Harnessing Science and

Innovation for Forensic

Investigation in Policing

Live-time
Forensics

2 2

Harnessing Science and Innovation

Forensic
Investigation
in Policing
Sciencefor
and
Innovation
for Research
and Development of the way forword for

Contents

FOREWORD
OVERVIEW
SECTION 1 OUR VISION
SECTION 2 PRIORITIES IN POLICING
SECTION 3 WHAT WE DO
COLLECTION OF FORENSIC EVIDENCE
ANALYSIS OF FORENSIC EVIDENCE
STORAGE OF FORENSIC EVIDENCE
SECTION 4 WHAT WE WANT
SECTION 5 COMMON ISSUES
SECTION 6 CRIME SCENE EXAMINATION
CURRENT PROBLEMS AND ISSUES
Tasking
Information Technology
Locating and Recovering Evidence
Evidence Management
Scene Recording
OPPORTUNITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT

Live-time Forensics

SECTION 7 FORENSIC PROCESSES IN CUSTODY

CURRENT PROBLEMS AND ISSUES
Sampling Times
Process Order
Live Time Searching
Multiple Data Entry
Use of Facial Images
OPPORTUNITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT
SECTION 8 PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION
CURRENT PROBLEMS AND ISSUES
CCTV and Face Recognition
Fingerprints
Rapid DNA
Iris
Voice
Tracking/Marking
Other
OPPORTUNITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT
SECTION 9 SUMMARY
SECTION 10 FURTHER SUGGESTED READING
SECTION 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Foreword
History tells us that science and innovation has a
leading role to play in the future of policing.

The police must continue to engage with the

scientific, academic and business communities in
order to constantly and effectively harness innovation
and develop new techniques.

Not only can research improve the way in which

criminals and criminal activity is dealt with, it can
also help us continue to meet our main priority of
maintaining public safety.

The need to research, develop and implement what

have been called live-time forensics to support UK
policing has never been as vital to society as it is at
this present time.

Over the past 20 years this key objective has been

met in no small part due to the efforts of innovators
within policing, the scientific community and industry.

The main objective of live-time forensics is to reduce

the delay between the information and evidence
gathering process and the identification and
subsequent arrest and conviction of offenders.

This work has led to the creation of a scientifically

sound and robust policing toolkit, yet even this is
only a milestone on a much longer road. It is vital
that the momentum of research and innovation be
continued and moreover intensified to keep pace with
criminal activities that are becoming increasingly
sophisticated.

Some of the emphasis of the work being carried out

concerns three specific areas; namely crime scene
investigation, custody suite protocols and personal
identification. Initial studies show that live-time
forensics would have a positive impact in these areas
of work; helping us to further reduce the destructive
impact of crime on the public and enhance public
confidence in the criminal justice system.

The need to research, develop and implement what have

been called live-time forensics to support UK policing has
never been as vital to society as it is at this present time

Live-time Forensics

Although the drive is to speed up the investigative

process, sample analysis systems, the identification
of those involved in crime, and custody processes, the
benefits of live-time forensics are multi-fold, including:
At the crime scene: Samples obtained and
analysed on-site will provide investigators with
information which can be used proactively rather
than reactively.
In the custody suite: Integrated and standardised
protocols with live-time searching will ensure an
improvement in detections.

The police service will continue to take on the

responsibility to identify and work with partners to
ensure that already proven processes, procedures
and strategies form the foundation for further
fundamental scientific and technological research.
By undertaking this lead, the police will ensure that
good practice in policing is carried out today and for
decades to come.

Personal identification: Bringing together all

sources of intelligence at the right time to identify
an individual will allow police to make much more
informed decisions.
The work emerging from scientific research and
innovation today will no doubt shape a new era of
policing into the next decade, revolutionising present
systems.
Although one of the drivers for such developments is
the current economic climate, the need for faster and
more cost effective technologies must not be allowed
to compromise public confidence or diminish police
capabilities that have made British policing the envy
of the world.

Deputy Chief Constable Mark Gilmore

Northumbria Police
ACPO Lead for Forensic Science and Innovation

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Overview
The need to drive forward research and development
in live-time forensics presents significant opportunities
for strategic partners to develop the Government
and Policing priorities relating to public safety. The
objective of which is to provide a safer environment
for all UK citizens.
Whilst the prospect of such future work brings many
challenges in the current fiscal environment, it
remains an opportune moment to be involved with
the enhancement of the effectiveness and reputation
of the Criminal Justice System. The need for this
improvement has been clearly evidenced by recent
challenges in high profile cases where the efficacy of
forensic science has been questioned.
Developments in forensic science has progressed
immensely over the past few decades, yet there
still remains to be many challenges that require
researchers in science and technology to explore and
be productively innovative.
With present boundaries needing to be investigated
and where relevant, be pushed even further. The
requirement to harness emerging technologies and
methods has never been more important in the
search for the truth, but these need to be immune
from challenge and be entirely risk free. The public
and judiciary requirements are such that the
confidence in any new methodologies which are to be
forensically utilised must be maintained. Therefore,
validation of such, should be of the highest standard,
adequately peer reviewed, and robustly quality
assured.
This document is a publicly available open source
document that will allow providers of research and

development with a unique insight into the problems

faced by the police service. Solutions to these issues
are being sought proactively, and it is believed
the answers lay within the utilisation of the latest
advances in science and technology. The current
research environment remains healthy despite the
downturn in the global economy, with the funding
of research being largely unaffected. Investment
in high quality scientific research remains to be a
necessity and a priority for the UK Government in
many areas. Yet there is however, a lack of focus
towards the issue of public safety, and therefore,
there is a steer towards improved methodologies
and development of innovative solutions to address
this failing. Co-ordinating this drive for improvement
at a national level will ensure that real benefits are
delivered. This represents a significant opportunity
for academia and industry to work in collaboration
with law enforcement, and where appropriate access
will be authorised to live test environments and
operational police staff field testing solutions.
The requirements of the police service are being
focussed on several key elements that cover the needs
of the CJS, and are summarised in the following
points:
Public safety this is the overarching
requirement to ensure a safe social environment
is developed where the public feels protected from
criminal behaviour. Science can make a significant
contribution if efforts are focussed on areas that
contribute to the public safety objective.
Crime reduction this impacts upon society as a
whole and by using science to reduce actual crime,
will reduce the fear of crime itself.

Live-time Forensics

Value for money in the current fiscal

environment, there is a responsibility on the public
sector to ensure that activity is proportional,
accountable and delivers value for money.
Reputational risks this applies to the
Government, policing and the criminal justice
system as a whole in that there is a need to ensure
that the forensic science used in the CJS is assured
and reliable and not exposing risks to those
applying it.
Public confidence the public should have
confidence in the reliability of forensic science and
those presenting in the CJS. Any confidence gaps in
science will be exploited to the full by the defence,
therefore there is a need to ensure that these gaps
are filled with reliable scientific methods.
Fair and equitable delivery of justice the latest
scientific developments should be available to the
courts to determine the truth, it is equally important
to eliminate than implicate using scientific methods.
National consistency we should ensure that the
standards used for the delivery of scientific evidence
are consistent across the country and the Forensic
Regulator has a key role in ensuring the application
of a consistent approach.
Scientific innovation in policing is accountable to the
public and therefore seeks to maximise the resources
available for research and development across all
scientific disciplines. This includes forensic science,
in which funding should be directed to where it will
have the biggest impact in meeting the key challenges
facing the service.
This principle aims to deliver improved police
capabilities year on year. There is an endeavour to
ensure that policing decisions are supported by robust

knowledge about the impact and effectiveness of

different approaches, and to harness radical scientific
developments that are relevant to policing over the
short and long term. The delivery of these goals is
based on the 3 key fundamental issues;
Coordination where there are clear priorities
for police science and innovation and where the
different activities of the organisations involved
align together to have maximum impact.
Collaboration where research and development
work engages police officers and the public;
and where specialists from different sectors and
disciplines work together encouraging innovation
to transfer from one area to another.
Challenge where investment in innovation
is targeted to where it will deliver the strongest
benefits; where these are realised faster than in the
past; and where the appropriate individuals are
exploited to address the most pressing police needs
of the future.

The requirement to harness

emerging technologies and
methods has never been more
important in the search for
the truth, but these need to be
immune from challenge and
be entirely risk free.

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 1

Live-time Forensics

Our Vision
A safer community for all
It is our vision that the safety and security of all UK citizens and those visiting these
shores attains the highest possible standard, and one that all the nations of the
world will want to aspire to and emulate.
The delivery of our vision is primary and therefore it is crucial that the police
service, academia and industry pool all available and significant resources, and
work in close partnership. This will ensure that initial innovative solutions and the
emerging technologies and methodologies to address the public safety issue are
unrivalled, second to none and remains relevant.
Furthermore, our vision demands that there is a continuum of research and
development to guarantee that all criminal activity is not only adequately and
speedily dealt with, but that law enforcement agencies are one step ahead of the
law breakers.

10

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 2

Live-time Forensics

11

Priorities in Policing
Research and Development
A recent consultation exercise with the police
service resulted in the development of an agreed
framework of priorities to support public safety.
To ensure full support of these high level priorities,
the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO)
Forensic Science Business Area, police forces and
other stakeholders established a more detailed
list, which includes capability and knowledge gaps
of the priorities. By identifying individual areas
of work and detailing what is required at an early
stage, it is envisaged that any scientific investment
will be effectively utilised guaranteeing specificity
of the activities undertaken and confidence in the
resulting outcomes and conclusions. These main
areas for development will be periodically reviewed
and scrutinised against thematic priorities, to
ensure they remain integral and continue to a
provide safe and secure forensic science provision
to the Criminal Justice System.
It is acknowledged that there may be other
significant developments in science and technology
that will benefit public safety that sit outside the
scope of the identified priorities and these will be
considered on a case by case basis.
To provide direct support to the public safety
issue and build a safe community for all the ACPO
Forensic Science and Innovation Board identified
three key areas for development. By working
toward the advancement of already existing
methodologies and technologies used to capture
biometric information, it is anticipated that
improvements will; significantly improve the quality
of reference databases and greatly contribute
towards the continued fight against crime.
The initial three areas identified for improvement
are those in relation to:
Crime scene examination
Forensic processes in custody
Person identification
Whilst this initial move will go some way to
improve the ability of investigators to both prevent
and detect criminal activity, it is recognised that

there are a whole range of other opportunities

that could improve public safety including; next
generation DNA, forensic databases, statistical
methodology, cyber and electronic crime to name
a few. Once work has been started in the initial
three work packages, there will be progression
onto those areas that present significant impact
to augment capability.
To progress work in respect of the three priority
areas, four specific objectives were identified,
these being;
Identify key stakeholders and current
operational practice

Engage with stakeholders to develop a user

requirement
Disseminate the user requirement to develop
innovative solutions
Identify funding streams
Some of this work has already been carried out
via consultation workshops held throughout the
country. These structured, one day events were
attended by key stakeholders, and provided
participants with an open forum to discuss current
operational practices and put forward future user
requirements. The resulting data was collated
and now forms the basis for the future work to
be undertaken, that being to develop innovative
solutions to address user requirements and gain
funding for such work. The information found
within this brochure gives an outline to the
findings of the workshops and provides an insight
of the priorities and the work required by potential
research and development partners.

Force Partner Arrangements

The Science and Innovation Portfolio Board will
assist, where appropriate, in facilitating partnering
arrangements between suppliers and forces
to ensure research and development activity
continue to be informed by accurate user input.

12

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 3
What we do

Live-time Forensics

What We Do
Forensic Investigation
To maintain and uphold public safety within the
UK it is crucial that any information permitted to
be used within the judicial arena is of the highest
quality. It needs to be reliable and accessible
to the right people at the right time, in order for
UK courts to make informed decisions and bring
offenders to justice. The CJS requires that all
forensic information such as evidence obtained
from scenes of crime, custody suites, databases,
and any resulting analysis of such evidence be
acquired by the utilisation of the most up to
date methodologies and technologies available.
The provision of high quality information is
paramount as any lesser alternative increases
the risk of either imprisoning innocent persons or
allowing offenders their freedom to continue to
commit further offences.

Collection of Forensic Evidence

The police service within the UK arrests and
forensically process 1.4m people per year,
recovering significant amounts of forensic
evidence that requires analysis.
Forensic evidence is obtained from two main
sources; from persons coming into custody,
and from scenes of incidents where there may
have been a crime committed. The intention of
gathering this material is multi-faceted and is to;
Determine whether or not a crime has taken
place
Who was responsible for the crime
Identify a person from existing records
Assign an identity to an individual that can be
used to track them through the criminal justice
system
This information is not used to enable the police
to determine whether an individual is guilty or

not, but to provide sufficient information to the

courts to enable them to conclude whether an
individual was responsible for committing a crime.
It is the role of the courts to prove or disprove the
guilt of an individual based upon the information
presented by the prosecution and defence. In
many instances, cases are presented to the court
using sound and reliable evidence that has been
quality assured and tested and is deemed safe
and secure, examples of this being fingerprints
and DNA.

Analysis of Forensic Evidence

The general principles of forensic evidence
analysis that are now in place have been
embedded for many years but are still open
to challenge as the recent Scottish Fingerprint
Inquiry has demonstrated. The environment
within which this activity operates is changing
rapidly and presently there is a mixed economy
for the analysis of evidence.
Traditionally, the analysis of forensic evidence
types has been undertaken by providers external
to the police but the demands of modern policing,
advances in technology and fiscal challenges are
encouraging forces to consider new options, these
being:
In-sourcing analysis all analysis is
undertaken within force
Part analysis analysis of evidence is shared
between the force and a forensic service
provider, or not analysed at all
Triage analysis The evidence is initially
screened in-force to enable a decision to be
made to whether or not to sent the evidence
for further analysis by a forensic service
provider

13

14

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

The analysis of fingerprint evidence is almost

exclusively carried out within a policing
environment, however, there is a drive towards
more collaboration between forces maximising
the benefits that technology can bring and
therefore opening up opportunities for new
methodologies to be considered alongside
existing processes.

Storage of Forensic Evidence

In many cases, the information resulting from the
analysis of evidence is placed onto a database
that is utilised as the main reference collection.
With any database, the ability to search and
challenge the information to provide an answer
relies heavily upon the quality of the information
inputted in the first instance. This is not unique to
forensic science and policing, and it is therefore
imperative that the reference material being
searched against is legally held, valid, accurate
and entirely fit for purpose. Examples of where
this happens in forensic science are the National
DNA Database hosting records from 5.5m
offenders and Ident1 fingerprint database hosting
8m records. These are the two main forensic
reference databases used to search material that
is gathered from 750k crime scenes per year.
These have proved to deliver significant success
and has resulted in the identification of over 93k
offenders each year, many for serious cases such
as murder, sexual offences and terrorism. There
are many successes from this approach but there
are still in excess of 400k unidentified cases on
the NDNAD and 1.9m on Ident1 with potential to
provide valuable information to the CJS in relation
to undetected crimes.

To maintain and uphold

public safety within the
UK it is crucial that any
information permitted to
be used within the
judicial arena is of the
highest quality.

Live-time Forensics

15

16

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 4

Live-time Forensics

What We Want
Partnership approach
The purpose of this document is to stimulate
interest from academia, industry and other
government departments in developing
innovative solution to investigative problems thus
improving public safety. It is intended to foster a
partnership environment where police forces or
groups of forces will identify with development
partners to work on solutions that can be
implemented on a national basis. The concept of
a knowledge bank of good working practice that
can be drawn upon by law enforcement is long
standing, and will be developed further through
the College of Policing (COP). This creates a
culture of learning and evaluation of operational
practice and identification of problem issues that
can be shared with partners in order to solve the
problems that are now being faced.
The intention will be to maximise the
opportunities available through the existing
funding streams including encouraging a
partnership approach in order to access for
example:
Small Business Research Initiatives
RCUK funding opportunities
European Union funding opportunities
including Framework Programme 7 and
successor programmes
Whilst this list provides a few of the more well
known funded options, it is not exclusive and
there are many more that could be considered as
suitable. There will be an endeavour to facilitate
the development of partnerships utilising our
contacts within operational policing to enhance
the likelihood of realising funding opportunities
through providing high impact issues that are
associated with public safety concerns, and
facilitating access to end users in policing.

This will hopefully bring together researchers in

academia, industry and the end users to provide a
powerful alliance in improving public safety.
The benefits from calling upon those who
undertake research and development to address
the issues regarding the gathering of forensic
evidence can be seen as advantageous in many
areas. Not only could it result in bringing more
offenders to justice, but will contribute towards
a safer society for all. This is a challenge not just
faced by the police, but by the whole criminal
justice sector.
There is great optimism and anticipation within
policing, that collaboration with industry and
academia will address the present methodological
and technological policing issues. It can be seen
that there are three routes that can be taken by
innovators to address these issues, the first being
to develop that which is already in existence
within the forensic arena and the second route is
to develop completely new methodologies and
technologies. The third option is to adapt that
which is used within alternative environments.
This final option may not be apparent initially, so
it is important to mention here that solutions to
some of these issues may sit outside of forensic
science. As an example, fingerprints, the biometric
identifier with the oldest history, has its origins,
not in policing but a way of ensuring against
fraudulent claims of salaries by Indian soldiers
in the 1860s. DNA came from the medical
world, not advanced biological techniques for
crime investigation. In many cases, that there
are potentially solutions to the challenges found
in other scientific and technological applications
where the basis for the science is proven, but
the application has never been identified as an
investigation tool for policing.

17

18

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

In summary there needs to be an improvement in

the following areas;
The methods used to locate and recover
useable forensic evidence
The usability of evidence types not currently
being exploited
The quality of information on the reference
databases
Identification rates for forensic evidence
The quality of the information provided to
investigators
The time it takes to process evidence
The time taken to provide information to
investigators
An important factor is that within the CJS, there
is a need to identify the problems that are
being faced and articulate them publicly so that
academia and industry can consider how they
may contribute towards an innovative solutions
based approach. This will be done through a
series of consultation exercises with end users and
practitioners to determine how obstacles can be
removed, and look to academia and industry to
assist in this process.

Academia in particular can make a significant

contribution by focussing research capability
towards the problems identified utilising partner
arrangements with forces that can be facilitated
through ACPO. Whilst this document highlights
some of the high level issues, more detailed
requirements are available as a result of the
consultation exercises. These can be discussed
further through the contacts listed at the rear of
this document.
The intention is to provide annual updates to this
document to ensure that additional issues remain
to be relevant and support the Government
priorities of maintaining and improving public
safety. This will inform interested parties of the
short, medium and long term requirements and
assist in driving their research and development
activities in the right direction.
Obtaining funding for research has been, and
will remain to be challenging. To ensure that
these great opportunities for research within
the policing arena are given the best chance
possible to succeed there should be an open
and transparent collaboration amongst partner
groups. Additionally, any application for funding
should be correctly coordinated and fulfil the
criteria of the funding body being approached.

Academia in particular can make a significant contribution

by focussing research capability towards the problems
identified utilising partner arrangements with forces that
can be facilitated through ACPO.

Live-time Forensics

19

20

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 5

Live-time Forensics

Common Issues
The need for standardisation
Many of the problems with crime scene
examination processes and custody
suite protocols emanate from the lack of
standardisation across the 43 Forces in terms
of technology, resources, facilities, policy and
processes and the training afforded to staff.
Differences are also evident in the approach
taken by individual personnel operating within
these areas despite the standardisation of CSI
and Custody Officer training. Innovation activity
needs to recognise these problems and bring
forward solutions that mitigate their impact
and assist in improving both the examination
and custody suite processes. The emphasis
for improvement should be to embrace the
concept of Live Time Forensics developing real
time information to investigators and thereby
increasing the chances of recovering property,
detecting crime and removing offenders ability to
repeat their crimes through speedy action by the
police.

A number of issues were considered to be so

fundamental to delivering improved performance
and meeting user expectations that a failure
to deliver at least one of them is highly likely to
render and innovation activity out of step with the
needs of the user. The fundamental issues for the
user are;
Delivering significant improvements to the
speed of key processes
Delivering significant and tangible efficiencies
Delivering cashable savings
Delivering significant improvement
to detections or other relevant positive
outcomes

The emphasis for improvement should be to embrace the

concept of Live Time Forensics and the development of
real time information to investigators.

21

22

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 6

Live-time Forensics

Crime Scene Examination

Exploiting science and technology
To support the aspirations to develop a new
approach to crime scene examination, a series
of workshops were held across the ACPO forces
seeking new ideas and innovative solutions to
the crime scene examination process. Whilst it is
clear that there have been a number of significant
progressions in recent years, such as DNA, the
basic techniques of crime scene examination
have remained in place for many years. Examples
of this are the use of brushes and powders that
have been in place since the inception of the
use of fingerprints to detect crime in the late
19th century. These principles remain the most
effective method in the CSIs current toolbox,
however modern technologies may present more
effective and efficient solutions.
The user community have been widely consulted
and via the workshops a range of specialists
identified those problem areas that present
significant obstacles to the successful examination
of crime scenes and the subsequent management
and analysis of the material recovered. This
ranges from dysfunctional IT systems that are
working in isolation through to manual evidence
management systems, and labour intensive scene
examination that can be inconsistent at times.
The overall objective of this exercise is to
deliver improvements to public safety through
the development of modernised effective
examination techniques at the crime scenes.

Current Problems and Issues

The specific issues highlighted by the users as
those that would benefit from innovation activity
can be categorised into five main sections:
Tasking, Information Technology, Locating and
Identifying Evidence, Evidence Management, and
Scene Recording.

The issues highlighted within each category are

seeking innovative and novel solutions that will
improve performance and the quality of service
to the public. They are in many cases interlinked
and dependent upon each other, and could be
from a range of different solution types such as
IT, scientific research, product development and
improved process management.
Tasking - Tasking is the process of deploying a
CSI to examine a crime scene to recover forensic
evidence and intelligence. This is the first stage
of the process and forces should deploy the most
appropriate resource in the most efficient manner
to the scene. Very often, the initial actions of
the call handler or first officer will determine the
ability to recover, and the value of the evidence
recovered. The process varies dramatically across
forces, ranging from dedicated staff employing
effective triage, through to self tasking by CSIs
reviewing incident logs. There are significant
opportunities for improved tasking, partly through
development in IT and operating procedures.
Some of the problems can be resolved through:
More effective tasking model that enables
forces to maximise staff resources more
efficiently
Improvements to the existing triage process
leading to a more efficient deployment
Better communication between officers and
CSIs prior to deployment
Increased feedback for victims of crime
Developmental training for call handlers and
first officers at scene

23

24

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Information Technology - Following the

consultation exercise, the IT utilised by CSIs
varies considerably from force to force, again from
one extreme to another, however, what is clear
is the lack of interoperability between internal
systems and forces. In addition, forces are not
maximising the opportunities that innovation
is presenting through the use of technologies
such as augmented reality and real time analysis
as well as some of the more basic information
recording techniques. The overall process would
improve from an integrated case management
and information system that can be deployed
remotely utilising suitable hardware at scenes.
Some of the issues can be addressed by:
Better integration of case management
system
Fit for purpose hardware/software applications
The ability to transfer data on a real time basis
Improved interoperability between forces using
different systems
Removal of multiple data input (often manual)
Future proofing of technological solutions
Locating and Recovering Evidence - In many
cases, we are still reliant upon traditional methods
for the visualisation and recovery of evidence
from the scene, the example given as the use
of powders to enhance latent marks has been
in place since the 19th century demonstrates
the need to consider modernising the process.
There is significant variation in the examination
methodologies applied by individuals examining
scenes that could potentially lead to evidential
material being overlooked.

Some of the significant issues may be resolved

through:
Improved preservation methodology by call
handlers and first officers at scene
Standardisation of examiner training
Development of the current procedures for the
existing technology for locating and recovering
biological evidence at scenes, e.g. saliva and
weak blood stains
Enhancement of latent fingermark
visualisation non physical methodologies
Improved capabilities to locate and recover
other trace evidence types e.g. footwear
Development of the existing national guidance
on recovery protocols and the variable
examination policies
Evidence Management - Evidence management
covers the recovery and packaging, storage,
presentation at court and subsequent disposal of
any material that is seized from a scene. Not all
of this material will be subject to further analysis
but may be seized as it could provide valuable
information towards the course of events that
have occurred. The purpose of this is not just to
link specific individuals to a scene but may also
be used to exclude and eliminate people from an
enquiry. It is therefore vitally important that the
management of all material seized is done in a
way that will enable its probity to be maintained
if required to be used in evidence. Once a decision
is made to recover material it will enter the chain
of evidence and has to be packaged appropriately
depending upon its nature. There are numerous
packaging materials available for a wide range of
sample types, as there is no common packaging
material that covers all eventualities which can be
quite time consuming. Evidence management is

Live-time Forensics

without doubt, the weakest link in the evidential

chain leading to more and more challenges
in court. Whilst there has been much progress
in this area, an updated and secure system of
evidence management that minimises any risk
of contamination would add significant value to
the ability to present secure evidential material
in court. Some of the problems can be resolved
through:

Many of the issues can be addressed by:

The reduction of multiple data entry
The development of a national standard or
system for scene recording
The availability of a standardised case
management system

Improved packaging material

More effective tools for the visual recording of

scenes

Development of a more efficient method for

the packaging of diverse evidence types

Direct links from scenes to case management

systems

Increased effectiveness to track evidential

material from recovery to court and disposal

The ability to transmit live time data to

investigators

Improved guidance regarding the storage of

recovered material

Fit for purpose software/hardware for scene

recording

Enhanced processes for recording of forensic

evidence

Opportunities for Development

Scene Recording - The process of recording

the scene provides a snapshot of contextual
information that enables those not able to be
present to visualise what the scene looks like, and
where evidential material has been recovered
from. It forms an aide-memoire for the examiner
to refer back to in order to inform the information
process and can be made up from a blend of
textual information, graphics, images and video.
The methods and standards applied in the
capture of this information vary considerably from
force to force. The information can be captured
using high end technological solutions, or hand
written on job sheets that need to be converted
to digital information that can be managed more
effectively. The capture of this information is
critical as it can, on many occasions be presented
to the courts as evidence and provides the visual
context for the case as well as a description
of the circumstances. It has to be seen as
contemporaneous and certified as a true record
without amendments.

The following potential high level solutions

were highlighted as a means to solve what were
perceived to be the main problems:
The provision of an integrated national case
management system that was
embraced by all forces
Standardised, appropriate hardware such as
a tablet PC with peripherals that would allow
CSIs to record scenes and recover information
easily
Research into more effective methods
of examining scenes utilising modern
technological solutions
Appropriate evidence management systems
that can track material from recovery to court

25

26

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 7

Live-time Forensics

Forensic Processes in Custody

Systems modernisation
To support progress in respect of the custody
work stream, a workshop comprising a diverse
of stakeholders was held in January 2012 at
the Home Office, London. The product of that
workshop has been used to prepare the following
summary in respect of the key issues as identified
by the user community.
Custody is not just about a person being held in a
cell in a police station, the process of detainment
commences at the point of arrest. In terms
of forensic evidence this is an uncontrolled
environment as the transportation of the
detainee, from the site of arrest to the police
station, may result in not just the loss of evidence,
but evidence contamination via the introduction
of material from previous passengers in vehicles.
Additionally, the arresting officer may be
unaware of who they are dealing with and what
information is readily accessible and available.
This contributes to the inability to make informed
decisions on the containment of forensic material
prior to the arrival at the custody suite. It is only
when the arrestee is brought into the controlled
environment of the police station that they
are subject to a series of individual processes
including identification and investigation.
The custody staff involved in the collection of
forensic evidence from the detainee is governed
by legislation which provides clear guidance on
what samples the detainee is required to provide.
Although, force protocols often determine when
and how detainees are processed, which varies
form force to force leading to the difference
in, not only the quality of the forensic samples
obtained but the priority of actions undertaken.
Presently, forensic sampling will include as a
minimum, fingerprint and palm impressions,
photograph and DNA samples but could also
include impressions from footwear, sampling
for drugs, seizure of clothing, hair combings,
biological samples as well as personal possessions

such as mobile telephones. In addition, there may

be other physical, biometric or biological samples
that could provide significant information that is
just not being considered at this moment in time.
The ad hoc evolution of technological solutions
and custody related processes have brought us
to a position where the end to end processes are
beset with inefficiencies and duplication of effort.
New innovations should ideally seek to reduce this
burden by integrating with existing technology
and avoid, wherever possible, adding to the
inefficiencies of the process.
The primary objective underpinning this issue is
to make the entire forensic sampling process as
efficient and consistent as possible. Specifically
there is a need to ensure that equipment reduces
the possibility of samples being acquired from
suspects that do not comply with the requisite
standard. Additionally, solutions need to ensure
that following the acquisition of samples, where
possible, are searched immediately against the
relevant database and results are reported swiftly
to the custody staff and Investigating Officer.
This offers the potential to remove the need
for subsequent custody detention periods that
are unavoidable with the current segmented
processes.

Current Problems and Issues

The specific issues highlighted by the users as
those that would benefit from innovation activity
were identified below, but are inextricably linked
together through the full custody process:
Sampling Times Improving the timeliness
of obtaining forensic samples and the ability
to move detainees through the custody system
speedily is crucial to the delivery of a prompt
indication to the identity of the individual. This
will enable the decision making process of the
detention staff to be more efficient which in

27

28

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

turn will assist for example, where there are

particular warnings regarding a person or where
there may be the need for special provisions to
be put in place to accommodate the individuals
needs. A quicker response capability would also
enable staff to prioritise case work. Additionally
faster processing will allow the checking against
outstanding crime information from undetected
crimes that may connect a person to an offence
whilst they are in custody rather than releasing
them and then having to re-arrest them again.
Some of the issues may be addressed by:
The reduction of the number of different
pieces of equipment
Improved facilities to obtain forensic samples
Process Order In many cases it was clear that
the sampling process was seen as something
that should be done once the initial booking in
process had been completed. This does however,
present problems in that the use of forensic
processing can significantly improve the ability
to accurately identify an individual that are not
realised. Examples of this could be to utilise a
fingerprint scanner in the initial arrest process
to provide the demographic details that could
pre-populate the custody record in advance so
that when the detainee arrives at the custody
suite the information that is known about them
is already in place. There are also opportunities
to link detainees to outstanding crimes through
searching their relevant information through
databases such as fingerprints and DNA. This will
return results or at least sufficient information to
justify retaining them for further enquiries.
Some of the problems can be resolved through:
Rethinking the order in which forensic samples
are obtained
Improved anti contamination methods

Reducing the opportunities for the loss of

forensic material
Better awareness of forensic opportunities
Live Time Searching When individuals are
detained and brought into custody, at some
point in the custody process, their details will
be searched against databases. From a forensic
perspective this is limited to a search against the
Ident1 fingerprint database against other persons
on the database and some level of searching
against outstanding crime scene marks. Whilst
this will be used primarily as an identity check, it
may also be used to search that person against
outstanding crime scenes but this often takes
longer than the time the person is in custody
for. This means that by the time the results have
come through the person has been released.
There is no use routinely made of other data
that is seized from detainees such as DNA, face,
shoeprints etc.
Some of the problems can be resolved through:
Improved interoperability between systems
Increased speed of responses
Expansion of database searches holding
additional biometric information
Multiple Data Entry At the present moment,
there are multiple IT systems being employed
in custody that often require detention staff
to enter data on more than one occasion. This
demonstrates a lack of system integration
which includes the current Livescan electronic
fingerprint capability as well as the arrangements
for the capture of DNA information. The ideal
situation would be to enter a detainees name and
demographic details once only which then would
automatically populate all other systems in use.
The current systems present an inability to exploit

Live-time Forensics

efficiencies due to multiple data entry, leading to

increased risk of information loss.
Some of the present risks can be reduced by:
Integrating present systems
Reducing data entry
Automating data entry
Use of Facial Images Most detainees who are
charged with an offence are photographed as
part of the custody process. The standards applied
to the capture of the image vary from force to
force as does the subsequent use of images within
a force. This leads to an inability to fully exploit
the intelligence available as there is no clear
steer on how and what we should use the images
for. The technology for facial comparison is still
maturing and requires further development and
consideration needs to be given to an end user
requirement regarding the use of technological
applications for facial imaging.
Some of the issues may be resolved through:
National guidance in the use of images
Improved maturity of technology
Development of a user requirement
Ability to exploit all available biometric
information

Opportunities for Development

It is clear that there are opportunities to
significantly enhance and modernise the
approach taken to the forensic processing of

detainees, some of which are technology driven,

others which may be down to relatively simple
process changes. The ability to exploit information
gathered and consider other sources will enable
forces to provide a far more coherent contribution
to public safety as these opportunities represent
the source data for many of the reference
databases used in policing.
There are some high level solutions that may go
some way to resolving the issues highlighted:
Work towards an all encompassing forensic
sampling solution that enables forensic
information to be gathered in a coordinated
and efficient way to an agreed standard
Provide an integrated approach for prisoner
photographs and the video images required
for use in identification parades
Optimise the availability of hand held devices
for the collection of biometric data at the point
of detention
Provide a capability to efficiently and easily
capture data/evidence from electronic devices
coming into possession through the custody
process
Provide a capability for the immediate
identification of drugs to an evidential
standard
Optimise the availability of hand held devices
to confirm suspect identity and automatically
populate IT systems using the available
demographic information

29

30

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 8

Live-time Forensics

Personal Identification
Improving public safety
As a result of the UK-wide rioting in the summer
of 2011 a multi-agency workshop was held to
bring together representatives from a wide range
of organisations. These included the police,
National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA),
The Home Office, and other law enforcement
partners. The aim of which was to identify
capability gaps in the polices response to those
events and to offer ideas on how things could
be improved in future. Part of that workshop
addressed the issue of identification and the
product of those discussions forms the basis for
the following summary of the key issues identified.
The introduction of new technology in this
field brings with it significant challenges in
relation to the proportionate use of intrusive
imaging and identification techniques. Those
embarking on research should be cognisant of
civil liberties, ethical and legislative implications
that provide guidance to proportionality of their
use. It is essential that the public support for
new technologies and methodologies is sought
to ensure confidence in those entrusted with the
delivery of public safety.

Current Problems and Issues

The fundamental requirement underpinning this
particular innovation area of work is the ability to
rapidly and accurately identify persons of interest,
often within much larger groups of people and
in challenging and dynamic environments, such
that appropriate action can then be taken. This
may be either real time identification on-site
as part of preventative measures, or post event
identification in the context of a subsequent
investigation. Whilst the ultimate goal may
be to identify particular individuals to forensic
standards, in some cases the initial need may
merely be to track or assign a unique identifier
such that a subjects movements can be tracked
(e.g. across multiple CCTV cameras), allowing
formal identification to be made some time later.

Many public order situations involve sizeable

crowds. Where multiple arrests are made there is
a need to be able to rapidly process large numbers
of people to forensic standards, including
fingerprints, DNA and facial image (mugshot).
This may be accomplished by transporting
them to custody suites at police stations but
there is increasingly a desire to be able to carry
out such processing at the scene using mobile
technologies.
Whilst it is not the specific focus of this particular
work stream it is worth mentioning that in
addition to identifying such persons of interest,
it is also important to be able to reliably identify
police officers and other members of the
emergency services who may be at the scene, and
some of the potential opportunities for innovation
may also find a use in this scenario.
The specific issues highlighted by those attending
the workshop that would benefit from innovation
activity fall within six main areas: CCTV and
face recognition, fingerprints, rapid DNA, iris,
voice, tagging/marking and other (e.g. process
innovation).
CCTV and Face Recognition - CCTV plays
a major role in monitoring individuals and
groups in public spaces. Whilst the use of
automated face recognition systems to
identify a face in a crowd may feature
regularly in programmes such as CSI, in reality
this remains beyond the reach of current
technology, other than in specific, controlled
situations.

However, improvements to Facial Recognition

(FR) algorithms, increasing use of High
Definition CCTV and real time video analytics
suggest that this is still an area with much
potential, although it must be remembered
that the FR element is just one part of a much
larger process and benefits may come from
innovation in other related areas.

31

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

32

For example real time tracking of subjects

across multiple CCTV cameras, the ability to
locate and extract not just the face(s) in an
image but other key features such as build,
clothing, gait etc and to then use this data to
enhance search accuracy are all areas where
R&D could deliver significant benefits.

In addition there are clearly opportunities for

innovation around the forensic processing of
DNA samples (new profiling chemistries etc)
although these are perhaps more directly
relevant to the other innovation areas (e.g. the
crime scene workstream).
Iris - The use of iris for identification has
developed rapidly in recent years as a result
of improved imaging technology and its
use in border control applications as a
highly accurate, non-contact biometric. Its
application in law enforcement has been
limited due to the lack of a reference database
(irises are not currently captured during
custody processing) and the argument that
criminals do not leave their irises at crime
scenes (unlike DNA and fingerprints).

As of September 2012, the first ever Surveillance

Camera Commissioner will be in post to oversee
the implementation of the new codes of practice.
The codes will provide the public with more power
to challenge the use of surveillance cameras by
the police and local authorities.
Fingerprints Many of the identification
opportunities within this workstream are noncontact in nature (e.g. via CCTV). Although
on the other hand the taking of fingerprints
(currently) require the subject to physically
touch a sensor, limiting their use to 1:1
encounters with police officers using MobileID
fingerprint devices, and custody applications
using Livescan units. However the availability
of a national fingerprint database and the
ability to return results within minutes and
with a very high degree of accuracy means
that this modality continues to play a key
role. Some possible areas for innovation
include developing rapid, non-contact forms
of fingerprint capture, more robust sensors
suitable for use in extreme environments,
using fingerprints in conjunction with other
modalities such as face or iris, and integration
with mobile custody applications that can be
quickly established at the scene.
Rapid DNA - Even with recent advances in
DNA technologies this is still not a real-time
form of identification, which would appear to
limit its application in this workstream, other
than for post-event investigation. However
there are still opportunities for innovation in
this area, in particular the possibility of using
mobile rapid DNA technologies to process
samples either recovered at the scene or taken
from those arrested, allowing identifications to
be made while the suspect is still in custody.

An additional inhibitor is that irises are

normally photographed under IR illumination
(which reveals more details in the iris), and
this presents a significant challenge to the use
of this technology in uncontrolled outdoor
environments.

However, hand-held iris cameras have

recently appeared on the market and further
innovation in this area could soon make
it possible for police officers to capture iris
images of individuals at a range of several
meters, allowing their identity to be accurately
verified at a later date (i.e. by a 1:1 comparison
with the image captured at the time) or
searched against a watchlist or even a national
database, although at the present time no
such databases exist for law enforcement use.

The possibility of using iris in conjunction with

facial images / face recognition is a particularly
promising area which could be well suited to
this particular area of work.

Live-time Forensics

Voice - A major challenge to the use of

voice in public disorder situations is the
amount of background noise that is likely
to be present multiple overlapping voices,
shouting, extraneous environmental noises etc.
Nevertheless, whilst facial or iris images may
be impossible to acquire (e.g. due to head
coverings) audio information is likely to be
available, albeit of very low quality and it may
not always be possible to isolate the individual
who is actually speaking.

The workshop identified the following key topics

as areas with potential for innovation:

The widespread use of mobile phones means

that voice data may be recorded direct or
intercepted (subject to legal contraints) and
used not only to identify the speaker but also
to infer information about their intentions
based on the content of what is recorded. The
use of voice in these situations has not really
been explored and hence there may be as
yet unknown opportunities for exploiting this
modality.

Tracking/Marking - This was identified as

a priority area by the workshop. Tracking
an individual in some way at the time of an
incident means they can subsequently be
apprehended and formally identified (possibly
days later and in a different location) while
still being linked back to the original event.
Smart Water is just one example of how this
could be accomplished but the workshop felt
that there were many other opportunities for
innovation in this area particularly around nonphysical methods.
Other (e.g. process innovation) - The
increasing use of social media applications
such as Facebook and Twitter and the
possibility of using these to organise and coordinate public disorder means that the ability
to identify such users would be of great benefit
to the police. In addition, GPS data from such
devices could help to localise and track the
owners movements and actions, while voice
intercepts could provide information as to their
identity and intentions.

As most people today carry one or more

form of personal communication device
the opportunities for innovation in this area
cannot be ignored, although there are clearly
significant privacy and civil liberty issues
associated with this which need to be balanced
against any benefits in terms of identifying
and apprehending suspects.

Opportunities for Development

Use of additional identification technologies

(including biometrics); fusion of multiple data
sources to improve identification rates
New ways of tracking and marking people for
subsequent identification, either at the scene
or post incident
Improved methods for tracking offenders
Development of rapid, mobile forensic
capabilities that could be deployed at the
scene
Screening and capturing biometrics at the
scene
Improving CCTV quality and the speed of
analysis of CCTV data
Improving evidence gathering techniques,
both forensics and video technologies
Better communications between front line
officers and control room/support staff to
enable rapid exchange of data/evidence
collected during an incident.
Of the above, the highest priorities are considered
to be improving the tracking/marking of
offenders, better CCTV and associated video
analytics, and the acquisition and processing of
biometric data at the scene.

33

34

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 9

Live-time Forensics

Summary
Foundations for the future
The Association of Chief Police Officers is
committed to creating an environment in which
public safety remains to be the number one
priority. The ability to bring offenders to justice
is heavily dependent upon the correct collection,
storage and analysis of reliable information and
evidence. These processes need to be constantly
revisited, and where necessary developed. It is
envisaged that by fully exploiting innovation and
utilising science and technology this will ensure
that the most effective methodologies and
technologies are used in this process.
Adopting fit for purpose technologies is vital for
the fight against crime, however, there must be
an understanding that implementation of such
has to be completely risk free. Courts must be
confident in the probity of forensic evidence,
and so any new developments must adhere
to the requirements laid down by the Forensic
Regulators Office and the Crown Prosecution
Service. These will provide the foundation for the
use of new science and technology in a court of
law and removes risk from the process.

The production of this document provides an

opportunity for those innovators and academics
with new thinking to challenge existing
boundaries and extend the scope of their thinking
to utilise new approaches in developing a safer
society. It delivers for the first time, an insight
into policing problems and offers collaborative
opportunities to harness science and innovation
to make a significant contribution to the use of
forensic science in improving public safety.
This should be seen as an iterative process that
will develop an ongoing partnership between
policing, academia and industry over the coming
years ensuring that we focus our resources
towards high impact societal issues that matter.

Adopting fit for purpose technologies is vital for the fight

against crime, however, there must be an understanding
that implementation of such has to be completely risk free.

35

36

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 10
Core Foundation Principles for Forensic
Science
This paper sets out the core foundation principles
that must inform any potential providers of
forensic science analysis for use in the Criminal
Justice System (CJS).
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/scientific_
evidence/core_foundation_principles_for_
forensic_science_providers/

Streamlined Forensic Reporting Staged Reporting - Guidance for cases

involving DNA evidence
The basis for charging shifted in 2004 from an
evidential DNA profile match report, to an
intelligence DNA profile match report, plus
appropriate supporting evidence.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/scientific_
evidence/streamlined_forensic_reporting/

High Sensitivity DNA Analysis

Science and Innovation Strategy

SGMplus is the type of DNA analysis routinely

used in forensic casework. SGMplus isthe name
of a commercially available (Applied Biosystems)
set of ten genetic markers (known as Short
Tandem Repeat or STR markers) plus a marker to
determine the individuals gender.

This strategy sets out key activities for police

science and innovation over the next three
years. These include the delivery of critical new
capabilities for officers such as information
sharing through the Police National Database
(PND), the ability to manage evidence digitally,
and new forensic techniques such as rapid DNA
testing in custody suites and at crime scenes.

Samples submitted for DNA profiling first

undergo a procedure to extract the DNA
before the amount of DNA is measured, using
a highly sensitive quantitation technique.
This measurement guides the laboratory
procedures which are followed and influences the
interpretation of the profile results.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/scientific_
evidence/high_sensitivity_dna_analysis/

http://www.npia.police.uk/en/15558.htm

Live-time Forensics

Further Suggested Reading

Research and Development in
Forensic Science: A Review
In January 2011, Professor Bernard Silverman,
Home Office Chief Scientific Adviser, was
commissioned by Home Office ministers to
conduct a review of research and development
relevant to forensic science.
This review, conducted by the Home Office Chief
Scientific Adviser, demonstrates the very wide
range of research and development relevant
to forensic science, carried out by forensic
science providers, universities, and laboratories
associated with Government. The review was
informed by widespread consultation, with over
80 respondents, including over 40 universities
identifying research relevant to forensic science.
The review makes recommendations to policy
makers and others in the forensic science
community, particularly underlining the crucial
role that representative organisations and learned
and professional societies have in providing a
forum for the communication, development
and validation of ideas, to act as advocates and
representatives of the field, and be a focus for the
relevant research and development communities.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/
agencies-public-bodies/fsr/forensic-sciencereview/

Codes of Practice and Manual of

Regulation - Quality Standards for
Forensic Science Service Providers
The United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS)
tested the effectiveness and impact of the version
of the codes of practice and conduct which was
published here in January 2011. This evaluation
was through dry runs with one policing and one
commercial organisation.
As the codes of practice and conduct is drafted
based upon the good practice that accredited
providers are already required to demonstrate,
the dry runs flagged only a couple of areas which
could be potentially disproportionate to the
benefits conveyed.
The regulator has reviewed the document and
made appropriate amendments to minimise
this impact and the final version is available to
download:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/agenciespublic-bodies/fsr/codes-practice/

37

38

Harnessing Science and Innovation for Forensic Investigation in Policing

Section 11 Acknowledgements
ACPO wish to thank all contributors to the development of this document including those representatives
from forces who took the time to attend the workshops and provide their valuable input. ACPO would
particularly like to thank staff at the NPIA Police Science and Forensics Unit who facilitated the workshops
and developed this document.

For further information on how you can assist, please contact:

Strategic Lead

R.Small@west-midlands.pnn.police.uk

Project Lead

Shaun.Mallinson@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Crime Scene Lead

Hazel.Biggs@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Custody Lead

Ambika.Suman@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Person Identification Lead

Geoff.Whitaker@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Forensic Researcher

Zale.Johnson1@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

The ACPO press office

press.office@acpo.pnn.police.uk

ACPO 2012
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, modified, amended, stored
in any retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without prior permission.
Produced by NPIA Design and Print. Yew Tree Lane, Pannal Ash, Harrogate HG2 9JZ. Tel:01423 876677