Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Front-End Forensics: An Integrated Forensic Intelligence Model

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Science Informed Policing

Abstract

Forensic science has the ability and capacity to be an active participant in investigations, rather than its traditional passive role. Too often, the evidence is collected, submitted to the laboratory, and the investigators wait for results, creating a lag between when the information is needed and when it is made available. Obstacles to forensic service providers being actively involved in investigations include organizational cultural norms, operational resources, sworn and civilian human resource issues, and media-driven expectations of outcomes. While traditional intelligence analysis is forecasting, forensic science and criminal investigations are reconstructive and this alters which methods can be and how to improve investigations. What has been characterized as forensic intelligence in the literature is largely forensic support to crime analysis. The benefits to using actual forensic intelligence actively in investigations by shifting forensic results, even if preliminary, to the front-end of the criminal justice system, are reduced wrongful arrests and convictions, more efficient use of policing resources, and stronger cases for adjudication. An integrated forensic intelligence model (IFIM) is offered as a roadmap to creating a sustained professional culture of forensic intelligence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://www.dni.gov/index.php/what-we-do/what-is-intelligence

  2. 2.

    The Continental Congress created the Committee of Secret Correspondence in 1775 to collect intelligence from people in England, Ireland, and Europe to help in the war effort. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-22-02-0167

  3. 3.

    California, Hawaii, Indiana, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma and Texas. Almost all state forensic laboratories (99%) are accredited.

  4. 4.

    https://www.parliament.uk/forensic-science-lords-inquiry

References

  • Benson, W., Stacy, J., & Whorley, M. (Eds.). (1968). Systems analysis of criminalistics and forensic science. Washington, DC: Law Enforcement Assistance Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burcher, M., & Whelan, C. (2019). Intelligence-led policing in practice: Reflections from intelligence analysts. Police Quarterly, 22(2), 139–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, D. L. (2004). Law enforcement intelligence: A guide for state, local and tribal law. Washington, DC: Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Childs, R. A., Witt, T. S., & Nur-tegin, K. (2009). Survey of forensic service providers. Forensic Science Policy and Management, 1(1), 49–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deedrick, D. (2001). Fabric processing and “nubs”. In M. Houck (Ed.), Mute witnesses: Trace evidence analysis (pp. 1–20). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durose, M. R., Burch, A. M., Walsh, K., & Tiry, E. (2016). Publicly funded forensic crime laboratories: Resources and services, 2014. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federation of American Scientists (FAS). (1996). Operations security intelligence threat handbook. Interagency OPSEC Support Staff. fas.org/irp/nsa/ioss/threat96/index.html

  • Fong, W. (1975). Criminalistics and the prosecutor. In J. L. Peterson (Ed.), Forensic science: Scientific investigation in criminal justice (pp. 371–394). New York: AMS Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fosdick, R. B. (1969). American police systems. Patterson Smith Reprint of a Century Company Work.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, J., Turchie, T., & Noel, D. (2018). UNABOMBER: How the FBI broke its own rules to capture the terrorist Ted Kaczynski. New York: History Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerringer, A., & Bart, J. (2016). Law Enforcement Intelligence. In P. Oleson (Ed.), AFIO’s guide to the study of intelligence (pp. 321–326). Falls Church: Association of Former Intelligence Officers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Advisory Committee. (2013). National Criminal Intelligence sharing plan: Building a national capability for effective criminal intelligence development and the nationwide sharing of intelligence and information. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guidetti, R. (2009). Collaborative intelligence production. In J. Ratcliffe (Ed.), Strategic thinking in criminal intelligence (pp. 222–234). Sydney: The Federation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heuer, R. J., & Pherson, R. H. (2015). Structured techniques for intelligence analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houck, M. (Ed.). (2001). Mute witnesses: Trace evidence analysis. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houck, M. (Ed.). (2004). Trace evidence analysis: More cases in mute witnesses. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houck, M. (2006). CSI: Reality. Scientific American, 295(1), 84–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houck, M., & Siegel, J. (2015). Fundamentals of forensic science. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Association of Chiefs of Police and US Department of Homeland Security. (2002) Criminal intelligence sharing: A national plan for intelligence-led policing at the local, state and federal levels. https://it.ojp.gov/documents/National_Criminal_Intelligence_Sharing_Plan.pdf

  • Ishiyama, J., & Breuning, M. (2010). 21st century political science: A reference. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, H. A., Wolfe, N. T., & Jones, M. (2008). History of criminal justice (4th ed.). Newark: Matthew Bender.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legrand, T., & Vogel, L. (2014). The landscape of forensic intelligence research. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 47(1), 16–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenthal, M. (2006). Intelligence: From secrets to policy (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaud, A. (2001). Trace evidence as investigative lead value. In M. Houck (Ed.), Mute witnesses: Trace evidence analysis (pp. 49–68). London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milne, R. (2012). Forensic intelligence. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morelato, M., Beavis, A., Tahtouh, M., Ribaux, O., Kirkbride, P., & Roux, C. (2013). The use of forensic case data in intelligence-led policing: the example of drug profiling. Forensic Science International, 226(1–3), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morelato, M., Baechler, S., Ribaux, O., Beavis, A., Tahtouh, M., Kirkbride, P., et al. (2014). Forensic intelligence framework—Part I: Induction of a transversal model by comparing illicit drugs and false identity documents monitoring. Forensic Science International, 236, 181–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences National Research Council. (2009). Strengthening forensic science in the U.S.: A path forward. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences National Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, B., & Peterson, J. (1970). Physical evidence utilization in the administration of criminal justice. Berkeley: School of Criminology, University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, R. (1942). Elements of police science. Chicago: The Foundation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe, J. (2003). Intelligence-led policing. In Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice (Vol. 248). Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe, J. H. (2016). Intelligence-led policing. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribaux, O., & Wright, B. T. (2014). Expanding forensic science through forensic intelligence. Science & Justice, 54(6), 494–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribaux, O., Walsh, S. J., & Margot, P. (2006). The contribution of forensic science to crime analysis and investigation: Forensic intelligence. Forensic Science International, 156(2–3), 171–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribaux, O., Baylon, A., Roux, C., Delémont, O., Lock, E., Zingg, C., & Margot, P. (2010). Intelligence-led crime scene processing. Part I: Forensic intelligence. Forensic Science International, 195(1-3), 10–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, A. (2015). Elements of a forensic intelligence model. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 47(1), 8–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Speaker, P. J. (2013). Forensic science service provider models: data-driven support for better delivery options. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 45(4), 398–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Justice, International Association of Chiefs of Police, & US Department of Homeland Security. (2008). National summit on intelligence: Gathering, sharing, analysis, and use after 9–11. www.theiacp.org/resources/national-summit-on-intelligence-gathering-sharing-analysis-and-use-after-9-11

  • Walsh, S., Moss, D., Kliem, C., & Vintiner, G. (2002). The collation of forensic DNA case data into a multi-dimensional intelligence database. Science & Justice, 42(4), 205–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. (1975). In J. L. Peterson (Ed.), Forensic science–The present and the future, in Forensic science: Scientific investigation in criminal justice (pp. 126–148). AMS Press, Inc.: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, C. (1975). Crime detection laboratories in the United States. In J. L. Peterson (Ed.), Forensic science: Scientific investigations in criminal justice (pp. 96–108). New York: AMS Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Forensic Studies & Justice Program, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, FL, USA

    Max M. Houck

Authors
  1. Max M. Houck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Max M. Houck .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA

    Bryanna Fox

  2. Department of Criminology, University of South Florida-St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, FL, USA

    Joan A. Reid

  3. College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA

    Anthony J. Masys

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Houck, M.M. (2020). Front-End Forensics: An Integrated Forensic Intelligence Model. In: Fox, B., Reid, J., Masys, A. (eds) Science Informed Policing. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41287-6_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41287-6_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-41286-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-41287-6

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation