Forensic intelligence and the analytical process

Abstract

A review was undertaken of the developments made with integrating forensic evidence into the analytical process to support police investigations. Evidence such as DNA, fingerprints, fibers, accelerants, tyre marks, and so forth, can support to differing degrees the various working theories or hypotheses about the nature of the alleged crime, the persons of interest and the modus operandi. Investigators however, either forensic or detective, bring various biases to evidence capture and analysis, biases which are better understood in the intelligence community. Structured analytical techniques have a long history in intelligence analysis, for example analysis of competing hypotheses, which serves several purposes: information sharing, clarity of communication, and to highlight the common forms of bias brought to bear in an investigation.We illustrate the representation of links based on traces and intelligence, and how these can be stored in databases permitting better "reasoning" with evidence. We also present some recommendations for integration of forensic intelligence into the investigative analytic process and review information systems in this area.

Themes in data mining, big data, and crime analytics

“…This will require services or products to include privacy and security features from the very beginning of concept and development. Examples include those from forensic intelligence (Oatley et al, 2020), with alternatives to reliance on traditional forensic science methods (e.g., odds ratios) and cross‐over with intelligence analysis (structured analytic technologies). Likewise, EBP, with an emphasis on scientific method, or intelligence‐led policing, with an emphasis on data gathering, or of any number of criminological concepts can all be said to be empirical models, verifiable by observation or experience.…”

The Use of Databases in the Analysis of the Scene of Crime

“…-increasing volume of processed information in the field of criminal justice (Carrera et al, 2021). In particular, this is related to the use of cyberspace as a place for committing crimes, the emergence of new ways of committing illegal acts (Blahuta and Movchan, 2020); -lack of unified methods of inspection of high-tech crime scenes and relevant databases (Lisohor, 2020); -a biased attitude of the investigators who inspect the scene to the selection and prioritization of working with traces and with databases (Oatley et al, 2020;Lid´en and Almazrouei, 2023), which leads to the loss of a significant number of traces (Ribaux et al, 2022); -low-quality communication between investigators and experts, overestimated expectations from expert work (Almazrouei et al, 2020;Srivastava et al, 2022); -problems of training persons involved in the creation of databases, including specialized personnel of expert institutions (Wickenheise, 2023); -overestimated appropriateness of using databases in the detection of serious crimes and in combating crime in general (Santos and Machado, 2017).…”