Based on this week lecture attachment in 150 words to each answer those questions

User Generated

havdhrcvpxfreivprf

Business Finance

Description

First thing, I want you to do before you answer those questions on that paper. Read those instructions and follow them.

You must answer the questions thoroughly and cite all relevant assigned readings for those attachments (using APA format). In a separate page, send me the links I want to verify them.

DO NOT refer to or incorporate information from extremely unreliable sources (e.g., Wikipedia, TMZ, and The Onion).

Based on this week lecture attachment in 150 words to each answer those questions

Posts must be well written, free of grammatical errors, relevant to the topic, and demonstrate critical thinking and analysis.

Postings are defined as more than simply stating “I agree,” or “good answer,” but includes

WHY you agree/disagree or why you think it is a good answer or not.

Required readings:

Ogle, R. R. (2011). Crime scene investigation and reconstruction (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. (ISBN: 978-0136093602)

Osterburg, J. W., & Ward, R. H. (2013). Criminal investigation: A method for

reconstructing the past (7th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing (ISBN: 978-

1455731381)

Recommended readings:

Fisher, B. A. J. (2004). Techniques of crime scene investigation (7th ed.). Boca Raton,

FL: CRC Press.

Lyman, M. D. (2002). Criminal investigation: The art and science (3rd ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Turvey, B. (1999). Criminal profiling. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

INVESTIGATIVE PROCESSES CJI 550 LECTURE Legal Considerations Introduction During this week, we will examine legal considerations as they relate to investigative processes. Among the most important aspects of these legal considerations are criminal law, constitutional law, and Miranda and rights waivers, which are covered in this week’s readings. This lecture will concentrate on the dynamics of trial and court room testimony. Trial It is important to remember that winning at trial is oftentimes more about who presents the better argument than it is about fairness or justice. This may seem disappointing; however, it is a reality that the investigator must acknowledge and live with if he or she is to be effective in the courtroom. Before a trial begins, hearings will have occurred during which the defense will attempt to obtain rulings from the judge that will be favorable to their side. Through discovery, the defense will have been given access to the evidence that the prosecution plans to present, which is often challenged as being unfair, especially with highly damaging evidence. Once the trial is set, it will usually be held in front of a jury in complex cases. A jury will be selected and both the prosecution and defense will have opportunities to challenge prospective jurors. As the trial begins, the prosecutor will outline his or her case during opening arguments and the defense will outline his or her case, each one postulating the weaknesses of the other’s case. Following the opening arguments, the prosecutor will present his or her case, usually beginning with calling witnesses whom were initially interviewed by investigators. It is also likely that the prosecutor will have crime laboratory experts testify concerning the physical evidence that was recovered by investigators. Additionally, other law enforcement officers will testify about information they developed during the case. The defense will then present their case, usually challenging the physical and testimonial evidence presented by the prosecutor. Most of the challenges occur during cross-examination of the investigators where the defense will attempt to call into question the conduct of the investigation and the credibility of the investigators. Technical issues concerning improper collection efforts, chain of custody, and method of analyses of the physical evidence are commonly raised. Questions concerning the accuracy of observations, interviews, affidavits, and rights waivers are examples of challenges to testimonial evidence. Following the presentation of evidence, both sides will deliver their closing arguments. The prosecution will summarize the evidence they presented and explain how it proves the defendant’s guilt. Thereafter, the defense will review the evidence and argue how the evidence Copyright 2017 Gregory M. Vecchi INVESTIGATIVE PROCESSES CJI 550 presented does not prove their client’s guilt. Ultimately, the jury will render a verdict of guilty, not guilty, or hung (meaning that they couldn’t come to a consensus on the defendant’s guilt or innocence). Court Room Testimony Ultimately, the final result in bringing a case to fruition is the investigator’s testimony in court. As a result, it is critical that investigators prepare themselves thoroughly. When preparing for trial, the investigator should coordinate closely with the prosecutor to avoid surprises in court. This coordination involves spending enough time with the prosecutor to determine what questions will be asked by the prosecutor and what responses to expect from the investigator based on the evidence and facts of the investigation. In addition, the investigator should query the prosecutor on possible questions and alternative interpretation of the facts of the investigation that may be brought up by the defense. The following actions should be considered before testifying: • • • • • • • • • • • Review investigative actions and coordinate with the prosecutor before attending the hearing Review all statements for clarity Review all waivers, affidavits, and search warrants for investigative and legal sufficiency Review times, dates, and places of primary importance to the investigation Review investigative notes and prepare miscellaneous notes for use as quick reference material Avoid trying to memorize notes Coordinate with the evidence custodian and physically review all evidence acquired in the investigation Verify that the evidence is properly marked for identification Review the chain of custody Coordinate with the prosecutor on specific items of evidence required for court Refresh memory by visiting the scene of the crime During court, it is important for investigators to establish themselves as credible witnesses. To accomplish this, the investigator should present an appearance marked by cleanliness, neatness, and concern for the details. Additionally, the investigator should refrain from distracting mannerisms or actions, such as shaking, fidgeting, or excessive arm motions. Investigators should also avoid using police jargon or technical language, as it tends to confuse the jury. For example, instead of saying “I then observed the suspect exit the vehicle,” the investigator could say, “I then saw Mr. Jones get out of his car.” If an objection is raised by either the prosecution or defense, the investigator should stop his or her testimony until the judge rules on the objection. In addition, the investigator should never blurt out answers to a question that is asked by the defense until he or she is sure that the prosecution will not object. Likewise, the investigator should never volunteer any information while testifying that was not called for in a question. If the investigator does not know the 2 Copyright 2017 Gregory M. Vecchi INVESTIGATIVE PROCESSES CJI 550 answer to a question, he or she should respond, “I do not know,” rather than trying to guess, which can cause a loss of credibility. The investigator should keep in mind that during cross-examination, the defense counsel will use a variety of questioning techniques in attempts to establish inconsistencies and prejudices REGARDLESS of the strength of the case. This should be expected, so it is in the investigator’s best interest to remain calm, polite, and professional. Conclusion The best any investigator can do is to bring into court a well prepared case. The investigator should not expect the defense to plea bargain or stipulate to anything. In fact, the investigator should expect rigorous cross-examination. The investigator must be prepared to provide the best testimony possible, which is grounded in good preparation and coordination with the prosecutor. Bibliography Department of the Army. (1985). Law enforcement investigations. Washington, DC: Author. Dyson, W. E. (2001). Terrorism: An investigator’s handbook. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing. Fisher, B. A. J. (2004). Techniques of crime scene investigation (7th ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Lyman, M. D. (2002). Criminal investigation: The art and science (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 3 Copyright 2017 Gregory M. Vecchi Segaly What is meant by the term, “fruit of the poisonous tree” as it relates to the law? To properly define the poisonous tree doctrine, we must first expound on the exclusionary rule and its purpose. To curb constitutional violations by government agents, the procurement of evidence, absent a warrant, is made inadmissible. There are certain exemptions, however; if the evidence would’ve been discovered inevitably or the officer acted in good faith; illegality in how LEO’s entered to execute a warrant; impeachment; and its use outside of criminal trials. Since the Supreme Court regards the exclusionary rule as remedy—rather than a right—the exemptions stand, unless the deterrent effect is appropriate. The first exemption considers the fallible state of Man and admits illegally obtained evidence if the officer: (1) unintentionally violated the fourth amendment; and (2) the officers belief was objectively reasonable. For example, if acting on a faulty warrant (Judge erroneously believed probable caused existed), officers found drug paraphilia, the evidence is permissible court. The second exemption addresses how officers breach a residence or conveyance. In a knock-and-announce warrant, a set amount time is required before forceful entry. In Hudson V. Michigan, the Court held not that the evidence would’ve be discovered anyway. Even if they waited 5-seconds or 5-minutes. Also, it would offer little deterrent to officers, and therefore asinine reason to exclude. Lastly for exemptions, concerning impeachment, if a witness perjures themselves, prosecution can offer limited-illegally-obtained-evidence, for the sole purpose of discrediting him. And exclusionary rules apply only to criminal trials; so, parole hearings and civil trials aren’t protected. The exclusionary rule and its faithful companion—Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, is a remedy for violations of suspects constitutional rights. So, not only is evidence obtained directly through violation prohibited; evidence that is discovered as result of evidence violation is also unacceptable. What is the difference between probable cause and reasonable suspicion? In the U.S court system, party’s responsibly is determined by certain evidentiary standards. In civil cases, for example, a preponderance evidence is the burden of proof required: a mere 51 percent in the Plaintiffs favor needed for a win. Due to the restrictiveness of criminal penalties, prosecutors are required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to the triers of fact(Jurors), otherwise—acquittal. But what happens when a policeman wants to search your vehicle or person? What level of suspicion is required for an officer to infringe on your freedom? Generally, officer’s ability over the citizenry is determines by three degrees of suspicion: (1) Hunches, (2) reasonable suspicions, (3) probable cause. Officer cannot seize based on a hunch alone, the interview is completely voluntary. However, reasonable suspicion and probable cause is satisfactory to grant a limited detainment. In RS, officers must have observed behavior that is suggestive of criminal activity. An investigatory detention is permitted to determine if criminal activity is afoot. Probable cause is the standard needed to make an arrest or search warrant application. Officers must have information that would justify, a reasonable cautious person to believe the arrested person has committed a crime. What potential pitfalls can occur if the investigator does not adequately coordinate with the prosecutor before testifying? If the DA and the investigator aren’t communication properly, several issues may arise, the most concerning: an acquittal for a guilty suspect. In my experience, the human element, particularly witnesses are the leading cause of case dismissal. Investigators not only gather and arrest suspects, but act as psychologists, chauffeurs, and even bounty hunters. Prosecutors are oftentimes overloaded with large caseloads and little patience for mistakes. Witnesses integral for a conviction, on occasion, don’t make it to court, alter their testimony, or killed. The DA needs to be in constant communication with investigators, to ensure all necessary resources are at their disposal; that all legal safeguards are followed. If you interviewed someone as a suspect for murder, under what circumstances would you be required to read him his Miranda rights? Miranda rights are required to be observed if the suspect is in, Custody and is being interrogated by police. Simple right? Not exactly. To fully understand, we must operationalize the terms: custody and interrogation. Let’s define Custody as an arrest or the reduction of suspect’s freedom of action; and an interrogation, as when police ask investigatory question in the hopes it will elicit an incriminating response. Let’s say, Jason, our murderer comes to the police station on his own volition and hollers to every officer in hearing range, that he killed his wife for ordering to many QVC make-up kits. Is Miranda required—no. The procedural safeguards only come into play when custody and interrogation are activated. Small talk, non-police actors, and even undercover cops are also not required to use Miranda. Now, if you discovered him at the murder scene, you better Mirandize him before questioning. References: Ogle, R. R. (2011). Crime scene investigation and reconstruction (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

...


Anonymous
Just what I needed…Fantastic!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags