Forensic science is the application of sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, computer science and engineering to matters of law.
NIJ’s forensic science research and development program focuses on basic and applied scientific research with the intent to:
- Direct the findings of basic scientific research in broader scientific fields applicable to forensic science.
- Apply forensic science research to the development of highly discriminating, accurate, reliable, cost-effective, rapid methods for the identification, analysis and interpretation of physical evidence.
- Expand the scientific basis of forensic methods.
- Produce useful materials, devices, systems or methods that have the potential for forensic application.
- Increase the body of knowledge to guide and inform forensic science policy and practice.
On this page, find links to articles, awards, events, publications, and multimedia related to forensic sciences.
Identification and Quantification of New Psychoactive Substances Without Authentic Reference Standards
This recording one of a group of presentations on The Synthetic Drug Crisis – Identifying NPS in Forensic Casework, which is session I in Best Practices Guidance for Advancing Research Initiatives and Combatting the Synthetic Drug Epidemic Online Workshop Series.
The workshop was presented by the NIJ Forensic Technology Center of Excellence on July 25, 2018.
See the YouTube Terms of Service and Google Privacy Policy
Electronic Cigarettes: A Tangle of Regulation, Public Health, and Public Safety Issues
While modern electronic cigarettes (ECIG) were invented as an effective alternate method for nicotine delivery, the unregulated cannabis industry and recreational drug consumers adopted them for their culture acceptability and concealability. Absent strong, clear federal regulations, the ECIG industry rapidly expanded product types and e-liquid formulations. E-liquids contain chemicals considered safe for oral consumption, creating an aura of safety for consumers.
See the YouTube Terms of Service and Google Privacy Policy
Just Improving Sexual Assault Kit Testing Workflows
In episode one of our Sexual Assault Awareness Month season, Just Science sat down with Jody West, the forensic science manager for the forensic biology section at the North Carolina State Crime Laboratory, and Dr. Patricia Melton, a senior research Forensic Social Scientist at RTI International. Discuss resources aimed to help Forensic Science Service Providers increase the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of sexual assault kit testing. Among Forensics Science Service providers, there's a variability in how they approach testing sexual assault kits.
Intro [00:00:01] RTI International's Justice Practice Area presents Justice Science.
Intro [00:00:13] Welcome to Just Science, a podcast for justice professionals and anyone interested in learning more about forensic science, innovative technology, current research, and actionable strategies to improve the criminal justice system. In episode one of our Sexual Assault Awareness Month season, Just Science sat down with Jody West, the forensic science manager for the forensic biology section at the North Carolina State Crime Laboratory, and Dr. Patricia Melton, a senior research Forensic Social Scientist at RTI International. Discuss resources aimed to help Forensic Science Service Providers increase the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of sexual assault kit testing. Among Forensics Science Service providers, there's a variability in how they approach testing sexual assault kits. Some conduct serology testing of samples before moving to DNA testing, while others forego initial serology for direct-to-DNA approach. Because each processing workflow has distinct costs and benefits, The National Institute of Justice's Forensic Technology Center of Excellence has developed a no-cost tool that helps forensic science service providers decide on and advocate for an approach that is efficient and feasible considering their available resources and needs. Listen along as Jody and Dr. Melton describe the varied approaches to processing workflows in the field, the challenges that forensic science service providers face when transitioning from one workflow to another, and how the FTCOE's cost-benefit analysis tool for labor expenditure associated with sexual assault kit processing workflows can foster important conversations about improving sexual assault kit testing workflows. This episode is funded by the National Institute of Justice's Forensic Technology Center of Excellence. Some content in this podcast may be considered sensitive and may evoke emotional responses or may not be appropriate for younger audiences. Here's your host, Mikalaa Martin.
Mikalaa Martin [00:01:58] Hello, and welcome to Just Science. I'm your host, Mikalaa Martin, with the Forensic Technology Center of Excellence, a program of the National Institute of Justice. April is Sexual Assault Awareness Month, and we'll be covering emerging topics in the realm of sexual assault response reform. On today's episode, we will discuss a cost-benefit analysis tool for improving sexual assault kit testing workflows. To guide us in today's conversation, I'm joined by our guest, Jody West, the Forensic Science Manager for the Forensic Biology section at the North Carolina State Crime Laboratory, and Dr. Patricia Melton, a Senior Research Forensics Social Scientist at RTI International. Welcome to Just Science, Jodi and Patti. We appreciate you taking out the time to be with us today.
Dr. Patricia Melton [00:02:45] Thank you for having me.
Jody West [00:02:46] Thank you for having me.
Mikalaa Martin [00:02:47] So to kick off today's episode, I'd love for you both to share a bit about yourselves and your professional journey to where you are today. Jodi, would you mind getting us started?
Jody West [00:02:56] My first exposure to forensics was an internship that I had there my college years at the crime mob here in North Carolina. That was in 2002. So there my internship, I got some general exposure to the field of forensics. It wasn't something that was really on my career radar. But once I got exposed to it and saw some of the ins and outs of what happens in the crime laboratory, it definitely piqued my interest. So toward the end of my internship program, I was offered a contract position as a technician within the forensic biology section, essentially. So I began that portion of my career in 2003. Fast forward a few years. I then transitioned into a supervisor within the forensic biology section where I supervise a team of analysts who also perform casework. 2014 I then took another transition. I transitioned into the section manager and my primary role and responsibilities for as the section manager were to oversee the day-to-day operations of the forensic biologist section. I spent that role for about 10 and a half years and just recently as of a couple weeks ago transitioned into a new role within the laboratory system as a laboratory grants manager.
Mikalaa Martin [00:03:52] Thank you for sharing, Jodi, and congratulations on your new tour and decision. And Patti, can you share a little bit about your journey as well to where you are today?
Dr. Patricia Melton [00:04:01] So, my PhD is in genetics. And at that time, back in the dark ages, when I started my career in forensic science, we didn't have the feedback accredited processes. It was interesting trying to get my foot in the door into the crime laboratory sector because I don't think people really knew what to do with it. So I actually landed first at the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory, where I had just started and then September 11 happened. And so AFDIL was one of the primary laboratories to work the Pentagon and the Somerset cases from that incident. So I spent several years at AFDL in human identification work and then transitioned over to the crime laboratory sector up in Maryland as a Baltimore County PD in lab there for several years performing sexual assault cases, homicides, property crimes, you know, those types of things and testifying to those results. But I left the crime laboratory sector, believe it or not, about a decade ago now and landed here at RTI International. And here in this particular role, I spend my time primarily trying to bridge the gap between what happens in research and to practitioners. So the bulk of my work is associated with creating best practices and helping to implement those best practices. So that could involve training, technical assistance, workshop construction, educational platforms. But basically, having come from the crime laboratory sector, I know what it's like. The folks are inundated with casework. It is the font that never turns off. In fact, if anything, it only increases. As the technology gets better, so do the demands. And so what I find rewarding about the work that I do here at RTI International is really bringing in together, recognizing that we know, as practitioners, You don't have the time to figure out some of these things, but we can. And so we can really help bridge that gap and help you take the most advantage of technology that's out there, creates sustainable processes, and hopefully more efficient processes as Mikalaa Martin [00:05:53] Thank you, Patty, and we're lucky to have you and your experiences here at RTI. So to provide some context for our listeners, Jodi, can you provide an overview of the North Carolina State Crime Laboratory, including the services that you provide and then the general structure of the laboratory as well?
Jody West [00:06:10] North Carolina State Crime Laboratory, we are a multi laboratory state system. So we have three laboratories throughout our state. We have our central laboratory here in Raleigh, which is the state capital of North Carolina. Then we have two satellite laboratories, one of which is that we call it our Triad Laboratory, which in the Greensboro area, which about an hour and a half west of Raleigh. Then, we have our Western Laboratory, in a small town called Edneville, which is about three and a four hours west of our mountains. The three labs together are of our system. The Raleigh Laboratory is considered a full-service laboratory, so we have all the forensic disciplines to include firearms, digital evidence, latent evidence, forensic biology, trace evidence, drug chemistry, and toxicology. And then our Tri Laboratory, which is one of our satellite labs, has latent evidence drug, chemistry, toxicology, and then our Western Laboratory has latent-evidence, forensic-biology, drug-chemistry, and-toxicology. So in total, the three laboratory system, we serve hundreds of all course agencies throughout our state across all 100 counties in our state. So we have, as Dr. Melton mentioned, we have plenty of work that comes into our laboratory on an annual basis.
Mikalaa Martin [00:07:12] Thank you, Jodi. And one other kind of follow-up question that I have is do you know off the top of your head how many staff members are employed for the forensic biology sections?
Jody West [00:07:22] In our western laboratory there are nine forensic biology positions and then in the Raleigh laboratory there about 25 total forensic biology positions.
Mikalaa Martin [00:07:31] Perfect, thank you. And I'd like to frame our discussion around the varied workflow approaches that laboratories may employ when processing evidence from sexual assault kits. Patti, can you provide some background on these varied processing workflows? So.
Dr. Patricia Melton [00:07:46] And in a nutshell, I would say that I would divide the workflows between those that conduct serology screening and those that don't. So let's start there. Let's kind of make two buckets. Those that are using serology, screening and those that are using what we call a direct to DNA approach. Laboratories might call it something a little bit different, but in the serology screening side of the house, this is where serology is done first as a first triage on samples. Now serology is not DNA testing. Many other people listening to this podcast probably know that, but for those who don't, serology is actually looking at biological fluids, presence or absence of biological fluids and using that information to then make a judgment or an assessment on what samples could go forward for DNA testing. So you're looking at something a little bit differently there. Often serology screening or the serology step is what we kind of call red light, green light, or could potentially be a hard stop. After the serology testing is done, when that evaluation is completed, some samples or samples in the sexual assault kit, for example, may not move forward for DNA testing at all. But if they do move forward, for DNA, testing, that's when the DNA extraction process takes place in this normal DNA analysis process takes. Now, within this bucket of doing serology first, before moving on to DNA testing, you can have a process where a certain number of samples that meet the serology screening criteria are moved forward for the DNA testing. Like perhaps is three. We're going to take the top three or we take the top five. A laboratory can use their discretion and their validation studies to determine how many they want to move forward. The other side of the coin to that is something called continuous sampling. And what we mean by that is that although you might take your first top three serology samples and move them forward for DNA, perhaps in that DNA testing process, the results aren't as great as you expected. Maybe there's some complications there, things like degradation and inhibition terms that make us DNA analysis cringe just a little bit, because we know that implies additional work and additional analysis. Not that we don't mind the work, but it's just more complicated. But in continuous sampling, if those initial DNA testing samples do not yield an informative DNA profile or a CODIS eligible profile, then we go back. We go back to that sexual assault kit. We say, okay, I have those serology samples, took our top three, what else was there?
What else could we try? So this continuous sampling process means you keep going back until you either one, get a CODIS eligible profile, or two, exhaust the samples and evidence that's available to you. So that's kind of the first bucket. Second bucket is no serology is conducted. So we're going right to DNA. So we are taking those samples,
we're gonna go ahead and just extract the DNA based on what we see in the sexual assault kit, move it forward, see what we get. And again, the prime laboratory may decide that the best thing to do is I'm gonna look through the sexual salt kit, I'm evaluating the evidence that's in here, and I'm gonna take the top three. This is my top three, and we move it forward for DNA. If they get a CODIS eligible profile, great. If they don't, again, they can either stop, depending on their policy, or go to something that we call continuous sampling. So yet again, we go back to the sexual assault, can we say, okay, my top 3 didn't yield anything probative, I didn't get a CoDIS-eligible profile, I don't have enough information to move this case forward. Let me see, what other samples did I have? Could there be something more I could do? This continuous sampling process is, in my opinion, ideal, but also time consuming and complicated for the laboratory to implement. Now, just to throw a little monkey wrench into everything there, because it sounded so nice and neat, right? Two buckets, serology, then DNA, or no serology right to DNA. Some laboratories who are moving right to DNA who skip that serology step, do keep serology testing online in the event that a prosecutor's office comes back and says, well, this is great. You got me a DNA profile. That's wonderful. But what biological fluid did it come from? I need that for my case. They can always go back and do the serology at that point. And it's very effective to do that and helps kind of keep everybody in your multidisciplinary team happy with what you can provide to them to best support their case.
Mikalaa Martin [00:11:48] And Jodi, so to tie this back to North Carolina State Crime Laboratory, you guys have been using direct to DNA approach for processing sexual assault kits since 2018. Can you tell us a little bit about the former processing workflow that was utilized, what prompted the transition to direct to dna, and then the general experience of transitioning that processing approach?
Jody West [00:12:11] Yes. So like Dr. Melton mentioned, we had a previous workflow prior to direct to DNA, which was, I guess, your more traditional workflow in the laboratory where we would do the serology screen upfront. That would guide us what samples would move forward to DNA. So like Dr Melton said, we'd do it on the front end. So we would typically do your typical serology testing first, whether it be the AP tests or acid phosphatase test is this main screen tool for semen testing. And then we'd follow it up with microscopic examination for confirmation needed in those samples that would confirm and say the presence semen on would then move forward most of the time to DNA testing. So that was our traditional workflow. We were very much segmented where we had a group of analysts who were just serology tests, did the serology testing, then we would pass it on to the group of analysts who would do the DNA testing, so that was our historical workflow.
Then we decided to move forward with some different testing or direct to DNA approach. I would liken it back to our DNA testing at that point in time. Historically, a lot of our DNA extractions were done manually without the use of robotics, which was definitely a time-consuming process, but we did, in 2014, implement some robotics into our extraction process, which definitely made our process more efficient. Well, at the same time, our differential extractions, even after the robotics introduction, our differential extractions where that separation was still by manual process. So, we introduced some technology and made it more efficient, but, we still had a manual differential process in place. So in 2018, we did implement a direct-to-DNA approach and testing sexual assaults in our laboratory. We had heard about the concepts of directed DNA in professional conferences and in literature and presentations we've seen over the years prior. So we wanted to begin to explore that as an option in our laboratory. And many times along the lines with directed DNA approach, you have laboratories that have some sort of Y screening process or YSTR screening process in place. And we looked at different vendor options and we didn't really like the options that were available to us at the time. We're looking for something that we can help streamline our workflow where we could essentially go one way, a direct one way flow of the evidence in our laboratory versus having to circle back to the original evidence multiple times. So we ultimately decided not to implement a Y screening process initially in our directed DNA approach. So we did ultimately decide to implement the directed DNA approach and eliminate the serology testing or serology screening on the front end. When we were processing our sexual assault kits, we felt like this was a much more effective and efficient process and literally leveraging the DNA technology, which is far more sensitive than the serology technology as the main screening tool versus the serological testing. So when we did implement the direct-to-denial process, we at the same time brought online additional automation that helped with the differential process.
So we essentially automated that manual differential process at the time, which definitely added some increased efficiencies in our processing. So that was the technology we implemented. So we also looked at and reached out to other laboratories who already had a direct-denier process in place. We kind of get their ideas of how they designed their workflow in the laboratory, how they categorized certain case types over the others. So we ultimately found some models that we liked and we implemented our categorized sexual assault cases into two different categories depending upon the number of contributors that were potentially involved in the case. So that helped us kind of triage how to treat certain cases over the other. It kind of helped us make some more informed decisions about how many samples we would take forward after the quantitation step. We implemented a model and we put it in place and we just went with it. It was definitely transition period for us. It definitely had its challenges at times. Some of the challenges are coming from internally.
We have analysts in the laboratory with many years of experience, including myself being one of them. Their career was started in the serology field and just they did serology for years and taking the serolgy away from them kind of felt like they're losing part of themselves along with it. That definitely had some internal challenges we faced, but it's kind of helping everybody see the bigger picture where we could process more sexual assaults and doing it in a much more efficient manner by using the DNA technology versus the traditional methods. At the same time, we also have some challenges communicating to our external stakeholders because we do work in the laboratory, implement technologies in the laboratories, but then we also had to worry about the end product or end users. So that's going to be our law enforcement agencies as well as our district attorneys. We're the ones ultimately in charge with prosecuting and taking these cases forward to court. We did provide some training opportunities to our district attorney's ahead of time to kind of let them know, hey, this is coming. We're implementing these changes.
These are the reasons why. And for us, we had the NIJ had published a publication that kind of laid this out as a preferred method or the best method to move forward testing sexual assaults. And we also had in the DNA community, we have our SWGNAM guidelines that were implemented or put out there as well that had a similar theme where direct DNA is a preferred and much more effective in processing and processing sexual assault kits. So we use this information and put it out there to our stakeholders to try and get some buy-in to it. And overall, I think it was a very effective change and very great benefits for our laboratory as well as our criminal justice system to have this process in place so that we can get these kids tested in a much more efficient manner. So also kind of piggyback on what Dr. Melton said, while we took the serology portion testing out of our workflow, we do still have the ability to do serology testing in our laboratory. So if I say a handful of cases a year, we'll get a request from the district attorney's office to go back and do some additional serology, testing as needed on some cases as they're preparing for trial, where we have a profile that may have been uploaded to CODIS or may have had a profile, that matched a person of interest in a case, but they wanted some additional information to kind of tie things together for the jury. Where did that DNA come from? So what source or what body fluid did it come from? We do have the ability in our lab and do it on occasion to go back and do the serology testing as needed after the DNA testing
Mikalaa Martin [00:17:39] Thank you, Jodi. I appreciate all that information, and I really like your theme of really relying on the community of practice and leaning on early adopters, other laboratory systems. I know that you mentioned you looked around at the models and essentially you landed on a model that was implemented in 2018. I am curious, were there any modifications that have been made since the initial implementation of that model in 2018?
Jody West [00:18:02] And yes, we have made some modifications to our process. Well, we implemented a direct DNA process in 2018. We all realize it wasn't the end product. It wasn't where exactly we wanted it to be. And we knew that there were some efficiencies and different changes we can make down the road with the hopes of a wide screening process becoming available that we like to fit our workflow. So in 2022, we did indeed establish a wide screening process that allowed us to essentially direct AMP from the actual lysate from the original samples and to help us skip the DNA extraction process in a large number of our sexual assault kit samples. So that is something that we've implemented, like I said, in 2022. And over time, we've also made some tweaks here and there to our process. So we're always looking for areas of improvement, areas in which we can improve our process and make things more efficient. As new technologies come about or as in practice, we learn more about our cases and learn more how they function in our laboratory, we make more informed decisions as we go along the way in the process. So yes, we have made some modifications to our
Mikalaa Martin [00:18:58] And Jodi, would you be able to talk a little bit more about some of the information and the key considerations that really drove the laboratory to consider transitioning their processing workflow?
Jody West [00:19:10] When we were planning or looking at different models of direct-to-DNA approaches, we're doing that in considering what the information we were seeing and hearing from throughout the forensic community as it relates to sexual assault kit testing and particularly backlogs that were being identified in states throughout the country, as well as legislation that was being adopted in some states mandating the testing of sexual assault kits. While at the time we did not have any kind of legislation in our state or nor did we really truly know what our backlog of untested kits were, we were trying take a proactive approach and try to get ahead of anything that could be coming our way and try to make our laboratory processes as efficient as possible in case we saw an increased submission of kits coming our in the future. In 2019, we did have legislation that was adopted in our state that mandated the testing of all sexual assault kits. And once that legislation passed, we didn't see a dramatic increase in sexual assault kit missions in our laboratory. So the fact that we were proactive and adopted a direct DNA approach prior to this passing, it did help to a point making our processes efficient and laboratory and being able to test more sexual assault kits than we had previously.
Mikalaa Martin [00:20:13] Thank you, Jody. And one other thing that had stood out to me in your former answer was the end user training when you were making that transition.
Could you talk a little bit more about the training that was provided for your end users when you're bringing that process online?
Jody West [00:20:28] Yes, as a laboratory, we try to communicate to our stakeholders as frequently as possible. Like I said in my introduction, we serve 100 counties in our state,
and that includes hundreds of different law enforcement agencies and dozens of different district attorney's offices throughout our state. So communication to stakeholders is critical. So we try anytime there's any significant changes coming along to our technologies or to maybe what the end result will look like or end results look like, we tried to communicate those changes ahead of time so that people can be aware of what's coming. There were several instances in which we were able to meet with district attorneys at their annual conferences to provide them some information and literature about here's what's coming, here's some different references that are available that we model our technologies after.
So the upfront communication is critical. Now, just because we have communicated that to our stakeholders upfront, doesn't mean that we haven't had to continue to update them along the way. Cause many times the case takes a couple of years, two, three years to actually make it to trial. So they might not remember what we necessarily said or provided them through two or three years prior as far as technology. So it's not a one-time thing. It's something that's a continual communication with our stakeholders and hey, here's our changes. And here's some challenges you may face in court or some questions that may pop up. But to keep that open lines of communication between the two entities is very important.
Mikalaa Martin [00:21:40] That's wonderful. Thank you, Jodi. So let's dive into discussing the Forensic Technology Center of Excellence's Cost-Benefit Analysis Tool for Labor Expenditure associated with Sexual Assault Kit processing workflows. Patti, as a core member of the Tools Development Team, could you provide an overview of this resource and its aims?
Dr. Patricia Melton [00:22:00] So this tool was originally developed because, you know, you can tell from listening to what Jody's been talking about from their experience in the crime lab. Whenever you're making these large changes in workflows, there's a lot of discussion to take place. Some of those discussions are based around financial restraints, quite honestly. And so how do we figure out a way to have those types of conversations? How much resources, whether that be fiscal resources or personnel in an already tightly conserved system be shifted to what's probably a front-end investment for hopefully a long-term return on investment? But when you're talking about finances in a constrained system, that's a hard conversation to have, right? So what this tool does is a freely available tool. It's on the Forensic Technology Center of Excellence website. So anyone can access it. And it does require you to put in some labor salary type inputs from your crime laboratory. It's not a huge lift. It should be information that a crime laboratory representative has relatively easy access to. So if you are a crime laboratory that is doing one of the serology workflows and you're looking to say, well, as Jodi mentioned, this is a national recommendation to move to a directed DNA approach. We see the value in it even, but what's it going to cost us to get us there? And how are we going to the cape for that type of funding. What's really involved? What are we really looking at here from that fiscal standpoint? So this tool allows you to put in some inputs depending on the type of workflow that you're already in and what workflow do you want to go to and basically number chugs for you. And it produces a report that you can use to have a conversation with other key stakeholders like state legislators, for example, to say, this is the best we can do for sexual assault victims in our community. We should move to this new workflow
approach. But it is going to have an investment on the front end. We're going to need to do some changes and these changes are roughly going to cost X amount of dollars. But then coming on the other side, we expect a return on investment that looks like X, for example. So it really helps facilitate those conversations. It doesn't break down a lot of the deeper nuances like Jodi was referring to. Those are components that are going to come out as you make your shift, but it helps start that process so that when start to think about as a crime laboratory, what are all the things I need to think about to make this transition, to make this change, if this tool helps you start that conversation and helps cue you into a more effective process for thinking about and deriving solutions to those other nuances. So it's intended to be a helpful get start, but certainly not the deeper dive, because those nuances that Joey talked about, for example, looks like a certain way in his laboratory, but those nuances could look very different in another type of laboratory. But again, it's to help assist with going to what is a national best practice of a direct to DNA approach.
Mikalaa Martin [00:24:48] And this tool has been out since 2022, but recently had a facelift that just went live last month. Patty, could you talk a little bit about the updates that have been made to the tool?
Dr. Patricia Melton [00:25:00] Primarily, the updates made to the tool, the facelift that you refer to, really enhances the user end experience, right? It makes it a little bit more intuitive to use, a little easier to use and it guides you through the inputs of the tool in a much more concise manner, which I really appreciate. I haven't been on the developing end. When you look at something a million times, it makes perfect sense to you. Then, of course, when you put it out there and someone looks at it for the first time, there's a lot of questions that come up. So those were addressed as best that they could. But this upgrade, this new facelift, really helps guide the user through and really improves the user experience. It makes the tool much easier to use. Also the report that it generates, in my opinion, is also easier to interpret.
Mikalaa Martin [00:25:37] And Jody, you and your colleagues were integral members in helping inform the development of this tool all the way back in 2022. Can you share any highlights from your involvement in building the ground up for this resource?
Jody West [00:25:51] So in 2022, we were asked to complete a questionnaire as it relates to sexual assault kit testing within our laboratory. The questionnaire contained several different metrics and inputs that we needed to provide that can kind of help guide the development of the cost benefit tool for this processing method. So our laboratory provided the metrics that were requested. Those metrics could include things about salary of different levels of analysts within our laboratories as well as the number of cases that we would typically receive in a year, as well a number of case that we typically would complete in a and then within that further dive into the metrics we were then asked to provide certain information as it relates to each step of the laboratory process and how long it takes to do certain tasks and how many samples would be moving along in different parts of the process. So we completed the questionnaire and then the questionnaire looking at the way the questionnaire was originally structured it looks very similar to where the calls tool is now that we see and that is available for use now.
Mikalaa Martin [00:26:43] Thank you, Jody. And as a follow up, do you see your laboratory using this resource in the future to assist with any additional workflow, budget, or internal cost benefit analysis considerations?
Jody West [00:26:55] I definitely do. This tool is something that's definitely can be very useful in helping budgeting and planning for the future. It's definitely when you can put numbers to things about how much things cost because there are financial constraints that you always have to be aware of. I mean, it's definitely a very useful tool and I can definitely see our laboratory benefiting from using it in the future
Mikalaa Martin [00:27:14] That's great to hear. And we are very thankful to have you involved in the development of the tool as well. And Patty, kind of same question on your end. Moving forward, how do you envision this resource impacting the field or assisting in sexual assault response reform? What do you think may be next on the horizon?
Dr. Patricia Melton [00:27:32] I think for this particular tool, what I do like about it is the original design, again, was for a crime laboratory to work their way through making that big change from a serology-based workflow to a direct-to-DNA-based workflow. But as Jodi mentioned, the tool can actually be used for other nuances as you evolve your workflow processes in the crime lab, which is important. Considering the new technologies that keep coming out, forensic DNA analysis is one of the most fastest moving technology fields out there. It can be, quite frankly, exhausting for a crime laboratory to keep up with it. And the demands are incredibly hot. So I think that this tool does help with planning for the future or looking freely available. Take it, generate your report for whatever nuance you're looking at. Saves time for the crime laboratory to make some of those assessments. And you can take that information up to your leadership or to your committee meetings so that you can more appropriately plan for what needs to happen in the future. As far as what's on the horizon, I think that I remain excited about sexual assault response reform in our nation. I think the strides that we have taken as a nation over the last couple of decades have been incredibly important. We continue to evolve, we continue to strive for best practices, national recommendations, and efficiencies that help support our communities by improving public safety, but also supporting our members of sexual violence. And the ripple effect of sexual violence is massive. We're not just talking about an individual sexual assault survivor, right? That crime against them impacts members of their family and members of the community. Again, the ripples are massive. So I do remain excited that we continue to have a national focus on addressing sexual violence. I think that it's important to public safety. And I really appreciate the emerging research that has come out with sexual violence, we understand so much more about these types of offenders and the types of other types of crimes they're committing. It's easier to say what we all knew, anecdotally, but now we have the evidence base to support the fact that if you apprehend early on sexual assault predators and offenders, you're preventing additional violent crimes. And I think that's an important message for public safety.
Mikalaa Martin [00:29:44] Thank you, Patty. And I think you brought it full circle. I know, Jody, you said your laboratory relied on looking at some of the national best practices. So it's kind of this ecosystem of the more we learn, the more can put out to help laboratories grow and evolve their processes. Jody do you have any lessons learned or insights that you'd like to share with other laboratory systems that may be interested in transitioning their sexual assault kit evidence processing workflow to one that involves a direct-to-DNA approach.
Jody West [00:30:15] Yeah, because like I said previously, be sure to communicate the needs for change or the factors that are driving the need for change with your stakeholders and listen to what the community is saying, what other people are doing in the community, because we're not in this alone. Every lab has the same challenges as far as workload and trying to keep up with the demand. But I don't think you can communicate the need change or information with your stakeholders enough. I think it's something that you constantly have to do, constantly work on communicating those needs and the reasons for the change with their stakeholders. From a laboratory's perspective, when making work changes or workflow changes, understand that the initial change or modification you made to a procedure isn't necessarily going to be the perfect end state. There's always going to be ways you can change or improve along the way and that's okay. Small changes along
the way are something that's maybe necessary and needed. Don't try to develop the perfect process initially because time can go by and you can waste time and may never find that perfect state to begin with. Just get started on something and then make changes as you go as you learn more information or learn more things, get more experience in the process, make those changes as necessary along the way, and that's okay.
Mikalaa Martin [00:31:14] Wonderful, and as we near the end of our time together, do you guys have any final thoughts you'd like to share with our listeners before we wrap up today's episode? And Patty, I'll pass it over to you for any final thought, final takeaways.
Dr. Patricia Melton [00:31:28] I really want to thank everyone in the community, you know, Jody and his team at the crime laboratory, all the crime laboratories and investigators, advocates, and district attorneys, prosecutors who worked. So diligently to address sexual violence in our communities. As Sexual Assault Awareness Month for April, I just wanna say thank you. And I appreciate all of the efforts and I appreciate the continuous process of trying to fine tune and improve and always looking onto that next horizon as to what could be our best approach, what could make us better. So thank you for all that you're doing.
Mikalaa Martin [00:32:00] And Jodi, any final thoughts or takeaways to share with our listeners today?
Jody West [00:32:05] I would like to give a thank you to our crime laboratory staff here in our laboratory that have worked diligently over the years to play a small part in the sexual assault kit process and the testing initiatives that are out there. I would just join other crime laboratories out there and say thank you too organizations like RTI who are out helping push the information out there, providing the resources to the crime laboratories like us who, Dr. Melton said previously, we're limited in our time and resources. Having tools that are developed for us to use is something that's a great benefit to our laboratories and we appreciate it.
Mikalaa Martin [00:32:33] Well, it has been a pleasure talking with you both today, Jodi and Patti. I truly appreciate your time for sharing your expertise with us. Thank you for having me.
Jody West [00:32:43] Thank you for having me as well.
Mikalaa Martin [00:32:44] If you enjoyed today's episode, be sure to like and follow JustScience on your platform of choice. For more information on today's topic and resources in the Forensic Science field, visit Forensicoe.org. I'm Mikayla Martin, and this has been another episode of JustScience.
Outro [00:33:03] Next week, Just Science sits down with Regina Wells and Whitney Collins of the Kentucky State Police Central Forensic Laboratory to discuss a pilot study that evaluated the use of rapid DNA for sexual assault kit testing. Opinions or points of views expressed in this podcast represent a consensus of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of its funding.
Driving Success: Leadership Principles for Building the Right Team
Successful leadership is more than just managing people—it’s about assembling the right team, placing individuals in roles where they thrive, and fostering a culture of accountability and collaboration. This session explores key leadership principles based on the concept of "getting the right people on the bus" and ensuring they are in the right seats. Strategies for identifying talent, aligning team strengths with organizational goals, and creating an environment where individuals feel empowered to contribute their best are discussed.
See the YouTube Terms of Service and Google Privacy Policy
Improving Teamwork, Communication, and Productivity in the Workplace
This webinar provides a high-level overview of the Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Conscientiousness (DiSC) Personality Assessment tool and its application in workplace settings. Attendees learn how DiSC helps identify individual behavioral styles—Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Conscientiousness—and fosters better communication, teamwork, and productivity. The presentation explores practical insights into understanding colleagues' unique preferences and adapting your communication strategies for a more effective workplace.
See the YouTube Terms of Service and Google Privacy Policy
Just Advancements in Death Investigation Practices
In this special release episode, Just Science sat down with Chuck Heurich, senior physical scientist with the National Institute of Justice, and Dr. Jennifer Snippen, experienced medicolegal death investigator and consultant, to discuss recent updates to NIJ's guide for the Death Scene investigator. 25 years ago NIJ released a guide to help medicolegal death investigators navigate complex scenes and cases, a document that has since evolved with the development of best practices and technological advancements.
Intro [00:00:01] RTI International's Justice Practice area presents Just Science.
Intro [00:00:08] Welcome to Just Science, a podcast for justice professionals and anyone interested in learning more about forensic science, innovative technology, current research, and actionable strategies to improve the criminal justice system. In this special release episode, Just Science sat down with Chuck Heurich, senior physical scientist with the National Institute of Justice, and Dr. Jennifer Snippen, experienced medicolegal death investigator and consultant, to discuss recent updates to NIJ's guide for the Death Scene investigator. 25 years ago NIJ released a guide to help medicolegal death investigators navigate complex scenes and cases, a document that has since evolved with the development of best practices and technological advancements. In 2024, a new version was released after a multidisciplinary group of experts collaborated to make four major changes, including updates to documentation for death notifications to the office, procedures for child death investigations, partnering with local law enforcement and more. Listen, as long as Chuck and Dr. Snippen describe what the Death Investigation Guide was developed and how the newest updates came to be, and implications for day to day operations for medicolegal death investigators. This episode is funded by the National Institute of Justice's Forensic Technology Center of Excellence. Some content in this podcast may be considered sensitive and may evoke emotional responses, or may not be appropriate for younger audiences. Here's your host, Kelly Keyes.
Kelly Keyes [00:01:26] Hello, everybody, and welcome to Just Science. I'm Kelly Keyes. I'm a retired medicolegal death investigator in Orange County, California. And I was fortunate to be involved in this death investigation guide for the scene investigator, the National Institute of Justice's or NIJ's recent guide that was released. With us today we have two people who were much more involved in the process than I was. I'd like to start by welcoming Chuck Heurich and Jennifer Snippen. Chuck, do you want to take a moment and introduce yourself?
Chuck Heurich [00:01:55] Hi, I'm Chuck Heurich, I'm a senior physical scientist with the National Institute of Justice. I've been with NIJ since 2005 and have managed many grant programs dealing with the forensic sciences, and most currently I am involved with the National Missing and Unidentified Persons System, or NamUs, as well as the update to this death investigation guide.
Kelly Keyes [00:02:18] Thanks for being here. Jen, what about you?
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:02:21] Thanks, Kelly. I'm happy to be here. My name is Jennifer Snippen and I'm a medicolegal death investigator. I'm also a researcher and educator in death investigation. And I have worked primarily in Oregon, which is categorized as a medical examiner system.
Kelly Keyes [00:02:36] So let's just start with what exactly is this guide?
Chuck Heurich [00:02:40] The guide, which originated in 1999, and I know we'll talk about that later. From my perspective, it's a blueprint for medicolegal death investigators to have at their disposal, to look at a death scene in its entirety, and that would be from the initial notification that a death has occurred to all of the steps in between. Until they complete the investigation of the death scene. So it really is a blueprint with steps that can be followed. It's understood that not all of these steps are taken in all jurisdictions, but what the NIJ wanted to do was put out that blueprint or guideline for the death investigators. So when that they're at a complex scene and sometimes you don't have everything, you know, right there in your memory banks, you can have a guide to go to refresh your memory at the scene. And now online. And we really feel like the groups through the years have done a great job in creating this product.
Kelly Keyes [00:03:38] Thanks. What about for you, Jen? What is the guide to you?
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:03:41] Well, I have an interesting history with this guide, I think because I kind of stumbled into death investigation way back when dinosaurs roamed the Earth in the early 2000s, and I went through a series of different steps trying to get myself educated about this specialty. And it was while I was attending an internship in Charleston, South Carolina, with our common colleague Bobbi Jo O'Neil, that she introduced me to this guide and that paper document that I had in my hands was so important to me moving forward, because coming back to Oregon, we didn't have a very well established medical examiner system at that time. It felt like there wasn't a lot of resources to help me develop our local system, and this gave me a starting point for looking at the equipment that I could invest in, the types of steps I should be taken to ensure that I tried to meet or exceed national standards, you know, kind of best practice, but it's it was something that really helped me a lot in the initial stages of trying to develop our local death investigation system.
Kelly Keyes [00:04:41] That's awesome. Thanks for that. Chuck, what's the history of the guide? You mentioned that it came out initially. I think you said in 1999. How did we get to today with this new addition?
Chuck Heurich [00:04:51] Things back then worked a little differently with federal funding and how we got involved with projects. But I do know that NIJ was very involved with the death investigation community and the forensic science community, and someone from the field probably said, hey, it would be really great if somebody put out a guide to medicolegal death investigation. And at that time, NIJ was the go to in the Department of Justice to fund this type of project. What I found really interesting when I looked into the history of the guide, the original guide that was put out in 1999, had a review panel of 144 members. If you can imagine trying to manage that many people, I'm sure it was a great undertaking. But what was also interesting to me then was in the 1999 version some of the organizations that were involved in this 144 member group were the United States Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Counties, National Association of Medical Examiners, NAME, International Association of Coroners, and Medical Examiners, ICME and the American Board of Medicolegal Death Investigation. But it was those other ones that really jumped out at me. So there was a really broad set of input in the first guide. Fast forward to 2010 and somebody said, hey, you know, things have changed a lot in these 11 years. We probably need an update. So again, NIJ convened a working group, a much smaller one of subject matter experts with more focus on the actual practitioners. So NAME, ABMDI, IACME, and other affiliated forensic experts. Now, again, fast forward to 2019. The CDC came to NIJ and said, hey, we would really like to be involved in an update of this. And again, it was a group of about 40 people. From that, we whittled it down to an editorial board review that came up with the final product.
Kelly Keyes [00:06:53] Is this update different than the update in 2010?
Chuck Heurich [00:06:56] It really is, because if you think about the world in general, things have changed incredibly. And as we all know in forensic science, you know, thing that's changed incredibly. The way we've been able to communicate has changed. Technology has changed dramatically with regards to the ability to photograph and document scenes and advances in different types of deaths. So as time goes on, not only does technology change, but our knowledge base increases. We learn more, we know more, we know how things work and how things change. And that gives us the ability to look at something like death investigation and put a new spin on improvements to performing the tasks associated with death investigation.
Kelly Keyes [00:07:41] I was certified death investigator by AMBDI, American Board of Medicolegal Death Investigators, and I believe there's always been a tie in between sort of the work that they do at least pass tests and additions, ABMDI and the guide. Jennifer, do you know anything about that?
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:08:00] I know that when I was studying to become first registry and then board certified by the ABMDI, that this was offered to me as a suggested study tool. And as far as any formal collaboration or formal linking to it, I can't speak to that, but I know that this is one of the leading references that new death investigators are appointed to, to use them in preparation for those certification exams.
Chuck Heurich [00:08:23] It's not supposed to be a guide that the federal government has put out and said, this is the way you must do things. It's really a guideline, and my understanding is that ABMDI does promote it as a study guide for their certification process, because it is so comprehensive and it has a lot of detail in it that they want their certified death investigators not only to be able to perform the task, but to comprehend the reason they're doing it a certain way out in the field.
Kelly Keyes [00:08:54] It's really nice that it was a collaboration between people with experience, especially in medicolegal death investigation. Jen, from your perspective, how did the updating process work?
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:09:04] I received my invitation to work on this project back in early 2021, and from that very first email, I was really impressed. It really struck me that there was a distinct effort to make this kind of a representative sample of the world of medicolegal death investigation. So there were federal, state, county and city level people. There were people from tiny rural jurisdictions, giant urban jurisdictions. Somebody took a lot of effort to make sure that we had a good representation at that meeting. The first meetings that occurred over 2021. So one of the challenges of having such a broad spectrum of individuals collaborating is a lot of busy schedules, a lot of different time zones, and a lot of different ways in which this task is undertaken and a lot of different language for the same, speaking about the same things, but describing them in different ways. So we spent a lot of time working on what was going to be the breadth and the depth of any changes that we make, and whether we should strive for the ideal that we all hope is out there, as opposed to being realistic about the challenges that everybody face. And I think having that big group of people, a lot of them with a lot of experience and expertise, representing NAME, ABMDI, IACME, the NSA originally, the Haida folks, we had IACP, International Association of Chiefs of Police. So we had great representation.
And that led us to a really sweet spot, I think, of trying to approach all of the changes in a way that is most useful to the greatest amount of people. In fall of 2023, a group of us were invited back to participate on an editorial board to clean up the final document, make any final decisions, work on formatting and streamlining decisions.
Kelly Keyes [00:10:47] I certainly really like that this new edition maintains the same format. It's got the principle of each section, a policy suggestion, procedure, and then a nice summary that wraps up everything in the section. So I love that the format has stayed the same. From your perspective, what are some of the biggest new changes to the latest edition?
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:11:07] Some of the things that stand out to me are that a short glossary was included. We've added links to other documents that may be useful. You will find that there is a new section that didn't exist in the previous guides that highlights the importance of the process of receiving that first notification of the death, and the importance of documenting that you were notified of a death. And briefly addresses the important decisions that have to be made when you are notified of a death. I do remember in the first scene guide, the very first section is arriving at the scene, and it always felt to me like there was a something missing before that, like what is happening before you arrive at the scene. And I working on some previous projects, I was always looking for references that talk about how did death investigators get notified? How did they make the decision to go? And so I love that this document addresses that. Some updates on the equipment list. You know, like you mentioned, there's no Polaroids anymore. We don't list that a watch as important knowing that everybody lives on their the cell phones relying on those for their watches. One other thing is there's a distinct point made in this document that medicolegal death investigators must collaborate closely with law enforcement partners, but that our investigations are a distinct process. And highlighting that early in this guide is that something new that we didn't do before. And I think it's a really important point.
Kelly Keyes [00:12:28] Yeah, I think that initial notification and determination of response section is a good addition. Obviously, it is a guide for the scene investigators specifically. You know, not talking about all the other factors of death investigation that necessarily go on outside the scene, although it certainly does, I think dip its toes into many of those other things, but it does feel a little more complete to me with that section. So that was a nice, nice addition for sure.
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:12:58] I agree, it's a nice little addition into why you're at the scene and some decisions that have to be made before you go to the scene. And I think it really rounds out the document.
Kelly Keyes [00:13:08] Yeah, I also like that it makes reference to following local laws and statutes related to things like evidence collection and recognizing that variability.
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:13:17] There is a definite focus on recognizing how variable death investigation practices around the country, and respecting the fact that different agencies in different locations have different limitations on what they are able to do.
Kelly Keyes [00:13:31] Chuck, do you want to comment any more on that? I would imagine from a national perspective that is relatively important to you.
Chuck Heurich [00:13:38] It is, and that's why we take a great amount of time and care to assemble the working groups that we put together like this. We want a broad cross-section of not only death investigation practitioners involved with this, but we also want people involved that are part of or are touched by death investigation. And Jen mentioned, most importantly, law enforcement, because sometimes the death investigation crosses the medicolegal death investigation and crime scene from a law enforcement perspective. So we wanted to make sure that we covered that as well as being able to take from start to finish. And Jen mentioned the inclusion of the new section, notification and determination of response that came up as part of this group to be a very important part that was lacking in the previous guides. So we take all of that information from our subject matter experts and let them kind of work together to figure out how that best fits in to the format of the update, while keeping the original structure and feel of the guide consistent and cohesive.
Kelly Keyes [00:14:46] I'm going to switch gears a little bit here and talk about appendix A, which is investigative tools and equipment. How is that new list of equipment decided upon, Chuck?
Chuck Heurich [00:14:57] Well, again, Kelly, it's really up to the subject matter experts on the group. And as Jen mentioned, we broke them initially up into subcommittees, so we've had each of them. I take a particular section of the 2011 guide. We thought that would be the most efficient way to tackle the update, and we had each subcommittee was built in a similar way with the same types of subject matter experts in them. So they had a cross- section of all the people involved in depth investigation. But like I said earlier, you know, technology evolves so fast and how people process scenes is always changing. So we looked at the technology and equipment and supplies that are available now to medicolegal death investigators. And we wanted to make sure we had a comprehensive list of those types of equipment. Not necessarily to say that jurisdictions absolutely had to have these things, because we all know that there are rural jurisdictions, very small jurisdictions, that aren't able to afford a lot of these things, but they can see that they're on the list, and they can use that within their agency to say, look at what they're recognizing as something that would be valuable to our jobs. And that may help a jurisdiction or an agency be able to fight for getting funding for those types of equipment that they might not necessarily be able to get or talk to a jurisdiction nearby that has that equipment and may be able to share it with them and use it on death investigations that they're part of. So we just want to make sure that it's as up to date as possible when we know what's going to be published, because we also understand that when it's published, much like a car, when you drive it off the lot, it's not going to be the same. It will be different, and technology has already evolved. So there are probably things today that, while we're talking that aren't on the list, that have been thought of since we put this publication out.
Kelly Keyes [00:16:54] Yeah, I think it is a great opportunity for maybe a new coroner who's establishing an office or, you know, somebody who's new into this role to go ahead and have a place to start of things to buy. I know, Jen, you mentioned that when you started in Oregon that you would use the supply list back then. I'm also the chair of the OSAC Organization of Scientific Area committees, Medicolegal Death Investigation Subcommittee, and we've identified this as a topic that's so important that we were working on developing a document from OSAC. So I think that that is a very useful tool for the community as well, especially the smaller offices that are under resourced.
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:17:35] Yeah. Kelly. And one thing I want to point out to this is the appendix A, it states that the, you know, medicolegal death investigators may be collaborating with other agencies and may share some equipment, but ultimately we're responsible for our part of it. And I have to say that early on, as I was getting established, I had to purchase my own equipment, and I had to be very mindful about what was luxury and what was necessary that I'm spending my money on. Right. Well, some of the stuff that I invested in, I would take to death investigation scenes, and many times we would use the law enforcement materials and I would just keep mine in my car. But there were a number of times where, for whatever reason, they didn't have the equipment and the fact that I was adequately prepared. You know, using this guide gave me a stock of materials that then they could use. And so it not only aids and like you said, a new coroner who's freshly elected or a medicolegal death investigator who's trying to get a local office up and running, but we can ultimately help our law enforcement colleagues to, if we're better prepared and not relying on them for everything. And as Chuck mentioned, using this as a justification for why we do need the appropriate tools and equipment to do a professional job.
Kelly Keyes [00:18:39] And that sounds like that's really a great opportunity to show our law enforcement colleagues or other colleagues that we're working with on scenes our professionalism. And the professionalism that a medicolegal death investigator can bring to a scene, that's a great story. So, Chuck, what else what else is new in this guide?
Chuck Heurich [00:18:57] The advances in technology is the easy low hanging fruit to talk about. Everybody knows DNA technology has improved in the way we can get more from smaller samples. There's the availability now a forensic genetic genealogy to make a more concrete identification of someone. If the death investigators is dealing with remains of someone that is unknown, and some of the other sciences obviously related to death investigation have improved. One of the things that's new about this guide, and I think it's really important to mention, because at the onset of the podcast, I talked about the CDC being a partner, and they really brought a unique perspective to this discussion because their focus is on public health, not really public safety, but there's such an intersection in those two areas that we wanted to try to incorporate that feel into this new update. And we did so with our input on areas that are really important in that world of public health, and that's things like drug deaths. I mean, with the opioid epidemic, we wanted to make sure there were things involved in here that, you know, related to the differences in those types of scenes. And as well, there wasn't always as much covered with regards to child and infant deaths, which are both so vitally important to public health and public safety concerns in the United States. So we tried to incorporate those. And just through the discussion of creating this update, the CDC was really helpful in those types of discussions and finding where we could insert things in this guide to make them valuable and to stand out to the investigators as an update. Not to mention what we discussed about the independent collaboration and the investigations themselves. You know, at a scene you may have someone that's from the public health sector in the government, you would may have law enforcement and you may have a medicolegal death investigator all at the same scene. And it's so important that they understand each other's role and that they understand the steps that each has to take in their particular investigation. It's the sense of you need to be open and collaborative with these other agencies, while still meeting the goals of your investigation.
Kelly Keyes [00:21:15] Chuck, that public health piece is really to me when I looked at the guide, and I do have it in front of me. Section E recording the decedent profile information. I really think that a lot of that is covered in there. You know, talking about not just how the decedent was discovered in the circumstances of death, but it goes so far as to suggest that the investigator gets information on medical history, mental health history, possibly helping to determine manner of death. But then also the social history part is, is really extensive in this. And I recall some discussion about that. You know, it includes information suggesting as relevant to the investigation, financial history, daily routines, habits, activities, you know, a new one probably that in the initial version of the guide didn't exist is pertinent written or electronic correspondence like social media sites, text messages, emails, those sort of things. So obviously that's a great example of the update, but also kind of that public health responsibility that a medical examiner or coroner's office or justice of the peace in Texas has the opportunity. And I think that's great that that's recognized and provides that guidance as well. And that's be it on the scene or as part of the ongoing investigation.
Chuck Heurich [00:22:30] Yeah, I completely agree, Kelly, because I think all of that information, because the CDC in the public health world is so data driven, if we can collect all that information and have that at our disposal from death investigations. The collection of that data over time can help to inform not only the public health community, but also the community at large with law enforcement, medicolegal death investigators, and also the general public on trends and things and why certain things happen and how certain things happen in death investigations and actually, honestly, in the lives of people who come to the point of the end of their life. And why did that occur? Is there something we could have done to prevent it? Is there something along the way that, you know, triggered them to choose to commit suicide? Or were they killed by another person because of some interaction in their world? So I think the more information we can collect at scenes and with regard to scenes, the better off everybody at the end of the day will be moving forward.
Kelly Keyes [00:23:37] Yeah, I think a great example I always use for the public health impacts of medical examiner coroner data is related to sudden infant deaths. You know, with the Back to Sleep campaign really being based on information found from death scenes that babies who are not sleeping on their back were dying at higher rates. And, you know, as such, the rates of infant deaths have declined in this country, which is obviously fantastic. Jennifer.
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:24:03] Yeah. Kelly, I'd like to add on that. I think most of the lay public and many new people new to medicolegal death investigation, think that this is primarily a criminal justice role, and you don't have to spend much time in this field before you realize that the bulk, the vast majority of what we do is not related to criminal justice. Those cases are absolutely critical, a critical part of what we do. But much of it is public health, community caretaking, gathering data that advances future medical research. So the fact that we take an effort in this guide to highlight that, I think we kind of shift the focus, isn't it doesn't give the indication that everything is a crime and really points to some of the nuances and some of the complexity of the small details that are required to parse out different types of death investigations that are not homicides. You mentioned infant death. It's we have probably ten times the references to infant death in the new guide as the previous. You know, we talk about prescription medications and what you should be recording. And something is as important as making sure that what's in the bottle matches what's on the label. These are all things that are people who are new to the field, might never think of. And I think that is that's a really great point, that the focus on public health really stands out in this guide.
Kelly Keyes [00:25:17] There's a theme of personal safety throughout, with that topic addressed early on in the guide and throughout. And I don't recall that quite being as much of a focus in past guides.
Chuck Heurich [00:25:29] Yeah, I think it's really important because I actually started my career as a crime scene investigator in Baltimore City from 1988 to 1992. And back in those days, we were considered kind of a bag and tag operation where we just went and took pictures of things and put it in bags, and the science was different. And policies and procedures and standards were different. And I really think that back then there was very little thought about the investigators, whether it be a law enforcement crime scene investigator or a medicolegal death investigator. It was just like, here's what you do. Youg o out, you do your job. You know, whether it's a hazardous scene, you know, may have been a little bit of a thought. If there was something like somebody died in the gas truck that spilled and there's gasoline everywhere, all the way up to the 80s where I worked.
And there was knowledge about the Aids epidemic. And you went to a crime scene and there was a lot of blood. You knew how to protect yourself there. But I think it goes beyond that because there is so much information we know now about the mental health of the investigators, the mental health of first responders and how we really need to address those types of things as well. So I think it's important for not only to do the job effectively, but to protect them at the crime scene and give them the support that they need, maybe mentally after they perform this job, because that's a really tough job.
Kelly Keyes [00:26:56] Well stated, well stated. I think that might be what I'm most excited about.
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:27:01] Adding on to what Chuck said, I think as a profession, the medicolegal death investigation profession tends to be fairly overlooked and kind of operate in the shadows. Everyone from OSHA to county administrators to state and federal policymakers don't tend to have us way high on their radar. And maybe in some of the more well resourced and well developed larger jurisdictions, that might not be the case. But I know, speaking to friends and colleagues across the country, many of us have nobody really looking over our shoulder to ensure that we are safe or to follow up with us after cases. And I know that's definitely was the case for me early on. And I made some stupid decisions and things in this guide that can serve as reminders for us about our own actions are useful and things that those ultimately responsible for us and our safety. It all might help to just turn the dial just a little bit and help the professionals doing this difficult work receive just a little bit more support and a little bit more education about how they can invest in their own safety and look for assistance like Chuck mentioned after the after the fact with some of these more difficult cases.
Chuck Heurich [00:28:12] And I totally agree with that. And one of the things that came to my mind is, I think part of the problem with the recognition of death investigators is the misconception of the general public that all death investigations are handled by law enforcement CSI. If there's a vehicle accident, the CSI's don't go to that because it's not a crime scene investigation. All of the deaths that are not violent crime related deaths are handled by you and your colleagues. And I think a lot of the public doesn't know that. So they don't really understand that there are really two different worlds with regard to the death investigation. And I think maybe that's something we take moving forward as a group, putting this guide together as to decide how we could move forward with informing the general public that medicolegal death investigators are a separate set of professionals and do a larger amount of work than a lot of the crime scene investigators do.
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:29:06] I agree, I was thinking just the other day how if you look at any TV show, you look at the books on the bookshelf, they all talk about the forensic pathologist doing the work, and they talk about law enforcement and detectives doing the work. And then occasionally we have an Angela Tron or a fancy high tech van with people in stilettos and flashlights during the their nighttime examinations of scenes. But there's very little mention of this sub specialty of medicolegal death investigation, with few exceptions. You know, that's something that excites me about this is early on. It shows this as a distinct profession, and I think it's a good step towards promoting that and a good step towards professionalizing it as well.
Chuck Heurich [00:29:43] Absolutely. And back in the day I'll date myself. But back in the day when I was watching TV, Quincy and Sam were doing death investigations and it wasn't. They didn't have death investigators. It was the pathologist and his assistant going out the scenes. And that's just not the way it is.
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:29:59] Yeah, but the shortage of forensic pathologists, even if that would be ideal, it's not going to happen. And it is a specialty. There's special skills. You have to be a death investigator that are different than autopsy skills, that are different than toxicology skills, they're different than law enforcement specialization. It's a distinct group of special techniques and education and talents that you have to be a successful medicolegal death investigator.
Kelly Keyes [00:30:22] So it sounds like the guy has a lot of potential use other than just for death investigators themselves, be it a new a death investigator or even a long term death investigator, you know, certainly no two scenes are ever the same. And I was one of the things I loved about my 25 year career as a death investigator was I was always learning something. So the guy, you know, certainly plays a role for a death investigator no matter where in their career, but also seems like it would be a great resource for someone who's interested in a career as a medicolegal death investigator or a forensic pathologist. You know, I always have people reaching out to me to ask, I want to be a death investigator, and I want to be a crime scene investigator. And this seems like it would be a great resource for those folks. Jen, you mentioned you are involved in education. Is there a role for this, you know, in the in the classroom at all that you're aware of?
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:31:13] Well, absolutely. I will say that I just teach at a local college and we're working on developing some medicolegal or forensic related programs there, and I've encouraged them to order copies of this book to use for students in those future classes and discussing the classes that we're trying to design. I also think it is obviously for new coroners and new medical death investigators. It's a no brainer that this should be in their hands from the beginning. For anybody who is planning to become accredited by either ICME or NAME, this is an awesome reference. You have to have policies. That's part of the accreditation checklist. And so this is a great place to start with developing policies to reach that level of professionalism in an office, and then using this to educate the people who are funding us and making important decisions about our offices and our functioning. And of course, you know, the general public. I don't know what's necessarily written for the general public, and I don't know that they're the ideal audience for it. But the more people that learn about what we do, the better off that they will be in the long run. But I think planning for accreditation, writing policies, training new people, and then also we can't overlook what we've talked about law enforcement a number of times.
There are places in the country that are so underdeveloped or under-resourced that their law enforcement is being forced to act as medicolegal death investigators. So they're taking on an additional role led by different statutes, different responsibilities. And that's not ideal. But they're doing the best they can where they are. And this is an awesome resource for those folks, even though they aren't, in most cases, going to be professional medicolegal death investigators. They are for a short period of time trying to fill that role. And so this might be a really useful tool.
Chuck Heurich [00:32:51] I think that's a great point, Jen, but especially when it came to my mind when you were discussing that we employ a Navajo Nation representative in the NamUs program, and she had a over 20 year career as a criminal investigator/death investigator for Navajo Nation. And there are two very different responsibilities and roles. But she did both for the Navajo Nation. So I think your point is well put.
Kelly Keyes [00:33:15] And I imagine there's probably also a role for the criminal justice system, for prosecutors, defense, judges, those sort of things as well. So to that point, Chuck, where can people access this guide? How can people, you know, get this information?
Chuck Heurich [00:33:29] Well, Kelly, the simple answer is they can go to the NIJ website and search for Death Investigation: A Guide To The Scene Investigator and it will take them to the publication. And when they go to that link, there should be instructions there on how they can actually order print copy for their agency or several print copies for their agency.
Kelly Keyes [00:33:52] And I know you guys have had booths at some of the conferences NAME, IACME. I know I was able to get a print copy there. Is that something that might happen again in the future at associated conferences?
Chuck Heurich [00:34:06] We printed a first printing of 2500 copies. It's my understanding there are still plenty of available right now, so we plan to have them probably in a few weeks at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences and then down the road at IACME as well as NAME in the fall.
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:34:23] And I just want to say, I really appreciate the fact that paper copies are available. You know, I know there was a version in between, and I don't know that there was a paper copy available, and now that version is not on my desk. You know, there's something even in this digital age where we have access to 27 million PDFs and online forums and all of that. There's something with this guide being a paper copy that we can throw in our car, throw in our bags, having our a desktop. I think that's a really valuable service that's been provided. So thank you for that.
Chuck Heurich [00:34:50] And just in talking to people at meetings I have internally with Department of Justice and other federal agencies, we always make mention of the resource. You know, we would like to update this every five years, if possible, to be more regular with the updates, rather than kind of knee jerking a reaction and looking back and saying, oh my gosh, a decade has passed and we haven't done anything with this. So we're looking forward to doing a revision of this guide more regularly.
Kelly Keyes [00:35:16] So other than a potential new addition in five-ish years, anything else with this? What's next?
Chuck Heurich [00:35:23] What we'd like to see going forward is when we have the electronic version of this to have sort of a web based toolkit that goes along with it. That would include the guide. And when the links are highlighted, you can link out to different documents about death investigation or about equipment. A much more interactive type of resource that investigators can use. While understanding is, as Jen mentioned, you know, when you go out to the scene, having a copy of this in your glove box is awesome because in rural jurisdictions or places you go where there's not internet access, an app may not be available, or you may not be able to get the guide digitally unless you have download it to your to your personal device. So we're thinking more big picture for the next version of this. And even for this version, if we can get the resources together in conjunction with CDC and work with someone such as, you know, NIJ's Forensic Technology Center of Excellence to maybe develop a toolkit that can accompany this
guide for the investigators, as well as for people that just want to learn about death and investigation, like Jen mentioned.
Kelly Keyes [00:36:31] Well, as we wrap up, I want to give each of you just an opportunity for any last parting thoughts.
Dr. Jennifer Snippen [00:36:36] Thanks, Kelly. It's been fun to visit with you and Chuck today, and I just keep being reminded that the quality of any death investigation and the quality of any decisions that are made during the course of a death investigation are going to be completely dependent on the quality of information that we use, the quality information that we obtain to make those decisions. And so this document is just another step towards improving the attention to detail and the types of information we might need to gather at a scene to help us make informed decisions, to give our very best data to public health and our very best informed decisions to the criminal justice system. So I'm pretty excited about how this may be helping in tiny little ways across the country. That will all add up to an improvement in death investigation. And I want to thank the NIJ and the CDC for prioritizing this, and for continuing to acknowledge the importance of death investigation and provide federal support for this important work. So thanks for having me here and be exciting to see what all what all we can do with this guide moving forward.
Kelly Keyes [00:37:39] Very well stated, Chuck. Any parting thoughts for listeners?
Chuck Heurich [00:37:43] Sure. And echoing Jen, NIJ and myself being involved with the project, we were and are very excited about this update and also excited about the future updates and what we might be able to add to this resource for death investigators. But I want to emphasize that it's just that it's a resource and we're happy to provide it. And we hope it's helpful for death scene investigation. We hope it's helpful to talk to and educate legislators and policymakers about the vast amount of resources that are needed in this community, and that death investigation needs and deserves to do proper death investigation for the public, Most importantly, I think we need to for the people listening to this podcast. We need to understand that the most important resource in death investigation are the people doing it. And we need to make sure that we take care of them. And that's what we tried to incorporate into this guide as well. We have a responsibility to make sure that the people doing this job have what they need, and this guide is just a small piece of that.
Kelly Keyes [00:38:50] Well, thank you again, Jen and Chuck, for being here and talking about this guide. We will put a link to obtaining the guide in the notes for Just Science, but I will remind the listeners that it is National Institute of Justice's Death Investigation. A Guide For The Scene Investigator. Thank you everyone for listening.
Outro [00:39:10] Next season, Just Science will release episodes covering various topics for Sexual Assault Awareness Month. Opinions are points of views expressed in this podcast, represent a consensus of the authors, and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of its funding.
H
Seized Drugs & Toxicology, 2025 NIJ Forensic Research and Development Symposium
The Forensic Technology Center of Excellence assisted the National Institute of Justice in hosting the annual NIJ Forensic Science Research and Development Symposium on Tuesday, February 18, 2025 at the 77th Annual American Academy of Forensic Sciences meeting in Baltimore, Maryland. This video is one of five recorded sessions from the event.
Presentations include -
See the YouTube Terms of Service and Google Privacy Policy
Impression, Pattern, & Trace, 2025 NIJ Forensic Research and Development Symposium
The Forensic Technology Center of Excellence assisted the National Institute of Justice in hosting the annual NIJ Forensic Science Research and Development Symposium on Tuesday, February 18, 2025 at the 77th Annual American Academy of Forensic Sciences meeting in Baltimore, Maryland. This video is one of five recorded sessions from the event.
Presentations include -
See the YouTube Terms of Service and Google Privacy Policy
Forensic Biology and DNA, 2025 NIJ Forensic Research and Development Symposium
The Forensic Technology Center of Excellence assisted the National Institute of Justice in hosting the annual NIJ Forensic Science Research and Development Symposium on Tuesday, February 18, 2025 at the 77th Annual American Academy of Forensic Sciences meeting in Baltimore, Maryland. This video is one of five recorded sessions from the event.
Presentations include -
See the YouTube Terms of Service and Google Privacy Policy
Anthropology, 2025 NIJ Forensic Research and Development Symposium
The Forensic Technology Center of Excellence assisted the National Institute of Justice in hosting the annual NIJ Forensic Science Research and Development Symposium on Tuesday, February 18, 2025 at the 77th Annual American Academy of Forensic Sciences meeting in Baltimore, Maryland. This video is one of five recorded sessions from the event.
Presentations include -
See the YouTube Terms of Service and Google Privacy Policy
Research Forensic Library
We invite you to also search the Research Forensic Library, a curated collection of publicly-accessible material relating to every discipline of the forensic sciences.
