Crime Scene Investigators and the Judiciary: Comparative Analysis

The criminal justice system is comprised of many institutions that work in turn when a crime has been committed. Crime scene investigators and the police can be categorised as pre-charge, the crown prosecution service can be categorised as both pre and post charge and the probation service and the judiciary can be categorised as post charge. This well-oiled machine is the foundation to criminal justice system and without one part functioning to its maximum the other aspects may falter. This essay will look specifically at the role that the crime scene investigators (CSI's) and the judiciary serve in the criminal justice system with references throughout to the ongoing case against James Phillips. Crime scene investigators are infact a private organisation and are completely separate to the police. As a pre charge organisation, CSI's are involved right from the start. However, the judiciary the last services to be involved in a case as it is responsible for issuing sentences. This essay will compare and contrast many aspects of these two agencies. For example, the different ethics and policies that the two agencies must abide by along with the legal concepts that are involved whist discussing the criminological theory that is involved in these processes.

Comparison of CSI and the Judiciary

Crime scene investigators are one of the first agencies to attend a scene once a crime has been committed. This agency is a private organisation and are called upon by the police to carry out the first investigation. They have many roles and duties to carry out as part of their jobs. The first role is to attend and examine crime scenes along with searching for physical evidence. This will allow them to carry out their other duties such as record and recover the evidence. All this evidence will be handed over to the police and crown prosecution service to present the strongest case if it goes to trial. This suggests that if the crime scene investigators do not gain substantial physical evidence, the case may not be as strong as it could be and consequently may result in failing to get a successful conviction. During the case in question, the crime scene investigators attended Essendine Crescent, Wolstenholm Road and the stolen white Ford Fiesta and gained different evidence such as DNA, fingerprints, which are examples of conclusive evidence, and pieces of broken glass, which is an example of supportive evidence. Crime scene investigators also have many responsibilities while they collect the physical evidence that has been left at a crime scene. The main responsibilities is that all the evidence is preserved and recorded. Every physical item that is removed from the crime scene has to be placed in an individual evidence bag, sealed and signed by the investigator who collected the sample. This ensures that if the evidence bag is opened and resealed then it can be recognised. In this case, all this evidence was signed and sealed by the attending crime scene investigators who were on duty. Ethics and values are essential to crime scene investigators to ensure that the evidence is to the highest of standards. One principal they must abide by is the ABC philosophy. A stands for assume nothing. This means that the investigators should not have any preconceptions about anything. B stands for believe nothing. This means that the investigators cannot believe everything that they see and leads perfectly onto C, challenge everything. This principal ensures that not everything is what it may seem. Another principal that must be followed by crime scene investigators is one coined by Locard 1910. Locard states that every contact leaves a trace. For example, when A comes into contact with B it transfers and vice versa. This shows that everything that comes into contact with something it will leave a trace. The model of justice that can be applied to crime scene investigators is that of bureaucratic efficiency. This model recognises that there is a public pressure to solve crimes quickly along with being cost effective. This model also explains how there has been a an increasing influence of managerialism within the criminal justice system. This suggests that the crime scene investigators work quickly to recover the evidence to allow the other organisations to continue the criminal justice process.

The judiciary is the final agency which is involved in processing a case. The role of the judiciary is to listen and consider all the evidence and arguments that are presented in a court of law. This evidence may be presented by the prosecution or the defence whilst taking into account the defendants plea. It is the job of the judge that is presiding to decide what sentence is applicable to the defendant if either they are found guilty of the crime or plead guilty before the evidence is presented. James Phillips pled guilty to burglary, aggravated burglary and unlawful wounding and was handed a sentence of twelve years in prison. The judiciary has the responsibility of once the defendant has pled guilty or been found guilty, to take into account many different factors which can be claimed to be either aggravating or mitigating. The aggravating factors in this specific case that the judge must take into account could include planning and organisation, victim injury, use of a weapon and vulnerability of the victim. Mitigating factors can include rehabilitative prospects, for Phillips' drug use and the fact he has entered a guilty plea. This would have all impacted the judge's ruling. However, despite Phillips' entering a guilty plea this was not at the first opportunity so he will only gain a quarter reduction of his sentence so infact will be handed a nine-year prison sentence. If he had entered a guilty plea at the first opportunity, he would have been given a third reduction and would have been handed an eight-year custodial sentence. This shows that the quicker the defendant takes responsibility for their actions they are rewarded with a heavier reduction. If this trail had begun and only after this fact Phillips' had entered a guilty plea, he would have only received a tenth reduction. Despite him being handed a nine-year sentence he is only expected to serve a maximum of four and a half years. Ethics and values are again important within the judiciary to ensure consistency across all rulings. The sentencing guidelines provide judges with rules that they must follow when issuing sentences which cannot be deviated from. The model of justice that can be applied to the judiciary can be denunciation and degradation. This model values the importance of a public trail and public punishment. This model explains how criminal justice serves an important role to so enforce social values and show disapproval of offending behaviour. This suggests that the judiciary are important within society to recognise behaviour that is socially unacceptable and behaviour that needs to be eradicated.

With both crime scene investigators and the judiciary being part of the same criminal justice process, the two organisations do have similarities in their processes. One similarity is that both organisations must adhere to their respective ethics and values. Crime scene investigators must follow the ABC model and Locard's basic principal whereas the judiciary must adhere to the relevant sentencing guidelines. These ethics and values ensure that continuity is ensured throughout every case that is handled by these organisations are respected and treated in the same way. This means that no matter which crime scene investigator attends the scene of a crime, it will be treated with the same high levels of discretion. In relation to the judiciary, it means that no matter which judge is presiding over the case throughout the country, there will be a justified sentence handed to the defendant if they are found guilty. Another similarity is how important they are to the criminal justice system. Without crime scene investigators, evidence may be not be able to be found at a crime scene. Without this crucial evidence, organisations later on in the criminal justice system may struggle to gain the right conviction along with the possibility as they may charge the wrong person. In relation to this case, without the crime scene investigators, DNA and fingerprints that linked Phillips to the crime scenes would not have been recovered and an arrest would not have been subsequently made by the police. Without the judiciary, a defendant would not be punished. The judiciary issues not just custodial sentences but fines and community sentences so without this organisation a wide range of punishments would not be able to be issued. In relation to the Phillips case, he may have not been given the correct punishment and instead of a custodial sentence, he would have just waled free and may have committed another crime. This begs the question of if the judiciary did not exist then who would have the power to punish the guilty? This shows that both crime scene investigators and the judiciary are essential parts of the criminal justice process.

Despite these two organisations being in the same process, there is distinct differences in these two organisations. As previously mentioned, crime scene investigators are a private organisation. This makes them independent from organisations such as the police. This removes the possibility of coercion and bias across the organisations. Despite crime scene investigators being independent, they do work closely with the state run police forces. In comparison, the judiciary can be seen to work for the state. This means that the state can change the sentencing guidelines in accordance to the relevant societal values. For example, if a certain crime is becoming more of an issue within society, the state can increase the sentencing guidelines to deter more people to not commit that crime. Another difference between these organisations is at the point of where they become involved in the case. Crime scene investigators are the first to examine the case as they collect as much evidence as they can. This sets the foundations for the progression of the case. If the evidence is not collected in the proper manner, then this can hinder how successfully other organisations can conduct their duties. The judiciary on the other hand, are the final organisation to be involved within a case. The job of the judiciary is reliant upon the other organisations such as the crime scene investigators, the police, the crown prosecution service and probation workers. The judiciary is valuable to be able to close the case no matter what verdict is given. Another difference between these two organisations are the models of justice that can be applied. Crime scene investigators can be seen to use the bureaucratic efficiency model as it is the pinnacle of forensic evidence to work quickly and effectively to recover the evidence as it is well documented that the longer that evidence is, the lower the quality of that evidence. In comparison, the judiciary can be seen to be using the denunciation and degradation model. This model expresses how important the punishment process is and how highly the public respect the judiciary for this.

Conclusion

Both Crime Scene Investigators and the Judiciary play crucial roles in the criminal justice system. While CSI professionals work on collecting and analyzing evidence from crime scenes, the judiciary is responsible for the administration of justice and upholding the law. Both professions are critical in ensuring that justice is served, and the truth is uncovered. Although their work may seem separate, they often overlap, with CSI findings informing judicial decisions. Therefore, it is imperative for both professions to work together and communicate effectively to ensure the proper administration of justice. In the end, it is essential to recognize the valuable contribution made by both professions in ensuring that justice is served for victims and the accused.