, and constructing a case against a suspect.

Examples of data collection and analysis include gathering and analyzing physical evidence, interviewing witnesses, and analyzing financial records.

Developing Theories and Identifying Suspects

Once data is collected and analyzed, it’s time to put on the detective hat and develop theories to explain the evidence. Formulating theories and pinpointing potential suspects in the investigative reasoning process involves analyzing the collected information and constructing hypotheses based on the evidence.

The analysis of evidence is critical in the investigative thought process, as it facilitates the recognition of patterns and correlations between distinct pieces of evidence, which can then be utilized to devise theories and pinpoint potential suspects. The procedure for identifying suspects involves collecting and examining evidence, interviewing witnesses, and performing background checks. Once a suspect is identified, additional evidence must be obtained and validated to ascertain the suspect’s participation in the offense.

Adapting to Changing Circumstances

As the saying goes, “The only constant in life is change,” and this holds true for criminal investigations as well. Adapting to changing circumstances is crucial for investigators, as it allows them to:

Adjust their investigative strategies and theories when new information is obtained

Modify behavior or strategy to better suit the situation

Improve the effectiveness of investigations

Achieve better outcomes

Adapting to changing circumstances involves:

Accepting the shift

Maintaining a positive attitude

Gaining a different outlook

Concentrating on what can be controlled

Acknowledging the alteration

Making preparations when feasible

Calming the mind

Being compassionate to oneself

Conversing about it.

Incident Investigation Procedures

Conducting a thorough and effective criminal investigation involves following a series of steps and procedures. These include securing the crime scene, collecting data and questioning witnesses, and preparing investigation reports.

By following such procedures, investigators can ensure that they are conducting a comprehensive and successful criminal investigation that leads to the identification of the perpetrator and the collection of sufficient evidence to support legal proceedings in cases of criminal incidents.

Securing the Crime Scene

Establishing a secure perimeter around the crime scene is the first and most crucial step in any criminal investigation. Securing the crime scene serves to safeguard evidence and ensure safety. This involves several steps, such as:

Officer safety

Clearing the scene

Documenting movements

Establishing security

Planning and communicating

Conducting a primary survey

Searching for evidence

Securing and collecting evidence.

By following these steps, investigators can guarantee the integrity and admissibility of evidence in court, ultimately contributing to the successful resolution of the case.

Gathering Information and Interviewing Witnesses

Gathering information and interviewing witnesses play a vital role in criminal investigations. Collecting information from witnesses, documents, and other sources supports the investigation and helps build a strong case against the suspect. This process is a cornerstone of any successful investigation, as it allows investigators to piece together the sequence of events, identify potential suspects, and understand the motives behind the crime. Witnesses can provide first-hand accounts of the crime, offering invaluable insights that may not be apparent from physical evidence alone. Moreover, documents such as financial records, emails, and phone records can help investigators trace the suspect’s activities leading up to the crime. By meticulously collecting and analyzing this information, investigators can construct a compelling narrative that can stand up in court, increasing the chances of a successful prosecution.

Gathering information and conducting interviews involve:

Reviewing relevant case details and witness information

Structuring productive interviews

Asking open-ended questions for comprehensive information acquisition

Careful planning of the interview , creating a comfortable atmosphere for the interviewee, and having a clear understanding of the purpose of the interview are all important for successful interviews. Open-ended queries enable the interviewee to furnish comprehensive details regarding the event or subject under discussion.

Preparing Investigation Reports

After the hard work of collecting and analyzing evidence and interviewing witnesses, it’s time to document the findings and conclusions in an investigation report. Composing an investigation report involves including an introduction, detailing the incident, delineating investigation methods, presenting discoveries, offering analysis, making suggestions, and guaranteeing clarity and comprehensiveness. By creating a clear and organized report, investigators can effectively communicate the results of the investigation and support the prosecution in their pursuit of justice.

Financial Investigations: Uncovering Fraud and Deception

Uncovering financial fraud and deception is a complex and critical aspect of criminal investigations. Financial investigations serve to recognize and record the movement of funds during criminal activities, such as money laundering, terrorist financing, and other serious offenses.

Techniques utilized to detect financial fraud and deception include tracing illicit transactions, examining financial records, and collaborating with regulatory agencies. By employing these techniques, investigators can identify new leads and uncover fraud and deception that might otherwise go unnoticed.

Tracing Illicit Transactions

Tracing illicit transactions is a fundamental aspect of financial investigations. Identifying and tracking potentially suspicious financial transactions helps to uncover criminal activity and track the movement of illegal funds. The direct method of tracing illicit transactions involves examining the subject’s books and records to comprehend the correlation between their receipts and expenditures. The indirect method entails calculating the subject’s net worth by taking into account their liabilities and assets and then analyzing any changes over time.

By tracing illicit transactions, investigators can gain valuable insight into the financial aspects of criminal activities. This process allows them to follow the money trail, revealing patterns of suspicious activity, identifying potential fraud, and exposing the hidden financial networks that criminals use to launder their ill-gotten gains. Tracing illicit transactions is often a complex task that requires a deep understanding of financial systems and regulations. It is a crucial part of financial investigations that can shed light on the scale and nature of criminal operations, helping law enforcement agencies to dismantle criminal organizations and bring those responsible to justice.

Analyzing Financial Records

Examining financial documents and records is another essential component of financial investigations. The procedure for obtaining financial statement information involves obtaining and examining financial documents, including balance sheets, income statements, and cash flow statements. Calculating ratios, such as the debt-to-equity ratio, return on assets, and current ratio, can help evaluate a company’s performance and detect signs of fraud or deception. By analyzing financial records, investigators can identify potential risks and areas of vulnerability, ultimately uncovering financial fraud and deception.

Working with Regulatory Agencies

Collaborating with regulatory agencies is a crucial aspect of financial investigations. Working with regulatory agencies involves:

A transparent public process

Implementation

Rulemaking facilitates the creation, amendment, or repeal of rules and regulations to ensure clarity and consistency. The open public process allows members of the public to voice their opinions on proposed rules and regulations, ensuring that the regulations are equitable and effective. In the implementation and compliance process, investigators must:

Ensure adherence to the regulations

Monitor compliance

Provide guidance and assistance to those impacted by the regulations

Take appropriate enforcement action when necessary

By working with regulatory agencies, investigators can gather information and enforce laws related to financial crimes more effectively.

Learning from Past Incidents

The saying “history repeats itself” holds true in criminal investigations, as lessons learned from past incidents can greatly improve future investigative efforts. By analyzing case studies, implementing corrective actions, and providing training and development opportunities, investigators can enhance their skills and knowledge, ultimately leading to more successful investigations.

Reviewing Case Studies

By examining past investigations, police investigators can identify successful strategies and areas for improvement, ultimately enhancing their ability to solve complex cases. This process, often referred to as “learning from experience,” allows investigators to reflect on their past actions and decisions, identify what worked and what didn’t, and then apply these lessons to future investigations. It’s like a form of self-evaluation, where investigators take a step back and objectively assess their performance. This can lead to the development of new techniques, the refinement of existing strategies, and the avoidance of past mistakes. The ultimate goal of this process is to constantly improve and evolve, ensuring that investigators are always at the top of their game and ready to tackle the next big case with increased efficiency and effectiveness.

Reviewing case studies involves analyzing the evidence, interviewing witnesses, and evaluating the outcomes of the investigation. This process can be challenging due to the complexity of obtaining accurate information, the possibility of bias, and the necessity to consider the context of the investigation. Nevertheless, the insights gained from reviewing case studies can be invaluable in improving future investigative efforts.

Implementing Corrective Actions

Applying lessons learned from past incidents can greatly enhance current and future investigations, as well as help prevent future incidents. Implementing corrective actions involves analyzing the existing system, recognizing areas for enhancement, and devising a plan to tackle those areas.

Conducting a root cause analysis involves:

Pinpointing the issue’s origin

Devising a resolution plan

Implementing corrective actions to address the underlying causes of past failures

Ensuring that they do not recur in future investigations.

Training and Development

Providing ongoing training and development opportunities for investigators is essential to ensuring their continued growth and improvement. The process for identifying and assessing needs involves analyzing the current skills and knowledge of the investigators, determining any gaps therein, and creating a plan to address those gaps. The instructional design is the process of constructing a program for training and development that encompasses the objectives, content, activities, and assessments. The delivery method for the training and development can be provided through in-person, online, or a combination of both.

By participating in training and development, investigators can improve their skills and knowledge, ultimately leading to more effective investigations.

Summary and Conclusion

Throughout this article, we’ve explored the fascinating world of criminal investigations, delving into various techniques and strategies that investigators employ to uncover the truth and bring justice to light. From the critical role of physical evidence to the importance of assembling a skilled investigation team, the investigative thinking process, financial investigations, and the value of learning from past incidents, it is clear that the field of criminal investigations is complex and multifaceted.

By understanding and applying these concepts and techniques, investigators can continue to improve their skills, solve complex cases, and ensure that justice prevails.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the process of criminal investigation.

The criminal investigation process encompasses multiple key steps, which together form the overall investigative process:

Evidence collection and preservation

Communication and coordination within the investigation team

Utilization of the investigative thinking process for data gathering and analysis

Theory formation

Adaptation to changing circumstances.

In addition, the process involves securing the crime scene, gathering information and interviewing witnesses, and preparing investigation reports.

What is an investigation in a criminal investigation?

In criminal investigation, the term ‘investigation’ refers to the act of gathering and evaluating evidence to back investigative theories and identify suspects. The purpose of investigation in the criminal justice system is to:

Collect evidence

Evaluate data

Construct and validate hypotheses

Establish reasonable grounds for suspicion

Ultimately arrest and accuse a suspect.

The process of investigation in criminal investigation involves various steps, such as gathering information, conducting interviews, examining crime scenes, and identifying suspects and victims.

What are the phases of the investigation process?

The investigation process comprises several phases:

Preparation and Planning

Information Gathering and Problem Identification

Verification and Validation

Analysis and Evaluation of the collected information

Reporting and Conclusion

Each phase plays a crucial role in the overall success of a criminal investigation, ensuring that investigators follow a structured process to collect evidence, analyze data, formulate theories, and ultimately build a strong case against the suspect. The Preparation and Planning phase involves the investigator gathering all the necessary information and resources to conduct

How do financial investigations help uncover fraud and deception?

Financial investigations can reveal hidden connections, trace illicit transactions, and uncover criminal activities. This process involves examining financial records and working with regulatory agencies to detect fraud and deception.

Organizational Investigations Program: Developing A Constructive Organizational Investigations Program

Duties Of An Expert Witness

Internal And External Evidence: The Classified Difference Between Internal And External Evidence

Fraud Detection

Roles of DFIMC or Digital Forensics Investigation Management Committee

Qualifications To Be An Expert Witness

Privacy overview.

Sign up to our newsletter and get our Ultimate AML Compliance Guide sent to your inbox

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 4: The Process of Investigation

“For the court to be satisfied that the investigator acted lawfully and within the bounds of legally prescribed authority, the judge needs to hear the investigator describe their thinking processes to form reasonable grounds, or in some emergency cases, to have a reasonable suspicion that justifies the action taken.”

An effective strategy for learning any new skill is to define it and break it down into logical steps, establishing a progression that can be followed and repeated to reach the desired results. The process of investigation is no exception and can be effectively explained and learned in this manner. In this chapter, you will learn how each of the following issues relates to the process of investigation.

• The distinction between investigative tasks and investigative thinking
• The progression of the investigative process
• The distinction between tactical investigative and strategic investigative responses
• The concepts of event classification and offence recognition
• The threat vs. action response dilemma
• The distinction between active events and inactive events
• The connection of active events and Level 1 priority results to the powers afforded under exigent circumstance
• The Response Transition Matrix (RTM) and the critical need to transition from tactical response to strategic response

Topic 1: The Distinction Between Investigative Tasks and Investigative Thinking

To understand the process of investigation, it is necessary to comprehend the distinction between investigative tasks and investigative thinking. Investigative tasks relate to the information gathering processes that feed into investigative thinking and the results. Investigative thinking, on the other hand, is the process of analyzing information and theorizing to develop investigative plans. Let us consider this distinction in a little more depth.

Investigative Tasks

Investigative tasks relate to identifying physical evidence, gathering information, evidence collection, evidence protection, witness interviewing, and suspect interviewing and interrogation. These are essential tasks that must be learned and practiced with a high degree of skill to feed the maximum amount of accurate information into the investigative thinking process. Criminal investigation is aimed at collecting, validating, and preserving information in support of the investigative thinking process. Accordingly, it is important to learn to do these evidence collection tasks well.

Investigative Thinking

Investigative thinking is aimed at analyzing the information collected, developing theories of what happened, the way an event occurred, and establishing reasonable grounds to believe. Those reasonable grounds to believe will identify suspects and lead to arrest and charges. Investigative thinking is the process of analyzing evidence and information, considering alternate possibilities to establish the way an event occurred and to determine if they are reasonable.

Topic 2: Progression of the Investigative Process

The investigative process is a progression of activities or steps moving from evidence gathering tasks, to information analysis, to theory development and validation, to forming reasonable ground to believe, and finally to the arrest and charge of a suspect. Knowing these steps can be helpful because criminal incidents are dynamic and unpredictable. The order in which events take place, and the way evidence and information become available for collection, can be unpredictable. Thus, only flexible general rules to structured responses can be applied. However, no matter how events unfold or when the evidence and information are received, certain steps need to be followed. These include collection, analysis, theory development and validation, suspect identification and forming reasonable grounds, and taking action to arrest, search, and lay charges.

In any case, as unpredictable as criminal events may be, the results police investigators aim for are always the same. And, you should always keep the desired results in mind to provide focus and priority to the overall investigative process. We will talk more later in this book about developing a mental map of the investigative process to assist in recording, reporting, and recounting events. It is mentioned now because a mental map is an appropriate metaphor to illustrate the investigative thinking process.

In this process, even though the path we will take to investigate may be unclear and unpredictable at first, the destination, the results we seek in our investigation , will always be the same and can be expressed in terms of results and their priorities .

Results and priorities focus first on the protection of the lives and safety of people. They focus second on the priorities of protecting property, gathering and preserving evidence, accurately documenting the event, and establishing reasonable grounds to identify and arrest offenders.

Priorities refer to Level One Priorities, as the protection of the lives and safety of people. This includes the protection and safety of the police officer’s own life and the life and safety of other officers.

The Level Two priorities are the four remaining aforementioned results, and these may be considered equal value to each other. Depending on circumstances, a rationale can be made for choosing to concentrate on one Level Two priority at the expense of another depending on the circumstances presenting.

The critical point to be made here is that under no circumstances should an investigator ever choose to focus his or her efforts and attention to a Level Two priority if doing so would compromise the Level One priority of protecting the life and safety of a person, including police officers themselves. In the event that evidence is lost or destroyed, or that a suspect is not identified or apprehended because investigators were taking care of the Level One priority, that is a justifiable outcome. A response that would sacrifice the safety of people to achieve a level two priority would not be justifiable, and could even lead to civil or criminal outcomes against the investigators making such a choice.

Now that we have looked at the critical aspects of investigative tasks and the response priorities police investigators need to apply to decision making when they take action, we can proceed to examine the two different types of investigative response. We will refer to these as the Tactical Investigative Response and the Strategic Investigative Response .

Topic 3: Distinction Between a Tactical Investigative Response and a Strategic Investigative Response

These two different types of investigative responses are defined by the nature and status of the event that the investigator is facing. If it is an active event, it will require a Tactical Investigative Response and if it is an inactive event it will require a Strategic Investigative Response. It is important for an investigator to understand these two different levels of response because they include different response protocols, different legal authorities, and limitations to authority.

Tactical Investigative Response

Tactical Investigative Response is faced by operational officers who are engaged in the frontline response to criminal events. As mentioned earlier, police are often challenged to respond to events, sometimes life and death situations, where information is limited and critical decisions need to be made to take action. In these Tactical Investigative Responses, the responding officers often have little or no time to undertake the tasks of gathering information. They must rely on the information of a dispatched complaint, coupled with their own observations made once they arrive at the scene. If an officer takes the action of making an arrest or using force to bring the situation under control, they are accountable for the action they have taken, and they may be called upon by the court to articulate their thinking, albeit based on limited information.

Strategic Investigative Response

Once an investigator has arrived at the scene of an event and has brought the event under control by either making an arrest or by determining that the suspect has fled the scene and no longer poses a threat to the life or safety of persons, the investigation becomes a strategic investigative response. With this expiration of life and safety issues, also comes the expiration of exigent circumstances and the additional authorities to detain persons suspected and to enter and search private property without a warrant.

Clearly understanding and being able to define and articulate the circumstances of either an active event and tactical response, or a controlled event and a strategic response is critical. In court, it becomes important for a police investigator to describe what they were told going into the complaint, what they saw and heard when they arrived at the complaint, and, most importantly, what they were thinking to justify the action that was taken. For the court to be satisfied that the investigator acted lawfully, the judge needs to hear the investigator describe their thinking process to form reasonable grounds, or in some emergency cases, to have a reasonable suspicion that justifies the action taken.

To properly articulate their thinking in these investigative responses, it is important for the officer to understand the situational elements that can help define their thinking process when they testify in court. Two of the most important situational elements to understand are event classification and offence recognition .

Topic 4: Event Classification and Offence Recognition

In order to enter any investigation in either the tactical or the strategic response mode, an investigator must engage their thinking processes and make decisions about the event they are confronting. Is it an active event in progress that requires immediate and decisive tactical actions; or is it an inactive event where a less urgent, slower, and more strategic approach can be taken? This slower and more considered approach is the strategic investigative response, and the situational elements of this approach will be discussed in detail later in this chapter. Thinking about these situational elements of active event or inactive event is call event classification.

Considering the possible crime being committed in the event is called “offence recognition,” and this recognition of a specific offence activates the investigator’s thinking to look for the evidence that supports the elements of that recognized offence.

Topic 5: Classifying the Event as Either an Active Event or an Inactive Event

For each of these classifications of active event or inactive event , the investigator has some different legal authorities to put into action, as well as some immediate responsibilities for the protection, collection, and preservation of evidence. When attending the scene of any reported event, the investigator should assume that the event is active until it has been established to be inactive.

In many cases, an event can be re-classified as an inactive event when it is determined that the suspect has left the scene of the event, or the event has concluded by the suspect being arrested. In cases where the suspect is still at the scene of an active event, the investigator needs to be thinking about the possibility of detaining the suspect or making an arrest of that suspect for an offence in progress. To make that detention or arrest, the investigator should be thinking about what possible offence they are being called to investigate by the initial complaint, and also by the evidence they are seeing and hearing upon arrival.

The classification of active event or inactive event is critical. It is a distinction that will guide an officer to determine what powers of detention, arrest, use of force, entry to property, and search may be relied upon to take action. The defining elements between active event and inactive event are:

An Active Event

• The criminal act is or may still be in progress at the scene.
• The suspect is or may still be at the scene of the event.
• The situation is, or may be, a danger to the life or safety of a person, including the life or safety of attending police officers.

An Inactive Event

• The criminal act has concluded at the scene.
• The suspect or suspects have left the scene or have been arrested or detained.
• The situation at the scene no longer represents a danger to the life or safety of a person, including police officers.

Topic 6: Threat vs. Action Analysis Dilemma

The critical elements of this Threat vs. Action Analysis Dilemma were demonstrated in what became known as “Active Shooter calls” flowing from the incident at Columbine High School in 1999 (Police Executive Research Forum, 2014). In this incident, two armed teenagers went on a shooting spree in the high school killing 13 people and wounding 20 others before turning their weapons on themselves and committing suicide. Officers responding to that call followed departmental protocols of that era. These protocols dictated they should wait for the arrival of their Emergency Response Team in events where armed suspect confrontations were taking place. The fact that these first responders waited despite ongoing killing taking place inside the high school led to a determination that police have a duty to take action in such cases, and waiting is not the correct response. As a result of these determinations, active shooter response protocols were adopted across North America and police agencies re-trained their personnel to respond to active shooters with more immediate action and strategies to enter and confront the shooters in order to protect lives of possible victims.

The Threat vs. Action Analysis Dilemma response protocols in the active shooter response situations now provide the standard or benchmark that a responding officer must consider when faced with the decision to enter a dangerous situation alone and take action, or to wait for back-up before entering to take action. For active shooter situations, the protocols across North America are now prescribed responses, where responding officers are trained to enter and confront with minimal back-up. That said, not every potentially dangerous Threat vs. Action Analysis Dilemma is going to be an active shooter. Responding officers will often be faced with other calls where danger exists to the safety of persons and the decision to enter or wait for back-up must still be made. In these cases, the responding officer must weigh the available information and respond or wait for back-up per their own threat vs risk assessment of the facts. The active shooter protocols have provided something of a calibration to this analysis where extreme ongoing threat to life and safety of person equals high duty and high expectation to take action.

Topic 7: Rules of Engagement for an Active Event or an Inactive Event

Police officers may be called to action by many different means. It may be a radio dispatch 911 call to attend an emergency, a citizen flagging down the passing police car to report an incident, or an officer coming upon a crime in progress. Whatever the means of being called to action, this is the first step of the police officer becoming engaged in a thinking process to gather and evaluate information, make decisions, and take action. The first step of this thinking process for the investigator is to make the evaluation and ask the questions:

• Is this an Active Event requiring a Tactical Investigative Response?
• Is this an Inactive Event requiring a Strategic Investigative Response?

As a subsequent part of this evaluation determining an Active Event or Inactive Event, the investigator should also be alert to the type crime being encountered. For example, is it an assault, a robbery, or a theft? From the perspective of police tactical investigative response, an investigator confronted with an active event must first assess the threat level. Is there a danger to the life or safety of persons that would require a Level One Priority Result , taking immediate action to protect life and safety of persons, including the life and safety of attending police officers?

In assessing these threat levels to life and safety, police are often faced with very limited information. Sometimes there is only a possible threat, or an implied threat to the life or safety of persons. In such cases, it is only necessary for the police to suspect that there is a threat to the life or safety of a person to evoke the extended powers provided by exigent circumstances. In these cases of implied threats, police are authorized to rely on the powers afforded by exigent circumstances to enter private property without a warrant and to detain and search suspects who may present a danger. These are significant powers and an investigator must be aware that if they use these powers, there is a strong possibility they will later be called upon to justify the exercise of those powers. Let us consider that section of the Criminal Code that authorizes officers to enter a dwelling without a warrant, and then apply that understanding to some scenarios:

Authority to enter dwelling without warrant under the  Criminal Code of Canada 529.3 (1) Without limiting or restricting any power a peace officer may have to enter a dwelling-house under this or any other Act or law, the peace officer may enter the dwelling-house for the purpose of arresting or apprehending a person, without a warrant referred to in section 529 or 529.1 authorizing the entry, if the peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that the person is present in the dwelling-house, and the conditions for obtaining a warrant under section 529.1 exist but by reason of exigent circumstances it would be impracticable to obtain a warrant.  (Criminal Code, 1985, s 529(1)) Exigent circumstances (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), exigent circumstances include circumstances in which the peace officer (a) has reasonable grounds to suspect that entry into the dwelling-house is necessary to prevent imminent bodily harm or death to any person; or (b) has reasonable grounds to believe that evidence relating to the commission of an indictable offence is present in the dwelling-house and that entry into the dwelling-house is necessary to prevent the imminent loss or imminent destruction of the evidence. (Criminal Code, 1985, s 529(2)(a,b)) Where warrant is not necessary pursuant to the Criminal Code of Canada 487.11 A peace officer, or a public officer who has been appointed or designated to administer or enforce any federal or provincial law and whose duties include the enforcement of this or any other Act of Parliament, may, in the course of his or her duties, exercise any of the powers described in subsection 487(1) (Criminal Code, 1985, s 487(1))  or 492.1(1) without a warrant if the conditions for obtaining a warrant exist but by reason of exigent circumstances it would be impracticable to obtain a warrant.  (Criminal Code, 1985, s 492(1))

Scenario #1

A uniform patrol officer receives a call to attend a complaint through radio dispatch. The 911 caller is reporting that he has just witnessed his neighbour punch his wife in the front yard and then drag her forcibly into their house. The responding officer is immediately able to classify this event as an active event . The officer’s offence recognition of the criminal act is that it is likely an assault and possibly a forcible confinement. Given this assessment, the situation requires a Tactical Investigative Response . The suspect is still at the scene and there is an ongoing possibility of danger to the life or safety of the suspect’s wife. In this type of case, the officer can draw upon the extended powers under exigent circumstances to ensure the safety of the wife. Considering the information that has been reported, the officer may go to the residence with a view to using the necessary force to enter without a warrant to investigate the safety and well-being of the identified victim. If, after entering the home, further investigation provides evidence to confirm an assault, the officer can arrest the identified suspect for that offence. In this scenario, the information that allows the classification of the active event  and the offence recognition is fairly clear in the reported circumstances.

Scenario #2

Sometimes an event cannot be immediately classified as either an active event or an inactive event. In these cases, where the information is less clear, the investigator may be justified to assume an ongoing danger to the life or safety of persons, and remain in the tactical investigative response mode utilizing the powers afforded under exigent circumstances to pursue the investigation until it is determined that an implied danger no longer exists. For example, consider the situation where police dispatch receives a 911 call from a woman crying. Before any further information can be obtained from the caller, the call is terminated from the caller’s end. A patrol unit is dispatched to attend the residential address associated with the identified phone number. Upon arrival at the front door of the caller’s address, attending officers are met by a male resident of the home who identifies himself as the home owner. The attending officers advise the male that a terminated 911 call from a crying woman was received from this address. The male states that there is nothing wrong in his home and he refuses to allow officers to enter the premises. The officers advise the male that they need to enter the premises to satisfy themselves that there is no ongoing threat to the life or safety of the crying woman caller. The officers warn the man that they will be entering the premises and if he resists he will be arrested for obstructing a police officer.  

The man steps aside and the officers enter the home and find a woman in the bedroom area with a bleeding nose and a bruised face. The woman tells officers that the male, her husband, punched her in the face during an argument and when she attempted to call police he ripped the phone cord from the wall and struck her again. She states that he threatened to kill her if she cried out when the police came to the door. The man is arrested for assault, forcible confinement, and uttering threats. He is provided with his Charter Rights and warning, and he is then asked if he wishes to make any statement.

To evaluate this scenario, the officers had very little information in the first instance that would allow them to make a determination of active event or inactive event. The information to identify a criminal act was equally limited. Fortunately, case law has evolved to recognize this kind of information-limited case, and it provides a framework for making a response that can protect life and safety. In such situations, an officer is still empowered to act under the authority of “exigent circumstances.” Considering information-limited circumstances like this, the officer only needs to have a suspicion that there is a threat to the life or safety of a person to act. That threat may be simply implied by the circumstances being presented. In this case, the implied threat to life or safety of a person was the disconnected 911 call. The officers had a duty to attend and resolve the possible threat to life or safety of a person implied in this disconnected 911 call ( R v Godoy , 1999).

As you might imagine, an officer attending the calls outlined in the preceding scenarios needs to be very clear on the circumstances where implicit distress and exigent circumstances can be interpreted to use the powers to enter private property. This same need extends to using appropriate levels of force and making an arrest. Considering these are active and still evolving criminal events, there is urgency to act. It is critical for the investigating officer to have a clear understanding of these principles to quickly assess the presented facts, make the event classification, and take the necessary action in an expedient manner.

As outlined earlier in this book, there is a significant difference between reasonable grounds to believe and reasonable grounds to suspect, and an officer who is not clear on the distinction might have a difficult time articulating to the court how and why they took the initiative to act or not to act. It is these types of cases, where there is implied distress, or an implied threat to life or safety, that an investigator must be clear on their interpretation of the event and on their authorities to take action. The thinking involved might be described as an active event and an explicit or implied threat to life or safety equals exigent circumstances.

More on Offence Recognition

At the same time the event is being classified as either active event or inactive event, the investigator should be engaging in the thinking process of offence recognition. In other words, what offence is being reported or what is the offence being observed in the fact pattern that is unfolding? With this offence recognition, the investigator will begin to assemble a mental inventory of the evidence and information that will be required to support the recognized offence(s). Having an offence in mind, the investigator will also begin to consider their range of powers and authorities that can be used under the law regarding that offence. The investigator will ask them self;

• Is this a summary conviction offence where the suspect must be found committing to justify an arrest?
• Or, is it an indictable or dual procedure offence where there is direct evidence or strong circumstantial evidence to support an arrest?

If the investigator determines that they are attending to an Active Event and their offence recognition suggests that there may be a danger to the life or safety of a person, such as assault causing bodily harm, they will know that they need only find evidence to form reasonable grounds to believe in order to make an arrest. As part of attendance to the scene of the event, the investigator should be classifying the location to determine what their legal requirements are for their authority to enter. Consideration of the possible authorities to enter private property would include:

• Consent of the property owner
• Section 487 CCC warrant to search
• Exigent circumstances to suspect a need to protect the life or safety of a person
• Exigent circumstance with reasonable grounds to believe there will be a destruction of evidence of an indictable offence
• Fresh pursuit of a suspect found committing an offence

If the investigator arrives at the scene where a suspect is immediately apparent, the investigator can make an immediate detention or perhaps even an arrest. The investigator may rely on the Section 529 (2) of the Criminal Code of Canada  (1985)  under exigent circumstance to enter private property without a warrant to make the arrest and ensure the safety of persons at the scene. If the investigator makes an arrest after forming reasonable grounds for belief, they are required by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to tell the suspect what offence they are being arrested for.

Required Warnings

The following is the standard Charter of Rights  (Canadian Charter, 1982, s 10(a,b)) warning and police warning. These standard caution warnings are given as follows:

I am arresting you (or detaining you) for [name of offence(s)]. POLICE WARNING I wish to give you the following warning: You need not say anything. You have nothing to hope from any promise or favour, and nothing to fear from any threat whether or not you do say anything. Anything you do or say may be used as evidence. Do you understand? (Transit Police, 2015) CHARTER WARNING You have the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay. You also have the right to free and immediate legal advice from duty counsel by making free telephone calls to [toll-free phone number(s)] during business hours and [toll-free phone number(s)] during non-business hours. Do you understand? Do you wish to call a lawyer? You also have the right to apply for legal assistance through the provincial legal aid program. Do you understand? (Transit Police, 2015)

Let us consider the following scenario to illustrate these principles in action.

Scenario #3

An officer is dispatched to attend the complaint of an assault with a weapon and determines that it is taking place in a residential dwelling house in a nearby subdivision. Upon arrival, the officer is met on the front lawn by a man claiming to have witnessed the owner of the home stab a visitor to the home during an altercation as a second male runs out the front door holding his side and bleeding from an apparent wound. A third man holding a bloody knife comes to stand in the front doorway and the witness identifies him as the owner of the home. The officer directs the man with the knife to drop it on the ground and step out of the residence. The man complies and is arrested for assault with a weapon.

From this fact pattern the investigator could make an immediate arrest for assault with a weapon. The investigator would seize the bloody knife and protect it as evidence of that offence. The facts within this scenario that allow the investigator to take action, enter the private property, and form their reasonable grounds for belief and make the arrest. When the case goes to court, the investigator of this case will articulate the chain of events along with their thinking to substantiate their reasonable grounds for belief. To achieve this, the investigator’s testimony would be that:

• they were dispatched to attend a complaint of assault with a weapon in progress,
• the suspect was still on scene and it was an active event,
• considering the potential danger to life or safety of a person, they entered the property under the provisions of exigent circumstances,
• an independent witness at the scene stated the home owner had stabbed a guest in the home,
• a man bleeding from an apparent wound ran from the home, and
• another man standing in the doorway was holding a bloody knife and was identified by the witness as the home owner.

The investigating officer arriving at the scene of this event would treat this as a Level One priority because there is an ongoing danger to the life and safety of persons. Under these circumstances, the Criminal Code authorities of exigent circumstances would apply. The investigator would be justified in detaining all parties present, including the witness and the victim, on the reasonable suspicion that they may all have been involved in combative behaviour and might each still pose a threat to the life and safety of others, including the investigator. The powers of exigent circumstances are significant in this kind of scenario, and provide authority to take immediate action that will neutralize threats to the safety of people. Even if the facts of this assault with a weapon had evolved to show that it was taking place inside the private home of the suspect with the bloody knife, the authority of exigent circumstances would permit the investigator to enter that home without a warrant to protect the life and safety of persons. A very significant point to be made here is that as soon as the event is under control the extended powers of exigent circumstances expire.

Once this event has been brought under control and the threat to the life or safety of persons had been eliminated by arresting or detaining all persons present, the investigator must reclassify this event as an inactive event. As soon as this occurs, some of the rules of engagement and legal authorities to take action change, and the investigation must switch to a Strategic Investigative Response.

With the expiry of exigent circumstances and the switch to a Strategic Investigative Response, several factors change. If this assault with a weapon had been taking place in the suspect’s private home, and the investigator had entered under the authority of exigent circumstance, the authority to remain in the private residence and search it would expire. If the investigator needed to collect additional physical evidence in that home, such as blood from the stabbing assault, a warrant or consent to search would now be required.

In this type of case, the residence of the suspect could be locked down externally and all persons removed until a search warrant was obtained to complete the investigation. Evidence obtained up to the point where the arrest was made and before exigent circumstances expired would be lawfully seized without a warrant. This would include the seizure of the bloody knife as plain-view search or a search incidental to arrest. Anything else searched for and seized after the arrest could be challenged as an unlawful seizure if it was taken without a search warrant.

In addition to the requirement for search warrants, in some cases after exigent circumstances expire, other priorities and investigative must also change. As you will recall, the protection of life and safety of people is the Level One priority. With that priority, the court allows significant leeway to investigators in regards to the protection of crime scenes and the collection of evidence. If an investigator is attending any criminal event, the protection and collection of evidence always takes a backseat to the protection of life or safety of people. That said, once the life and safety issues have been resolved, the securing of the crime scene and the subsequent protection and collection of evidence becomes the number one priority.

Once the life and safety issues are resolved, it is time to lock down the crime scene and start protecting evidence for court. If it is possible to protect the life and safety of people and collect, protect, and preserve evidence, this is the preferred outcome. If it is not possible, the court will accept the fact that damage to evidence occurred prior to life and safety issues being resolved. Once those issues are resolved, the expectation is that a high level of care will be taken. If proper care is not taken, and evidence becomes contaminated, or continuity of possession is lost, the evidence may be ruled inadmissible at a trial. It is important for the investigator to fully grasp the construct that dictates when to transition from Tactical Investigative Response to Strategic Investigative Response.

Topic 8: Response Transition Matrix (RTM)

The RTM is a matrix tool to illustrate the considerations for police response when considering the authorities and issues to escalate or de-escalate from a Tactical Investigative Response to Strategic Investigative Response. Considering the following questions will help an investigator to identify an event as either a Tactical Investigative Response or a Strategic Investigative Response:

• Is the event active or inactive?
• What offence(s) is possibly occurring?
• Do I suspect an implicit or explicit danger to the life or safety of a person?
• Do I have reasonable grounds to believe evidence of an indictable offence will be lost or destroyed?
• What immediate actions can be taken to protect the life or safety of persons?
• What immediate action can be taken to protect evidence, without compromising life or safety?
• Have life and safety issues been resolved, and should the change be made from Tactical Investigative Response to Strategic Investigative Response?

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , the Criminal Code , and common law authorities provide police with both powers to act and limitations to taking action. In the Canadian justice system, both statutory law and case law have evolved to establish a range of authorities and police powers that allow rapid response at the more dangerous end of the matrix, and more time-consuming restrictions to act at the less threatening end of the matrix. The chart below illustrates the duty to act, the authority to act, and the priorities for action to consider.

In this chapter, we have discussed the progression of the investigative process and the key elements within the progression that must be considered by an investigator. These elements within the investigative process are the signposts on the roadway of a mental map. These signposts of active event or inactive event tell us to either take action within the extended authorities of exigent circumstances or to modify our response for an inactive event and recognize the need to make the transition to a strategic response. An investigator’s understanding of the changes in circumstances that define these situations and the change from active to inactive events can make the difference between successful and unsuccessful investigative outcomes.

Study Questions

• What is the difference between investigative tasks and investigative thinking?
• What is the difference between Level One Priorities and Level Two Priorities?
• What is the difference between a Tactical Investigative Response and a Strategic Investigative Response?
• What is the difference between an active event and an inactive event?
• When would an investigator consider the Threat vs. Action Analysis Dilemma?
• When does an investigator have the authority to enter a dwelling house without a warrant?
• Why is it important for an investigator to thinking about “offence recognition” at the same time they are thinking about whether a situation should be classified as an active event or an inactive event?
• What is the Response Transition Matrix (RTM)?

Long Descriptions

Investigative response priority results long description: There are two levels of investigative response priority results. Level 1 includes “Protecting the life and safety of people including police officers attending the scenes of crime.”

Level 2 has four priority results:

• Identifying, gathering, and preserving evidence
• Establishing reasonable grounds to identify and arrest suspects
• Accurately recording and documenting the event in notes and reports
• Protecting property

[Return to Investigative response priority results]

The RTM: Response Transition Matrix long description: In the case of an active event with recognized offence, suspected issues of life safety or reasonable and probable grounds of evidence destruction, police need to take tactical investigative response action considering level-one priority results. Immediate action is required in such exigent circumstances, and as such, an officer has reasonable and probable grounds to detain and search without a warrant.

In the case of an inactive event with recognized offence but no life or safety issues or issues of evidence destruction, police need to take strategic investigative response action considering level-two priority results. This action should be specific to an identified offence. In such non-exigent circumstances, an officer has reasonable and probably grounds to perform an arrest and search only with a warrant. [Return to The RTM: Response Transition Matrix]

Introduction to Criminal Investigation: Processes, Practices and Thinking Copyright © 2017 by Rod Gehl is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Improving Efficiency and Understanding of Criminal Investigations: Toward an Evidence-Based Approach

• Published: 23 November 2021
• Volume 36 , pages 635–638, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Nadine Deslauriers-Varin 1 , 3 &
• Francis Fortin 2 , 3  

12k Accesses

2 Citations

8 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Various investigative techniques and methods available to investigators following the commission of a crime can have a great impact on the ability of police forces to adequately respond to such a crime. This impact can take many forms, ranging from the identification, arrest, and charge of the perpetrators to their conviction. Every case where the alleged perpetrator is not tried for lack of evidence poses a risk to community safety. Similarly, when an individual is wrongly convicted of a crime, it undermines the community’s confidence in the police forces responsible for protecting it, as well as its faith in the criminal justice system.

Nowadays, the realities of investigative work have profoundly changed: investigators are confronted with emerging phenomena and increasingly sophisticated crimes that present multiple (and new) challenges (e.g., economic crime, cybercrime, dark web, terrorism, online sexual exploitation). The type and nature of evidence required to take these cases through the criminal justice chain, and the way in which this evidence can be gathered, have also become more complex. Various legal, ethical, and practical issues have also contributed to the technicalization and greater systematization of crime scene analysis, intelligence, and everything related to evidence and information gathering. As a result, investigative work is becoming increasingly specialized (e.g., Maguire  2003 ; Police Executive Research Forum  2018 ).

As such, it is important to conduct research aimed at improving the effectiveness of evidence collection, identification, and prioritization of potential suspects, investigative interviews, and, ultimately, the charging and conviction of perpetrators. It has been noted, decades ago, that the criminal investigation is however one of the least examined areas of police studies (Skogan and Frydl  2003 ). Unfortunately, this has not necessarily changed much since then. In fact, knowledge about police investigation generally comes from “how to” books (sometimes of a more scholarly nature) or books which present the state of knowledge on specific aspects of investigations or techniques rather than presenting empirical and innovative results. Moreover, most books or collective work place a particular emphasis on its forensic aspect, as well as on the analysis and contribution of physical evidence. However, in case of limited physical evidence, other methods must also be used by police forces but there are few researchers working to scientifically measure and improve the efficiency of these techniques and methods. A careful review of the scientific literature shows that research having a genuine and valuable impact on police practices are in fact relatively infrequent. Applied research that moves police practices beyond common sense, tradition, experience, and flair to evidence-based practices remains a challenge (Mitchell and Huey  2019 ).

In recent years, we are, however, witnessing a growth of empirical studies that aim at providing support to police forces and specialized investigation units, and improving the efficiency of their practices using a proactive and evidence-based approach. This particularly true for sexual crimes and homicides (e.g., Beauregard and Martineau  2013 ; Chopin et al.  2020 ; Fortin et al.  2018 ; Woodhams et al. 2021 ). In the last decade, partnerships between academia and police agencies have emerged and detailed information on offender behaviors has been analyzed to facilitate police investigations as well as suspect prioritization and identification efforts. Despite this, evidence-based research in the field of criminal investigation is still lacking. Good and emerging research is being conducted and published on this topic, but there are only but a few collective works showcasing such research at the international level.

Several examples support the relevance of a vision that would for example use investigative and forensic science not only to study a single situation in depth, as usually done with cases presented in court, but to apply it to the entire criminal phenomenon or modus operandi. These new ways of approaching criminal phenomena offer an innovative way of appropriating criminological knowledge. As an example, in a study on “forensic drug intelligence” by Esseiva et al. ( 2007 ), the authors applied the chemical profiling technique to drug seizures made by the police. For each of these seizures, experts performed a chemical analysis to determine the nature of the substance, its level of purity, and its chemical properties. By collating this information and keeping an “organized memory” of all seizures, a certain amount of information can be uncovered: this technique can provide clues as to the path taken by the drug, from production to distribution on the street. In addition, this study demonstrated, among other things, the potential of this intersection between forensics and intelligence (Esseiva et al.  2007 ).

This special issue was proposed to the Editorial Board of the Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology with a main objective in mind: to bring together, in a single issue, innovative research on a relatively unknown and underdeveloped field of research usually looked at in a fragmented way. In other words, to create the synergy that is needed to comprehensively move forward investigative practices and techniques towards a more “scientific,” evidence-based police. The current issue includes 11 articles that represent the diversity of research on the topic and that fit well with the objectives and focus of this special issue. These 11 articles can be regrouped under three main topics related to police investigations: (1) the understanding of the processes involved in an investigation, the challenges related to it, and ways to improve investigative decision-making; (2) investigative techniques and the pivotal role of the spatiotemporal patterns of offenses for suspect prioritization and identification; and (3) investigative interviewing and new techniques and approaches to improve information and evidence gathering.

Understanding and Prioritizing Investigations

This first three articles of this special issue pertain to the understanding and prioritizing investigations (Rossmo; Jurek et al.; Henning et al.). Recalling the lack of scholarly literature on investigation noted earlier, Rossmo first proposes to outline the anatomy of a criminal investigation: the underlying structure of an investigation, its main purposes and objectives, and, by the same token, why it can fail (e.g., failure to solve the crime; miscarriage of justice). Using the example of the Canadian investigation into the murder of Gail Miller that led to the wrongful conviction of David Milgaard, Rossmo highlights the systemic problems in the investigation that lead to these failures, and emphasizes the unconditional importance of the relevance, reliability, and robustness of the evidence. In doing so, Rossmo’s article highlights areas for improvement in order to maximize the likelihood of success of an investigation, while minimizing its risks of failure.

In the second article, Jurek et al. aim at measuring and describing key activities police investigators take when working sexual assault cases and identifying factors influencing investigative actions. To date, relatively little is known about the specific actions that police investigators take after a sexual assault report is made that could potentially explain the high attrition rate for sexual offenses. Using a sample of sexual assault case files from a larger project on unsubmitted sexual assault kits, their study highlights factors that shape the way the investigation unfolds and provides insights into factors related to case attrition and progression in the criminal justice system.

The last article of this section addresses the prioritization of intimate partner violence investigations. In their study, Henning et al. seek to assess whether domestic violence recidivism can be reliably predicted using data that most law enforcement agencies already have access to in their standard police report. Their findings support the use of currently available records for the automation of risk triage tools that could be done at the earliest stage of the criminal justice process (i.e., police response). The 10-item scale put forth in their study pave the way for further improvements in the identification and predictive accuracy of high-risk intimate partner violence, investigative decision-making efficiency, and allocation of police resources.

Investigative Techniques and the Spatiotemporal Patterns of Offenses

So far, empirical studies in the field of police investigation have been primarily conducted to improve understanding and knowledge of criminal behaviors and to support techniques and methods that facilitate case resolution – particularly by supporting investigators in identifying and prioritizing suspects. In the absence of confessions, eyewitnesses, or forensic evidence to quickly identify the perpetrator, other methods must be used to assist investigators in identifying and prioritizing potential suspects. The following five articles of this special issue (Salfati and Sorochinski; Bennell et al.; Woodhams et al.; Chopin et al.; Hewitt) aim at improving suspect prioritization and identification techniques and showcase the pivotal role of the spatiotemporal patterns of (sexual) offenses. In the first study, Salfati and Sorochinski aim at having an applied utility for the investigative process of offender profiling. Based on a sample of sexual homicide crime series (i.e., all sex worker victims, mixed victims, all non-sex worker victims), key differences in the types of offenders who commit different types of homicide series were identified. Their findings provide a classification model for future research on offender profiling, as well as an example of how research on offender profiling may help support investigative practice by narrowing the pool of potential suspects based on crime scene actions.

In the second study, Bennell et al. set out to improve investigative crime linkage of serial crimes. Using a sample of serial offenders having committed stranger sexual assaults, their study uses domains of crime scene behaviors to distinguish between crime pairs committed by the same or by different offenders, and tests four different statistical approaches to predict linkage status. Their findings add to the scant literature aimed at determining the most suitable statistical method to link crimes and provide methodological improvements on how practitioners link serial crimes using the statistical approaches. Their study therefore represents a first step towards an empirically informed decision-making approach to link crimes.

Along the same lines, in the third study, Woodhams et al. aim to fill a significant gap in the literature by investigating the temporal and geographical proximity of crimes committed by serial stranger sex offenders in the UK. Their findings provide an empirical update regarding the periods of time and space over which serial sex offenders commit their offenses. They also offer insights relevant to analysts, decision-making, and search strategies for interrogating databases (such as ViCLAS) that could enhance the detection and apprehension of sex offenders.

In the fourth study of this section, Chopin et al. innovatively examine the geographic mobility patterns involved in what they call “Motiveless” homicides — homicides with no apparent motive. Despite the obvious challenges this type of homicide poses to law enforcement, motiveless homicides have rarely been studied with the aim of facilitating their investigation. Using a sample of solved cases of motiveless homicide from France and based on the criminal mobility triangle approach, their findings suggest that these crimes present distinct patterns compared to “motivated” homicides. Their study also provides easily observable information that could help investigators to prioritize their search for a potential suspect or to recover useful evidence in cases where no clear motive is discernable.

Finally, Hewitt’s study reaffirms the fact that sex crimes reported to the police are spatially concentrated on a very small number of street segments. Unlike past studies on the topic that use aggregated or crime-specific data, this study allows to further knowledge on this topic by using a substantial sample of sex offenses that occurred in Austin, Texas, broken down by victim age and type of sexual acts perpetrated by street segment. By disaggregating offenses this way, differences in the degree of spatial concentration are revealed and specific (micro)locations for certain subtypes of sexual offenses are highlighted.

Investigative Interviewing

Police interviews can influence the criminal investigation process, including the ultimate outcome of a case. Effective interviewing of suspects, victims, and witnesses allows investigators to gather a greater volume of information related to the crime and the probable suspect and can increase the credibility of the evidence being collected. The last three articles of this special issue focus on this vital part of criminal investigations (Izotovas et al.; Otgaar et al.; Van Beek et al.). In the first study, Izotovas et al. step away from the much common laboratory-based research to examine a sample of real-life police interrogations with suspected sex offenders. Aiming to standardize the language used across investigative interviewing settings, their study examines these interrogations using Kelly et al.’s ( 2013 ) taxonomy of interrogation techniques to assess whether the six domains of techniques could be applied to interviews carried out by PEACE-trained investigators from the UK. Their study provides a better understanding of the dynamics of interviews with suspects and supports the need to examine interviews more holistically.

In the second study, Otgaar et al. experimentally assessed whether empirically based interviewing — the National Institute for Child Health and Development (NICHD) Protocol — would affect the reporting of misinformation in children. In many countries, children with an alleged experience of abuse are often interviewed by many different organizations and practitioners. Their findings suggest that when children are interviewed about possible traumatic experiences, the first interview should ideally and immediately be conducted using empirically based guidelines, such as the NICHD Protocol.

Along the same line, the study of Van Beek et al. which closes this special issue, further investigates the impact of misinformation and inaccurate information presented by investigators during interviews, this time conducted with suspects. Using an experimental design, they seek to examine the responses that police interviewers provide to suspects when such suspects claim that information or evidence presented to them is incorrect. Their findings highlight the need for police interviewers to be aware that some of the evidence/information they present to suspects may be incorrect due to a variety of reasons that are inherently part of the criminal investigation process. Their findings also put forward that expertise may perhaps be more important in this regard than experience and support the importance of evidence-gathering training before conducting this complex cognitive task of interviewing suspects.

This special issue brings together 11 original articles, all of which, in their own way, make an important contribution to the field of police investigation and investigative techniques. It regroups empirical studies conducted by researchers from various countries (Canada, Netherlands, Switzerland, UK, and the USA), mostly carried out in partnership with police organizations, covering a variety of themes related to criminal investigations, and highlighting the efforts and expertise of emerging and established researchers. In this regard, this is, to our knowledge, one of the first special issues of its kind. We hope that this issue will be of interest to researchers, students, and practitioners in this field, that it will pave the way for other special issues and collective works, and that it will stimulate research in this understudied area.

Beauregard E, Martineau M (2013) A descriptive study of sexual homicide in Canada: implications for police investigation. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 57:1454–1476

Article   Google Scholar  

Chopin J, Beauregard E, Deslauriers-Varin N (2020) Les agressions sexuelles d’enfants non résolues par la police: une analyse du processus de passage à l’acte [unsolved sexual abuse of children : An analysis of the decision-making process]. Criminologie 53(2):77–107

Esseiva P, Ioset S, Anglada F, Gasté L, Ribaux O, Margot P, Gallusser A, Biedermann A, Specht Y, Ottinger E (2007) Forensic drug intelligence: an important tool in law enforcement. Forensic Sci Int 167(2–3):247–254

Fortin F, Paquette S, Dupont B (2018) From online to offline sexual offending: episodes and obstacles. Aggress Violent Beh 39:33–41

Kelly CE, Miller JC, Redlich AD, Kleinman SM (2013) A taxonomy of interrogation methods. Psychol Public Policy Law 19(2):165–178

Maguire M (2003) Criminal investigation and crime control. In: Newburn T (ed) Handbook of policing. Willan Publishing, Cullompton, Devon (UK), pp 363–393

Google Scholar  

Mitchell R, Huey L (2019) Evidence based policing: an introduction. Policy Press, Bristol

Police Executive Research Forum (2018) The changing nature of crime and criminal investigations, critical issues in policing series. Washington, D.C.  https://www.policeforum.org/assets/ChangingNatureofCrime.pdf

Skogan W, Frydl K (2003) Fairness and effectiveness in policing: the evidence. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

Woodhams J, Kloess JA, Jose B, Hamilton-Giachritsis CE (2021) Characteristics and Behaviors of Anonymous Users of Dark Web Platforms Suspected of Child Sexual Offenses. Front Psychol 12:1–11

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Social Work and Criminology, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada

Nadine Deslauriers-Varin

School of Criminology, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

Francis Fortin

Centre International de Criminologie Comparée/International Center of Comparative Criminology, Montreal, Canada

Nadine Deslauriers-Varin & Francis Fortin

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nadine Deslauriers-Varin .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Deslauriers-Varin, N., Fortin, F. Improving Efficiency and Understanding of Criminal Investigations: Toward an Evidence-Based Approach. J Police Crim Psych 36 , 635–638 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-021-09491-6

Download citation

Published : 23 November 2021

Issue Date : December 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-021-09491-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Criminal Investigation Expository Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

There are various methods of inquiry. These methods can be grouped into either scientific or non scientific methods. The preferred method of inquiry in criminal investigation is the scientific method. In this method, an investigator develops a hypothesis and then investigates the viability of the hypothesis, which is a similar procedure as used in science. In addition to the scientific method of inquiry, non-scientific methods are also used.

The non scientific methods relate to authority, tenacity and intuition. Authority method of inquiry is where an investigator takes the words of a person in authority as true and relies on them for investigation (Wood, 1995). In criminal investigation, authority method of inquiry can apply where an investigator is influenced by individuals in authority in his or her investigation. For example, claims from senior police officers may influence the direction of an investigation.

Tenacity is the other method of inquiry. In this method, an investigator relies on prior knowledge without questioning whether the information is true or not. In criminal investigation, tenacity can lead to bias in investigation. For example, when investigating a crime such as drug trafficking, prior knowledge of the common trend in drug trafficking may mislead the investigation.

Intuition is the other common method of inquiry. In this method, an investigator uses inner feeling to direct the investigation. In criminal investigation, some investigators claim to use inner feeling to direct their investigation but the method is not reliable.

To be successful, an investigator should have the right mindset. This means that he or she should not have a fixed mind while carrying out an investigation but should be open to all possibilities (Ray, 1998). Despite being open to all eventualities, an investigator should be guided by the obvious and then move to the details.

It is expected that a good investigator should have a checklist, which he or she uses as a guide in an investigation. The mindset in investigation usually is derived from experience, training, observation and studies carried out on a subject. The mindset provides an investigator with a framework which he or she uses to carry out investigations.

Experience is vital in criminal investigation. Experience exposes an investigator to many possibilities and therefore helps make an appropriate decision at the right time. Therefore, being open to all possibilities is equivalent to having an investigative mindset. The following scenario illustrates the importance of being open to all possibilities: A man crosses the border regularly on bicycle.

An investigator initially suspects the man to be a drug trafficker but on checking, nothing suspicious is found on the man. Later, the man is found to be smuggling the bicycle he was ridding (Ray, 1998, p.4). The scenario shows the importance of considering many possibilities rather than having a fixed mindset.

The scientific technique is the most reliable method of inquiry. It is also possibly the most common method. Scientific method is a logical method of carrying out an investigation. Unlike non scientific methods, the scientific method follows a specific procedure in finding an answer to a given problem (Hunter & Dantzker, 2006). The scientific method assumes a healthy skepticism, which enables the investigator to approach a problem with an open mind.

The main objective of scientific methods is to overcome any bias and therefore arrive at a conclusion in an objective manner. The first step in the scientific method is observation. After observations are made, the investigator develops a hypothesis, which he or she tries to test through the process of investigation (Becker, 2008).

The investigator then identifies all the variables to the problem under investigation. Guided by the set hypothesis, the investigator evaluates the variables in order to support or reject the hypothesis. The results of a scientific study are obtained in an objective manner and are therefore justifiable.

In a criminal investigation, the hypothesis defines the investigative problem in a precise manner. The investigator then goes ahead to conduct the test, gather the necessary information, and make predictions. The investigator then uses inductive reasoning to make conclusion based on gathered data.

The objective of a criminal investigation is to gather information to determine whether crime has been committed in order to bring the individuals involved to book. A successful investigation should provide prove beyond doubt as to who was involved in a crime in order to allow justice to take its own course.

In conducting investigations, investigators rely on various sources of information. The three main source of information include the people involved, physical evidence and records. The people involved in a crime include the victim, the suspect and witnesses (Palmiotto, 2004, p. 2).

The victim and witness provide first-hand information related to the crime and therefore guide the investigation. A witness refers to any person who has first-hand information on the circumstances under which the crime is committed. Witnesses help investigators to verify information provided by the victim or the suspect. On the other hand, physical evidence plays a significant role in criminal investigation.

Do they not only provide evidence, which is important in a court of law but they also provide insights to the investigator. The records retained by criminal justice systems are the other important source of information. The past criminal records and fingerprint records of the suspect among other records play a significant role in criminal investigation.

Reference List

Becker, R. (2008). Criminal Investigation , New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning

Hunter, R., & Dantzker, M. (2006). Research Methods for Criminology and Criminal Justice: a primer , New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Palmiotto, M. (2004). Criminal Investigation , Washington DC: University of America.

Ray, D. (1998). Information-gathering Strategies: The Investigative Mindset , Web.

Wood, A. (1995). Methods on Criminology inquiry, Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology, 23(2), 78-86.

• How many murders occurred in USA in 2009?
• Guilty until Proven Otherwise: Domestic Violence Cases
• Arguing for More Street Bicycle Lanes
• Criminal Profiling and Investigative Linkage
• Offender Profiling as an Investigative Tool
• Sex Offender Registration and Notification
• Serial Killer “Theodore Robert "Ted" Bundy”
• Immigration and Crime Rate
• "Where Have All the Criminals Gone?" Analysis
• What to do with people who break the law
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, July 4). Criminal Investigation. https://ivypanda.com/essays/criminal-investigation/

"Criminal Investigation." IvyPanda , 4 July 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/criminal-investigation/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Criminal Investigation'. 4 July.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Criminal Investigation." July 4, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/criminal-investigation/.

1. IvyPanda . "Criminal Investigation." July 4, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/criminal-investigation/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Criminal Investigation." July 4, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/criminal-investigation/.

Essay On The Criminal Investigation Process

DOWNLOAD THE RESOURCE

Resource Description

To what extent does the criminal investigation process balance the rights of victims, offenders and society? (14/15)

While the legal system attempts to provide justice to everyone, it doesn’t always balance the rights of all victims, offenders and society during the criminal investigation process.The criminal investigation process is the investigative stage of the criminal process, where crimes are detected and investigated, and is broken down into main stages; reporting crime, investigating crime, arrest, detention and charge, court attendance notice, bail or remand. These processes, peculiarly the processes of reporting crimes have success at balancing the rights of the victim and society which is seen through the case of the murder of Anita Cobby in 1986. However, the processes of detention and interrogation struggle to balance the rights of offenders which is displayed in the case of Dr Mohamad Haneef in 2007. As a whole, the criminal investigation process is both effective and ineffective in balancing the rights of victims, offenders and society.

Report a problem

Popular HSC Resources

• Speech on George Orwell ‘1984’ – Human Experiences
• How To Survive the HSC
• One Night the Moon – Analysis (Video)
• 2020 – Physics – PHS (Trial Paper)
• Business Studies Influences on HR (Quiz)
• Sci Ext – Portfolio Pack
• 2020 – Science Ext – Exam Choice (Trial Paper)
• Domino’s Marketing Case Study

Become a Hero

Easily become a resource hero by simply helping out HSC students. Just by donating your resources to our library!

What are you waiting for, lets Ace the HSC together!

Join our Email List

No account needed.

Get the latest HSC updates.

All you need is an email address.