| Copyright © 2006 - 2007 - Barry M. Baker - CareerPoliceOfficer.com |
| Disclaimer |
| CareerPoliceOfficer.com is not responsible for the contents of any linked site or any link contained in a linked site, or any changes or updates to such sites. Links are provided only as a convenience, and the inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement by this site. |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| Homicide Report |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
This may surprise you, but, as the primary
police officer at the scene of a homicide, your
homicide report will most often be one of the
simplest reports you'll prepare. Of course,
there can always be exceptions. If you arrive
while the homicide is in progress, your
reporting will obviously be more
comprehensive. Or, if the homicide victim is
somebody important, your note taking on the
crime scene activity could take on a fast and
furious pace.
When you're the first police officer to arrive
on the scene of a homicide, you become the
primary officer. Your first and foremost
concern will be the protection and
preservation of the crime scene.
Let's look at what would be a pretty simple
homicide report. You receive an anonymous
call for suspicious activity in a secluded
wooded area about one o'clock in the
morning. You arrive to find no current
activity. As you walk the area with your
flashlight, you see a person lying on a foot
path. You soon determine you have a
homicide evidenced by the obvious bullet
holes in the victim. The victim is cold to the
touch indicating to you an earlier time of
death. You also notice a lot of blood on the
victim's clothing indicating that bleeding had
been excessive; however, you observe no
blood on the ground where you'd expect to
see some blood. You conclude that the victim
was probably murdered at another location
and subsequently dumped on the foot path.
Okay, what have you established as far as
your reporting is concerned. You've made a
number of observations, but which, or how
many, of your observations should you note
in your report? Since you're not a
pathologist, you should leave the
determination regarding any transport of the
body up to the medical examiner.
Here's how your report should read up to this
point:
"At 0105 hrs, [date], I responded to [location]
for a report of suspicious activity. During a
search of the area, I discovered a male lying
on his back across a foot path with his head
pointing in a northeasterly direction. I
police officer at the scene of a homicide, your
homicide report will most often be one of the
simplest reports you'll prepare. Of course,
there can always be exceptions. If you arrive
while the homicide is in progress, your
reporting will obviously be more
comprehensive. Or, if the homicide victim is
somebody important, your note taking on the
crime scene activity could take on a fast and
furious pace.
When you're the first police officer to arrive
on the scene of a homicide, you become the
primary officer. Your first and foremost
concern will be the protection and
preservation of the crime scene.
Let's look at what would be a pretty simple
homicide report. You receive an anonymous
call for suspicious activity in a secluded
wooded area about one o'clock in the
morning. You arrive to find no current
activity. As you walk the area with your
flashlight, you see a person lying on a foot
path. You soon determine you have a
homicide evidenced by the obvious bullet
holes in the victim. The victim is cold to the
touch indicating to you an earlier time of
death. You also notice a lot of blood on the
victim's clothing indicating that bleeding had
been excessive; however, you observe no
blood on the ground where you'd expect to
see some blood. You conclude that the victim
was probably murdered at another location
and subsequently dumped on the foot path.
Okay, what have you established as far as
your reporting is concerned. You've made a
number of observations, but which, or how
many, of your observations should you note
in your report? Since you're not a
pathologist, you should leave the
determination regarding any transport of the
body up to the medical examiner.
Here's how your report should read up to this
point:
"At 0105 hrs, [date], I responded to [location]
for a report of suspicious activity. During a
search of the area, I discovered a male lying
on his back across a foot path with his head
pointing in a northeasterly direction. I
observed apparent gunshot wounds to the victim's chest and head. Fire
Department ambulance number 3 responded to the scene, and Paramedic John
Smith pronounced the victim dead at 0120 hrs., [date]."
In this incident, it's obvious to you that the victim is dead, and, theoretically, as
a police officer, you'll be qualified to make a pronouncement of death.
However, in reality, it's always best to have an authorized paramedic make
Department ambulance number 3 responded to the scene, and Paramedic John
Smith pronounced the victim dead at 0120 hrs., [date]."
In this incident, it's obvious to you that the victim is dead, and, theoretically, as
a police officer, you'll be qualified to make a pronouncement of death.
However, in reality, it's always best to have an authorized paramedic make
that official determination.
There will be times when
death is so obvious, the
paramedic pronouncement
will not be required. The
medical determination is a
routine occurrence, and
people expect to see it in
your report. It's a lot easier
to follow the routine rather
than explaining why you
didn't. The paramedics you
work with will be aware of
crime scene procedures, and
they'll do their
pronouncement quickly and
There will be times when
death is so obvious, the
paramedic pronouncement
will not be required. The
medical determination is a
routine occurrence, and
people expect to see it in
your report. It's a lot easier
to follow the routine rather
than explaining why you
didn't. The paramedics you
work with will be aware of
crime scene procedures, and
they'll do their
pronouncement quickly and
efficiently without contaminating your crime scene.
It's obvious that this crime scene will be easy to secure. Your report will go on
to record the notifications you make, and the arrival of persons such as
detectives, crime lab, and medical examiner. Your report is primarily a
chronological record of activity regarding the crime scene. The investigative
portion of the homicide will rest with the assigned investigator(s). As a new
police officer handling your first homicide, you may have a lot of theories you'd
like to relate...and that's find. You can verbally communicate your theories to
the primary investigator who can evaluate their relevance.
When it comes to investigations, homicide comes in at the top of the list.
Whether you're employed by a police department that experiences few or many
homicide investigations, the homicide will always be the one to receive the most
attention, and...the most restrictions. When I say restrictions, I'm referring to
your involvement in the investigative aspect. Simply put, your department
doesn't want some rookie cop screwing up a homicide investigation.
You'll learn that following the very beginning of a homicide investigation where
patrol officers are expected to search for evidence and witnesses, homicide
investigators will rarely seek your active involvement in the continuing
investigation. That's not to say that you should abandon your interest or
efforts to locate witnesses, evidence, or other information that will assist the
investigation.
Let's go back to your victim on the path. Whether or not the homicide
occurred on your turf, that's where it ended up. As a police officer, it's your
duty to contribute your efforts as time permits. Let's assume that you return
to the crime scene the same morning at sunrise where homicide detectives are
doing their own daylight search of the area. You decide to expand your search
even though it would appear the victim was transported into the wooded area by
way of the path since it didn't appear that any effort was made to further
conceal the body.
Since you're very familiar with the area, you decide to check a parking lot
that's located about 100 yards from the crime scene and adjacent to the woods,
but with no direct access [pathway] into the wooded area. There are about
twenty residences around the parking lot, and you decide to interview as many
residents as possible. The hour is good since you'll be knocking on doors as
most people are getting up for work. As you look around the parking lot, you
immediately notice that some high grass on the hillside next to the woods is
trampled giving the appearance that a person or persons have recently been
traversing the hillside.
As you begin interviewing residents regarding any activity on the parking lot
from the previous evening or morning hours, you point out the trampled
condition of the grass on the hillside to determine if anyone might have
knowledge of anyone entering the woods at that location. About halfway
through your interviews, you speak with a resident who tells you he heard
voices on the parking lot sometime after midnight. Since it's usually very quiet
at that time, he looked out from his living room window where he saw three
men standing and talking near the rear of a parked SUV. Upon further
questioning, you learn that the SUV was not familiar to the resident, and, even
more significant, the SUV was parked directly in front of, or very near to, the
area of trampled grass on the hillside. The resident gives you physical
descriptions of the three men and the SUV. A license number would have been
nice, but that is not to be. You continue knocking on doors, but no further
information is forthcoming.
You decide to traverse the hillside to see what might turn up. You're definitely
looking for any signs of blood since your victim was covered in blood. You don't
see any blood, but, as you continue farther into the woods, it does appear that
someone had recently traveled through the area. There is just enough
underbrush that you can spot areas that appear to be trampled. At one point,
you observe several footprints in some soft dirt which indicates more than one
person. As you continue your trek, you realize you're heading in a straight line
toward the crime scene. The foot prints, at about the halfway point, end up
being the only real indication of recent presence.
When you emerge onto the footpath, you soon locate the homicide detectives.
While the detectives had checked the woods surrounding the crime scene, they
had not located the foot prints you came upon. You lead the detectives back
over the route pointing out the footprints and any other areas you found
indicating recent movement.
Now...what kind of, if any, reporting should you submit. It's simple, you should
report everything you did to include all the interviews identifying all the people
interviewed; information received, how you acted on the information, and
evidence [footprints] you recovered. One of two things is evident. Either the
evidence you've developed has absolutely no connection to the homicide, or
you've just established that the victim was probably transported by the SUV
described, and the three men described carried the victim's body up that hillside
and through the woods to the footpath.
Under this circumstance, if you're dealing with competent and experienced
homicide investigators, they're going to instruct you to report everything on a
supplemental report so that all your interviews and subsequent observations
become a permanent part of the investigation. If you're dealing with a couple
of "hotshots," you could get a different instruction. You could be told, "You
don't need to write anything. We've got all the information, so you don't have
to bother writing anything."
I put that body on the footpath for a reason. Your detectives could have
already concluded that the body was carried into the woods over the footpath
since it doesn't make sense why the body would be carried through the woods
and then dumped on the path where it was clearly visible. Even though you'll
soon learn that good sense and criminal activity have very little in common,
you'll find that a lot of police officers, even the supposedly experienced and
expert ones, stubbornly ignore information that contradicts their theory of an
event.
Any time you develop any information that could reasonably relate to a
homicide, that information should be documented as part of the official police
report. You'll find that some investigators, as well as supervisors, won't agree.
They'll like to control the information that ultimately becomes part of the
official reporting. It's human nature to avoid contradictions, but it's human
folly to ignore contradictions. Let's say your detectives ignore what they
believe to be your over zealousness or interference. They ignore the foot
prints, and that evidence is lost. If the footprints ultimately have no
significance, there's no harm done. However, if the footprints belonged to
suspects who dumped the body, valuable evidence has indeed been lost.
There's another reason why you might be told not to bother writing a report.
Your "hotshots" might indeed see the value of your discoveries. It could turn
out that your information will lead to further information that solves the case.
Of course their reporting won't mention your efforts in the woods. They'll
reinterview the witness you located, but, again, no mention will be made of your
original interview. It's just another of those human nature conditions...who
gets the credit?
They'll be plenty of times when you'll pursue interesting and important
investigations when no one else has any interest. You can go along
documenting your investigation's progress without any criticism or
interference. When it comes time to obtain search warrants or arrest
warrants, it's your investigation, so you do what needs to be done. However,
when it comes to any active investigations, particularly homicides, you must
always coordinate your activities and reporting with those responsible for the
investigations.
Let's go back to that witness who observed the three men and the SUV. Only,
this time, we'll make it more interesting. The witness tells you he saw the
three men removing a large object from the rear of the SUV. He describes how
the men appeared to be struggling with the weight of the object as they crawled
up the hillside, before they disappeared into the woods. At the time, he
suspected the men were discarding trash in the woods. That belief irritated
him, so he went outside to get close enough to the SUV to record the vehicle's
license number. You check the license number, and you learn that the number
is registered to an SUV as described by the witness, and you further establish
that there is no report of the vehicle being stolen.
You've obviously just revealed a major development in this case. Your correct
action is to get this witness and the homicide investigator(s) face to face. In
this instance, the investigators are nearby, so you'll request their immediate
response. In case you don't realize it, you've just developed a ton of probable
cause to obtain a search and seizure warrant for what is now a suspect vehicle.
Here again, the investigators should instruct you to start writing your report as
they go about preparing the application for a search and seizure warrant based
upon the information "you've" developed. Your report will describe everything
you did leading up to the application for the search and seizure warrant.
Now...if you're a moron, or worse and idiot, you could -- without consulting with
anyone -- just run with what you've developed and obtain the search and
seizure warrant; locate the vehicle; execute the warrant, and possibly seize
important evidence. Believe it or not, you're going to work with police officers
who will do just about anything to achieve recognition. For this type of
individual, recognition is useless if it has to be shared. When it comes to a
homicide investigation, this type of recognition will do you far more harm than
anything else.
By this point, it should be obvious just how important it is for you to search for
information; document the information, and coordinate investigative and
enforcement activities based on all the information. Of all the reporting you
do, the homicide report, and any subsequent follow-up reports, will be of the
utmost importance. There's nothing hard about it as long as you follow
established procedures and document everything that should be documented.
It's obvious that this crime scene will be easy to secure. Your report will go on
to record the notifications you make, and the arrival of persons such as
detectives, crime lab, and medical examiner. Your report is primarily a
chronological record of activity regarding the crime scene. The investigative
portion of the homicide will rest with the assigned investigator(s). As a new
police officer handling your first homicide, you may have a lot of theories you'd
like to relate...and that's find. You can verbally communicate your theories to
the primary investigator who can evaluate their relevance.
When it comes to investigations, homicide comes in at the top of the list.
Whether you're employed by a police department that experiences few or many
homicide investigations, the homicide will always be the one to receive the most
attention, and...the most restrictions. When I say restrictions, I'm referring to
your involvement in the investigative aspect. Simply put, your department
doesn't want some rookie cop screwing up a homicide investigation.
You'll learn that following the very beginning of a homicide investigation where
patrol officers are expected to search for evidence and witnesses, homicide
investigators will rarely seek your active involvement in the continuing
investigation. That's not to say that you should abandon your interest or
efforts to locate witnesses, evidence, or other information that will assist the
investigation.
Let's go back to your victim on the path. Whether or not the homicide
occurred on your turf, that's where it ended up. As a police officer, it's your
duty to contribute your efforts as time permits. Let's assume that you return
to the crime scene the same morning at sunrise where homicide detectives are
doing their own daylight search of the area. You decide to expand your search
even though it would appear the victim was transported into the wooded area by
way of the path since it didn't appear that any effort was made to further
conceal the body.
Since you're very familiar with the area, you decide to check a parking lot
that's located about 100 yards from the crime scene and adjacent to the woods,
but with no direct access [pathway] into the wooded area. There are about
twenty residences around the parking lot, and you decide to interview as many
residents as possible. The hour is good since you'll be knocking on doors as
most people are getting up for work. As you look around the parking lot, you
immediately notice that some high grass on the hillside next to the woods is
trampled giving the appearance that a person or persons have recently been
traversing the hillside.
As you begin interviewing residents regarding any activity on the parking lot
from the previous evening or morning hours, you point out the trampled
condition of the grass on the hillside to determine if anyone might have
knowledge of anyone entering the woods at that location. About halfway
through your interviews, you speak with a resident who tells you he heard
voices on the parking lot sometime after midnight. Since it's usually very quiet
at that time, he looked out from his living room window where he saw three
men standing and talking near the rear of a parked SUV. Upon further
questioning, you learn that the SUV was not familiar to the resident, and, even
more significant, the SUV was parked directly in front of, or very near to, the
area of trampled grass on the hillside. The resident gives you physical
descriptions of the three men and the SUV. A license number would have been
nice, but that is not to be. You continue knocking on doors, but no further
information is forthcoming.
You decide to traverse the hillside to see what might turn up. You're definitely
looking for any signs of blood since your victim was covered in blood. You don't
see any blood, but, as you continue farther into the woods, it does appear that
someone had recently traveled through the area. There is just enough
underbrush that you can spot areas that appear to be trampled. At one point,
you observe several footprints in some soft dirt which indicates more than one
person. As you continue your trek, you realize you're heading in a straight line
toward the crime scene. The foot prints, at about the halfway point, end up
being the only real indication of recent presence.
When you emerge onto the footpath, you soon locate the homicide detectives.
While the detectives had checked the woods surrounding the crime scene, they
had not located the foot prints you came upon. You lead the detectives back
over the route pointing out the footprints and any other areas you found
indicating recent movement.
Now...what kind of, if any, reporting should you submit. It's simple, you should
report everything you did to include all the interviews identifying all the people
interviewed; information received, how you acted on the information, and
evidence [footprints] you recovered. One of two things is evident. Either the
evidence you've developed has absolutely no connection to the homicide, or
you've just established that the victim was probably transported by the SUV
described, and the three men described carried the victim's body up that hillside
and through the woods to the footpath.
Under this circumstance, if you're dealing with competent and experienced
homicide investigators, they're going to instruct you to report everything on a
supplemental report so that all your interviews and subsequent observations
become a permanent part of the investigation. If you're dealing with a couple
of "hotshots," you could get a different instruction. You could be told, "You
don't need to write anything. We've got all the information, so you don't have
to bother writing anything."
I put that body on the footpath for a reason. Your detectives could have
already concluded that the body was carried into the woods over the footpath
since it doesn't make sense why the body would be carried through the woods
and then dumped on the path where it was clearly visible. Even though you'll
soon learn that good sense and criminal activity have very little in common,
you'll find that a lot of police officers, even the supposedly experienced and
expert ones, stubbornly ignore information that contradicts their theory of an
event.
Any time you develop any information that could reasonably relate to a
homicide, that information should be documented as part of the official police
report. You'll find that some investigators, as well as supervisors, won't agree.
They'll like to control the information that ultimately becomes part of the
official reporting. It's human nature to avoid contradictions, but it's human
folly to ignore contradictions. Let's say your detectives ignore what they
believe to be your over zealousness or interference. They ignore the foot
prints, and that evidence is lost. If the footprints ultimately have no
significance, there's no harm done. However, if the footprints belonged to
suspects who dumped the body, valuable evidence has indeed been lost.
There's another reason why you might be told not to bother writing a report.
Your "hotshots" might indeed see the value of your discoveries. It could turn
out that your information will lead to further information that solves the case.
Of course their reporting won't mention your efforts in the woods. They'll
reinterview the witness you located, but, again, no mention will be made of your
original interview. It's just another of those human nature conditions...who
gets the credit?
They'll be plenty of times when you'll pursue interesting and important
investigations when no one else has any interest. You can go along
documenting your investigation's progress without any criticism or
interference. When it comes time to obtain search warrants or arrest
warrants, it's your investigation, so you do what needs to be done. However,
when it comes to any active investigations, particularly homicides, you must
always coordinate your activities and reporting with those responsible for the
investigations.
Let's go back to that witness who observed the three men and the SUV. Only,
this time, we'll make it more interesting. The witness tells you he saw the
three men removing a large object from the rear of the SUV. He describes how
the men appeared to be struggling with the weight of the object as they crawled
up the hillside, before they disappeared into the woods. At the time, he
suspected the men were discarding trash in the woods. That belief irritated
him, so he went outside to get close enough to the SUV to record the vehicle's
license number. You check the license number, and you learn that the number
is registered to an SUV as described by the witness, and you further establish
that there is no report of the vehicle being stolen.
You've obviously just revealed a major development in this case. Your correct
action is to get this witness and the homicide investigator(s) face to face. In
this instance, the investigators are nearby, so you'll request their immediate
response. In case you don't realize it, you've just developed a ton of probable
cause to obtain a search and seizure warrant for what is now a suspect vehicle.
Here again, the investigators should instruct you to start writing your report as
they go about preparing the application for a search and seizure warrant based
upon the information "you've" developed. Your report will describe everything
you did leading up to the application for the search and seizure warrant.
Now...if you're a moron, or worse and idiot, you could -- without consulting with
anyone -- just run with what you've developed and obtain the search and
seizure warrant; locate the vehicle; execute the warrant, and possibly seize
important evidence. Believe it or not, you're going to work with police officers
who will do just about anything to achieve recognition. For this type of
individual, recognition is useless if it has to be shared. When it comes to a
homicide investigation, this type of recognition will do you far more harm than
anything else.
By this point, it should be obvious just how important it is for you to search for
information; document the information, and coordinate investigative and
enforcement activities based on all the information. Of all the reporting you
do, the homicide report, and any subsequent follow-up reports, will be of the
utmost importance. There's nothing hard about it as long as you follow
established procedures and document everything that should be documented.
The Elements of Style
Amazon.com
Composition teachers throughout the English-speaking world have been pushing this
book on their students since it was first published in 1957. Co-author White later
revised it, and it remains the most compact and lucid handbook we have for matters
of basic principles of composition, grammar, word usage and misusage, and writing
style.
Amazon.com
Composition teachers throughout the English-speaking world have been pushing this
book on their students since it was first published in 1957. Co-author White later
revised it, and it remains the most compact and lucid handbook we have for matters
of basic principles of composition, grammar, word usage and misusage, and writing
style.