Photographic Evidence Identification Paper

I would process all of the visible items for fingerprints, all door handles, and other items that may have been touched to get the visible items. I would process these items because they are out of place from where they normally should be, they stand out, the items seem suspicious, the items must be touched to enter the gas station, and I believe the items may contain fingerprint evidence that can lead to identifying the suspect. I would also take the fingerprints from every individual at the crime scene, any law enforcement or medical personnel that touched anything at the crime scene, and all employees including any that were not working the day of the crime. It is sometimes necessary for the latent print examiner to prepare known prints

General crime scene documentation is accomplished through a combination of photographs, sketches, and notes (The Fingerprint Sourcebook, 2011). Photographic evidence of the crime scene ensures that the locations of all evidence are visually recorded for use in a court case. Any questions on the position of items can be answered by looking at the crime scene photographs. My notes would include where items were found, what position, and condition they were in before being collected or processed for fingerprints. Without photographic evidence of the crime scene and items in their original locations, it may be hard to prove or confirm details in court later on. Also, some chemicals used to process fingerprints deteriorate with time. The deteriorated prints would not be reliable in the event they are needed years down the line for possible retrials or appeals. At the crime scene, I would collect prints from any items that I believe the print would be damaged while being transported, fragile items, or items that cannot be taken to the laboratory. For nonporous items, I would use latent print powders or cyanoacrylate fuming. Cyanoacrylate fuming can be used on nonporous surfaces before and after packaging to develop the fingerprints contained on them. Fingerprint residue on porous items are more durable than nonporous items because the fingerprint went

Based on the information and evidence given this is my interpretation of what happened before the murder. The suspect may have fled the scene after the murder. It appears that the suspect may have been outside the gas station smoking. The half smoked cigarette may not even have anything to do with the crime. What does not make sense is the cigarette carton is ripped open on the counter and the fresh cigarette is outside half smoked. It would seem that the person opened the carton then went outside for a smoke. After the gunshot, the person may have fled leaving the cigarette half smoked or went back in the store. If the carton was paid for why was it left in the store and if it wasn’t paid for only an employee could get away with opening the carton. This seems like the carton was opened by an employee who went to smoke then went back inside after they heard the gunshots. The best method to determine what happened is for law enforcement personnel to take statements from all people present at the time of the shooting. Based on what the witnesses say this would help guide the latent print examiner in their collection of evidence. The collection of evidence cannot only be based on witness statements because their statements can be lies. Statements collected should be backed