AFTE 2004 Wednesday

Visitors since
2/13/2001

www.afte.org > Training Seminar > 2005 Wednesday

AFTE 2005 - Wednesday June 22

Schedule

Moderator: Dave Brundage

8:00 – 8:40 AM

Reconstruction of the Barroso Homicide

James Roberts, Ventura Country Sheriff’s Laboratory, Ventura, CA

Objectives: This presentation will look at a homicide case shooting reconstruction and the animated material developed by the District Attorneys office to present it to a jury. Megan Barroso was a 20-year-old woman that went missing in the early morning hours of July 5, 2001 while returning from a 4th of July party. A serial rapist was developed as the prime suspect and later admitted to the killing. The pattern formed by some of the shots into the victim's car showed a possible sequence of movements during the time the shots were fired. Pretrial hearings challenged the admissibility of the animation, but failed, the animation was used at trial.

Methodology: Standard reconstruction techniques were applied to casework. The DA's office had the laboratory's reconstruction converted to an animated presentation, which was used for the testimony of several lab staff and other expert witnesses

Results: The reconstruction animation can be an effective presentation of several analysts work summed up into a visual presentation.

Conclusions: It is advisable to work closely with the attorneys involved in the case to prepare a presentation that accurately depicts the opinions of the analysts involved. The animation should be based on fact and logic and not on attorney's arguments. Care must be taken to keep things to a factual basis when animation is used.

8:40 – 9:00 AM

High Speed Video of Shotgun Pellet Ricochet

James Roberts, Ventura County Sheriff’s Laboratory, Ventura, CA

Objectives: This presentation will demonstrate typical 00 Buck pellet ricochet from a cement surface. It will demonstrate 10, 20 and 30 degree ricochet on standard sidewalk cement using High Speed Video to capture the pattern of departure of the pellets and their impact in a witness panel shortly thereafter.

Methodology: High Speed Video of 3 angles with 3 shots per angle.
Results: The highest point of ricochet was less than 14 degrees and the center of this ricochet pattern was less than 7.5 degrees, this from a shot fired at 30 degrees.

Conclusions: Of the shots fired in front of the video the angle of departure was as expected, a low angle. The images give the viewer an opportunity to see for themselves what is occurring.

9:00 – 9:30 AM

Non-Destructive Techniques for the Visualization of Gunshot Residue

Brandon Giroux, FBI Laboratory, Quantico, VA

Abstract: An investigation into non-destructive techniques for the visualization of gun shot residue (GSR). GSR from four different brands of ammunition will be examined using an alternative light source, digital radiography, and X-Ray fluorescence spectrophotometry. Results of this examination may provide an alternative to the chemical tests currently used in muzzle-to-target distance determination experiments.

9:30 – 10:00 AM

Toolmarks Seventy Year On – Have We Improved?

Kevan Walsh, ESR, Auckland, New Zealand

Objectives: In 1933 a double homicide in New Zealand presented an early opportunity for toolmarks evidence. Matching knife cuts in wood were presented in court, together with a probabilistic assessment of that evidence. Locally, this was novel evidence. In the late 1990s toolmark evidence relating to a chainsaw cut mark was presented in court. But aside from technological advances, has the process of evidential assessment advanced?

Methodology: The methods of comparison and the presentation and assessment of evidence for these two cases are compared. The retrospective application of recently championed approaches such as consecutively matching striae (CMS) is discussed.

Results: The early knife case was clearly "cutting edge" for its time. The recent chainsaw case, although a novel toolmark comparison, did not utilise any advancement in general forensic evidential assessment.

Conclusions: The challenge for the future is to be able to match the technological advances that have been made, with more progressive and transparent methods of evidential assessment to meet the growing demand for validation.

10:00 – 10:30 AM

Break – In the Exhibitor’s Area (Fortune Square A – D)

10:30 – 10:45 AM

California SB 357 – It’s Impact on Law Enforcement

Alan Seven, Remington Arms, SAAMI Representative, AFTE Technical Advisor, Lonoke, AR

10:45 – 11:05 AM

Overview of the Mayhew Tool Company

Bill Fletcher, VP Sales and Marketing for Mayhew Tools

11:05 – 12:05 PM

12:05 – 1:15 PM

Lunch (Ticket Required)

1:15 – 1:30 PM

A Smokeless Powder Reference Material Supporting Organic Gunshot Residue and Explosives Analysis

Dr. William MacCrehan & Dr. Mary Bedner, Analytical Chemistry Division, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD

Objectives: The analysis of the primary additives in smokeless powder provides useful information supporting firearms and explosives investigations. In this project, we have investigated the utility of identifying and measuring the concentration of nitroglycerin, diphenylamine, and ethyl centralite as a means of characterizing and categorizing unfired powders and residues. One particularly powerful approach to evaluating the measurements is to determine the ratio of the concentration of Energetic nitroglycerin to the Stabilizer (diphenylamine and/or ethylcentralite), the E/S for double-base powders. By measuring the E/S ratio, it is unnecessary to know the mass of residues or powder under examination. Comparison of the E/S values of questioned residue and exemplar powders can provide evidence to associate or exclude samples.

Methodology: Gunshot residues for organic additive determination were collected by tape lifting, hair combing, and muzzle-exit particle trapping. Residues were extracted in an ultrasonic agitator with a methanol-butanol solvent. Micellar capillary electrophoresis (CE) was used to determine nitroglycerin, diphenylamine, N-nitrosodiphenylamine, and ethylcentralite in filtered samples. Measurements of the composition of a smokeless powder reference material used both the CE and a reversed-phase liquid chromatographic (LC) method.

Results: A number of comparisons of smokeless powders and their firearms residues have been made in our laboratory. In one study, a comparison of seven unfired powders and handgun residues demonstrated the utility of the E/S ratio for characterization. Additional experiments evaluating the effect of changing ammunition on residue composition and the idea collecting residues from a shooter's hair with a fine toothed comb will be discussed.

Conclusions: Compositional measurements on smokeless-powder residues, either collected from suspected shooters or from post-blast pipe-bomb debris, can provide a powerful evaluation of limited evidence. Using the E/S ratio, it is often possible to associate or differentiate powder/residue samples. To support the most accurate smokeless-powder compositional comparisons, NIST is providing a reference material, RM 8107, Additives in Smokeless

1:30-2:00 PM

The Cotton Pipe Recovery System

Nancy McCombs, CA DOJ Laboratory, Fresno, CA

Objectives: To devise an alternative housing to the traditional wooden box for a cotton bullet recovery system.

Methodology: Standard sewer pip was used to make a convenient, economical and effective bullet recovery system.

Summary: Various caliber cartridges were fired in both a horizontal water tank and the newly manufactured ‘cotton tube’, and the bullets compared for quality.

Conclusions: Due to high velocity firearms and various bullet designs, it may still be desirable to employ a cotton recovery system in order to maintain the integrity of projectiles. Although a variety of bullet recovery systems are now available, the ‘cotton tube’ is an economical alternative to more costly systems.

2:00 PM - 2:15

The Humor in Forensics

Dirk Shaw, Indianapolis-Marion County Forensic Services Agency,
Indianapolis, IN

2:15 – 2:45 PM

The NFSTC Firearms CD-ROM Initiative

Dr. Katie Savage and David Epstein, National Forensic Science Technology Center, Largo, FL and Ronnie Freels, Independent Examiner, Shelbyville, KY

2:45 – 3:15 PM

Break – In Exhibitor’s Area (Fortune Square A – D)

3:15 - 3:45 PM

Forensic Individualization of Images

John Vanderkolk, Lab Manager, Indiana State Police, Fort Wayne, IN

The determination of the source of an image results, in part, from an understanding of the source, following an acceptable examination methodology, understanding levels of detail in images, and understanding the relationship between quality and quantity of information obtained by the examiner from the images. The examination method of the recurring application of Analysis, Comparison, Evaluation and Verification (ACE+V), understanding the levels of detail in images, and use of quality and quantity of all the detail in the images will be discussed. Visual representations of these three topics will be presented and explained as to how these representations can be used to help explain the thought processes involved in the Forensic Individualization of Images.

3:45 – 4:15 PM

Behavioral and Electrophysiological Evidence for Configural Processing in Fingerprint Experts

Dr. Thomas Busey, Indiana University of Department of Psychology, Bloomington, IN and John Vanderkolk, Lab Manager, Indiana State Police, Fort Wayne, IN

John Vanderkolk teamed up with Dr. Thomas Busey, Department of Psychology, Indiana University, to study whether differences exist between experts and novices in fingerprint recognition studies. Two of the studies will be presented documenting behavioral and electrophysiological differences between the two groups. Their research “Behavioral and Electrophysiological Evidence for Configural Processing in Fingerprint Experts” has been published in the psychology journal Vision Research, 45 (2005) 431-448. Dr. Busey and John hope to design toolmark and other pattern recognition studies to parallel these fingerprint studies.

4:15 – 5:00 PM

Footwear Daubert Hearing and Appeal

John Vanderkolk, Lab Manager, Indiana State Police, Fort Wayne, IN

John Vanderkolk and Sandra Wiersema presented testimony at a 2002 footwear Daubert hearing in U.S. v. Anthony Allen, in Fort Wayne, IN. This case was appealed to the Seventh Circuit. A summary of the preparations, testimony, and rulings will be presented.

5:00 – 6:00 PM

Dinner (On Your Own)

6:00 - 9:00 PM

GSR Workshop (Off Site at the International Forensic Science

Laboratory and Training Centre – Meet in Lobby for Transportation)

6:00 – 9:00 PM

Hi-Point Armorer’s Course (Golden Ballroom)

6:00 – 9:00 PM

Non-Firing Marks Workshop (Director’s Row 3)

blue line