Article pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
Exploring Perspectives and Identifying Potential Challenges Encountered with Crime Scene Investigations when Developing Chemistry Curricula A Bakarr Kanu,*,† Megan Pajski,‡ Machelle Hartman,§ Irene Kimaru,∥ Susan Marine,⊥ and Lawrence J. Kaplan# †
Department of Chemistry, Winston-Salem State University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27110, United States Department of Biological and Physical Sciences, Mount Olive College, Mount Olive, North Carolina 28365, United States § Department of Chemistry, Whitman College, Walla Walla, Washington 99362, United States ∥ Department of Chemistry, St. John Fisher College, Rochester, New York 14618, United States ⊥ Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Miami University Middletown, Middletown, Ohio 45042, United States # Department of Chemistry, Williams College, Williamstown, Massachusetts 01267, United States ‡
S Supporting Information *
ABSTRACT: In today’s complex world, there is a continued demand for recently graduated forensic chemists (criminalists) who have some background in forensic experimental techniques. This article describes modern forensic experimental approaches designed and implemented from a unique instructional perspective to present certain facets of crime scene investigation. Physical evidence collection, handling, and evaluation are reviewed, as are challenges associated with carrying out these tasks. The interrelation of the responsibilities of the crime scene investigator and criminalist also is addressed, as this can be highlighted in an instructional setting. If the investigator does not collect sufficient evidence or collects the evidence improperly, the criminalist will be unable to effectively interpret the data. In this report, the authors describe their experiences at a mock crime scene designed for investigation by undergraduate forensic science students. Key points that must be considered include evidence collection, analysis of the evidence, interpretation of the results, and drawing conclusions from those interpretations. We have presented the information in a way that may be beneficial to instructors looking to create or update existing forensic science courses, or scholars interested in the drawbacks of certain aspects of evidence collection. KEYWORDS: Upper-Division Undergraduate, Curriculum, Interdisciplinary/Multidisciplinary, Problem Solving/Decision Making, Forensic Chemistry, Analytical Chemistry
■
INTRODUCTION A young woman is assaulted at gunpoint and drugs are missing from a nearby repository. The gunman is free, loose on an unsuspecting populace. The police are on the scene, but if the assailant is unknown to the victim, how do you find the perpetrator? Sherlock Holmes and C. Auguste Dupin were hardly the first iterations of the idea that accurate and objective conclusions may be drawn from physical evidence.1 However, increasingly advanced and sensitive technology is allowing criminalists of different backgrounds to analyze smaller evidence samples with greater reliability. Where the assailant above could once be lost in a crowd, today’s techniques, including trace fiber analysis and DNA typing,2 allow forensic scientists to pick out small but important details that help differentiate suspects from those merely in the wrong place at the wrong time. As the role of criminalistics in crime scene investigation has become more important, there has been an © XXXX American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
increased demand for graduates experienced with forensic technical skills.3 Several programs have been established across the U.S. to close educational gaps in forensics as well as develop participants’ forensic skills. The NSF Sponsored Chemistry Collaborations, Workshops and Community of Scholars (cCWCS) Workshop in Forensic Science is an annual workshop facilitated by one of us (L.J.K.) at Williams College. Participants in the forensic science workshop spend an intensive week developing basic understanding of forensic science and learning about the application of forensic science to essentially all aspects of undergraduate instruction in chemistry. This program is only open to college, university, and community college instructors.
A
DOI: 10.1021/ed500671x J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
trained in the discipline of forensic science. This article has focused on workshops that trained future instructors to develop forensic science courses (lecture and laboratory) that actively engage their students in learning. In today’s forensic investigation, it is vital for physical evidence to be properly recognized, collected, evaluated, and brought into court to tell its story to a judge and jury. The task of processing physical evidence appropriately is primarily the task of two law enforcement agents with interrelated jobs: the crime scene investigator and the forensic chemist (criminalist). The crime scene investigator must be properly trained to recognize and collect evidence so as to keep its legal and scientific integrity intact. At the crime laboratory, the criminalist must analyze the evidence and be prepared to support her or his findings in a court of law. The purpose of this report is to describe some of the experiences and experimental techniques presented during the 13th Annual Forensic Science Workshop. We hope to highlight the benefits that cCWCS workshops such as this provide scholars, increase awareness of these programs, and possibly encourage the development of new similar programs for other areas of interest. Some of the participants from the workshop have already implemented courses in their respective institutions. The courses already implemented are described below. We also hope to highlight certain critical areas of crime scene investigation that we found to be important for effective analysis. Though participants gain knowledge, skills, and networking opportunities for themselves, the final beneficiaries of the program are the participants in classrooms who make use of the innovative teaching designs or who use the workshop experience as a starting point for developing even newer teaching and research ideas.
A symposium with similar end goals is the forensic science symposium at Cedar Crest College with Lawrence A. Quarino as director of the program. This annual program is organized and led by forensic science students and is open to anyone with interests in forensic science. It is a paid program normally attended by a mix of academics and forensic professionals and presents its own learning and networking opportunities. The CSI Lawrence Tech, another paid program, is organized at Lawrence Technological University in collaboration with Kathy Miracovits. This program trains educators interested in developing their own coursework to engage students in forensic science using an integrated science approach. The Extreme Forensic Instrumentation Experience Lab (EFIEL) is an annual forensic workshop at Winston-Salem State University facilitated by one of us (A.B.K.). This workshop was offered for the first time in summer 2014. It is open to rising high school seniors, undecided majors at university and community colleges, and high school teachers. With the range of topics offered in forensic chemistry, its main goal is to help motivate, excite and retain students to become interested in the STEM fields. The teachers are encouraged to develop their curricula to help students better prepare for entering the STEM fields at the college level. The concept of instructors at institutions developing courses or laboratory exercises to improve curricula in forensic chemistry is not new in the literature. Tobin identified the unique scientific discipline of chemistry to enable students in criminal justice programs to see how scientific theory is applied.4 Lab procedures have been developed to allow students to use real-life problems and apply basic organic chemistry techniques to determine the possibility of “foul play”.5,6 Using detailed organic reaction mechanisms to support various characterization tests and analytical results was suggested as a means to improve on the degree of certainty to be ascribed to an experimental conclusion in a courtroom. Experiments using multiple instrumental techniques have been designed as part of a laboratory curriculum in forensic chemistry course for nonscience majors.7−10 Some instructors have taken steps to design forensic chemistry courses solely on the basis of laboratory techniques.11−13 In one study, the lab offered at a FEPACaccredited B.S. Chemistry with a concentration in criminalistics was designed to illustrate the use of DNA amplification techniques and DNA melt curve analysis in three areas: (i) evaluation of student designed primers to amplify DNA; (ii) threshold cycles for dilution; and (iii) performing DNA quantification.12 In another study, a lab-based first course in forensic science was designed and offered to nonscience majors. The course established a suitable vehicle for effectively communicating the value of physical evidence and also presenting sound chemical and scientific information, particularly chemistry.12 Even though this course may have created an atmosphere for students to gain appreciation of a crime laboratory, it, however, fails to explain the critical relationship between the crime scene investigation and the forensic chemist. Identifying drugs is one of the most prominent areas of forensic chemistry. Several instructors have designed lab-based courses to spark students’ motivation and enthusiasm for course materials in forensic chemistry.14−17 All of these courses have focused so far on developing courses within curricula to engage students in the classroom. None of them have so far set up an avenue to provide training for instructors especially those that were not
■
ADDRESSING THE SHORTAGE OF QUALIFIED TEACHERS IN FORENSICS The cCWCS hosts a series of workshops funded by grants from the National Science Foundation designed to provide undergraduate teachers with hands-on-training in a number of areas of chemistry including forensic science.18 In addition to providing working professors with a convenient method for broadening their knowledge base, these workshops also act as places where new ideas for classroom activities may be shared and new networking relationships may be formed. The workshop organized by one of us (L.J.K.) at Williams College has been designed to help professors interested in using forensic applications in their classrooms. It provides participants with hands-on experience with several criminalist-related experiments and instrumentation. These include fingerprint collection and analysis, blood typing, shoe impression lifting and analysis, infrared fiber analysis, and gas chromatography− mass spectrometry (GC−MS) drug analysis. These analyses are used to solve a staged crime in a manner similar to what may be used in a classroom setting with students. Additionally, information related to useful books, lab procedures, and supplier sources is provided, as well as a broad overview of some of the major subjects and issues related to criminalistics. The framework for its implementation is to select participants based on their interest in the subject matter and also what they can bring to the workshop. For example, participants have been selected in the past based on a diverse group representing the following: a wide range of chemistry subdisciplines (organic, biochemistry, physical chemistry), various types of institutions (universities, four year liberal arts colleges, and two year B
DOI: 10.1021/ed500671x J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
Figure 1. Sketch of the crime scene.
community colleges), different experiences and time in the professoriate, and general backgrounds. By strongly encouraging class participation among participants, this workshop has been effective in promoting community building within the collective group.
■
and physical evidence was collected, packaged, and recorded according to practices that avoid contamination and maintain the chain-of-custody. Further details of all evidence collected and certain key points to note before evidence is recovered from a crime scene is available in the Supporting Information. Evidence intended for later analysis was entered into Evidence Tracker, a software database manufactured by Progressive Microtechnology, Inc. (PMI, Saint Augustine, FL). Participants spent the next several days analyzing the crime scene and evidence, comparing data to statements given by victim and suspects alike, and formulating and testing conclusions, guided by the instructional format used by the organizer with undergraduates. A variety of analytical techniques were used to examine the physical evidence, including the lifting and comparison of fingerprints, analysis of broken glass, fiber identification, blood typing, drug identification, and bullet and casing analysis. All analyses were done to compare known to unknowns.19,20 Fingerprints were visualized using ninhydrin staining, magnetic fingerprint powder21,22 (Forensic Source, Jacksonville, FL), or Mikrosil (Lynn-Peavey, Lenexa, KS); and later compared to a database of fingerprints using Automated Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFIS) (AFIX Tracker, AFIX Technologies, Inc., Pittsburgh, KS).
cCWCS FORENSIC WORKSHOP IMPLEMENTATION
The Staged Crime Scene
The workshop started with a bangliterally. During the initial campus tour with workshop participants, there was a short confrontation between the workshop organizer, one of us (L.J.K.), and an apparently inebriated student on the way to the Morley Science Laboratory building. On the way to the labs themselves, participants heard three gunshots and a person was seen fleeing down the staircase. Further investigation found the lab ransacked and an injured student, victim of an apparent assault. And thus, the stage was set for workshop participants to interact and develop an experience with the crime scene scenario. Participants secured, isolated, and determined boundaries for the crime scene, important for the preservation of physical evidence. A “lead investigator” was assigned, and two participants were chosen to take pictures and make a rough sketch of the crime scene19 (see Figures 1 and 2). A systematic search for evidence was carried out using a grid search pattern,2 C
DOI: 10.1021/ed500671x J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
Figure 2. Selected photographic images of the crime scene investigated in the Morley Science Building.
learning experience could culminate in students testifying as experts, with regard to their evidence analysis and interpretations, in a mock court. Of the techniques used, there exist ample resources for the reader to explore, and many exist as basic labs in general chemistry.15,26−28
Broken glass from various regions of the crime scene was compared according to thickness, density, and refractive index. Ink from a letter at the scene was analyzed by thin-layer chromatography (TLC). Bullets and casings were compared using a comparison microscope (10X−144X Forensic Comparison Investigation Microscope, Microscopes, Inc., St. Louis, MO). Fibers were analyzed using basic fabric staining by Test Fabric Identification Stain (TIS, Testfabrics, Inc., West Pittston, PA) and attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR−FTIR). Chemical analysis was performed on possible blood and drug samples using both presumptive23 and confirmatory tests.24,25 Presumptive blood tests included the Hemastix (Lynn-Peavy, Lenexa, KS) and QuickCheck (Lynn-Peavy, Lenexa, KS) tests, while confirmative blood tests used ABO blood typing and Rh factor or D-antigen (Ward’s Natural Science Establishment, Inc., Rochester, NY). Presumptive drug tests included NIK Narcotics Identification System, STAT one-step drug cassette, and TOXI-LAB, while GC−MS was used as the confirmatory test. Finally, DNA from suspects and blood samples found at the crime scene were typed using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and profiling of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) hypervariable regions I and II. DNA samples were provided on IsoCode Stix (PCR template preparation dipsticks), and the mtDNA Linear Array HVI/HVII Probe Regions were compared for the three samples. Through cooperative efforts, the workshop participants compared the physical evidence data to police statements provided periodically throughout the week and eventually identified a probable perpetrator. If a mock workshop setting were to be carried out as a full class activity, the crime scene
Potential Complications in Analysis of Crime Scene Data
As in real-life forensics, complications arose as participants processed the crime scene and its evidence. The instructor (L.J.K.) and students (workshop participants) used the complications to explore real-world challenges (both legal and scientific) with crime scene analysis. The first complication was chain-of-custody. The concept of chain-of-custody is that there must be an accurate running record of who has handled each piece of evidence and for what purpose. This is necessary for legal proceedings in order to prevent misuse or manipulation of evidence.29 During our investigation, it was evident that the chain-of-custody could be easily broken if an investigator took a piece of evidence from the evidence locker without proper documentation. If the chain-of-custody were broken, the analysis and results would be irrelevant and no longer admissible in court. A second setback forensic investigators could encounter is drawing conclusions about innocence or guilt from individual results. Workshop participants found that evidence analysis occasionally contradicted itself, and even the final determination of a perpetrator had uncertainty in the conclusion. The scenarios detailed below are examples in which investigators encountered problems and found difficulty in drawing conclusions. D
DOI: 10.1021/ed500671x J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
Scenario 1. A piece of glass was collected from a shoe tread impression found outside the apparent exit door used by the perpetrator. The shoe tread itself matched shoes found on suspect 2 (Harold Bowman, HB), who claimed to have stolen the shoes from suspect 3 (Joe Liedel, JL). The refractive index of this glass (1.472) matched the refractive index of general laboratory glass (1.474), and thus possibly came from broken glassware. However, the thickness and texture of the shard did not match that of broken glass found in the lab itself. Thus, while the shoes were certainly used outside the chemistry building, there was no definite link related to glass to prove that the shoes had been at the crime scene. See Table 1 in the Supporting Information for details on known evidence from suspects. Scenario 2. Complications arose in attempting to match fingerprints lifted from the crime scene to a suspect. Fingerprint recognition is one of the most commonly used biometric techniques employed in automatic personal identification and recognition. Even though most crime laboratories have electronic databases to match “unknown” to “known” fingerprints, there are tremendous difficulties in lifting a print from a crime scene that shows a sufficient amount of minutiae for reliable recognition in an electronic database. Scenario 3. Blood typing found an anomalous O+ blood sample on a shirt purported to belong to suspect 3 (JL), although all other blood samples belonging to this suspect, and a sample of the suspect’s own blood was type A+. Ultimately, if a determination were to be made that JL is the perpetrator, other evidence such as mitochondrial DNA typing must have matched markers found in blood collected at the crime scene for this suspect. In a student lab, these inconsistencies could be used to generate discussion among students about probable reasons for their existence, or about the validity of tests that may generate false positives necessitating the need for repeated tests or alternative confirmatory tests. A third challenge to crime scene analysis in an educational setting is specific to the instructor’s job in preparing a lab that includes human samples (blood, urine, fingerprints, etc.). Safety and chemical hygiene practices are required in most all laboratory activities, and the addition of human body samples (usually fluids) creates additional responsibilities for the instructor of a forensic lab. Depending on state laws and institutional requirements, biological samples may have to be ordered from online suppliers that sell synthetic urine and blood. When testing for drugs, there are some over-the-counter medications that will show false-positives in some of the presumptive drug test kits for drug powders and urine samples.8,14 When evidentiary tests are done, however, permits to buy controlled substances (i.e., street drugs) may be necessary.
practice with someone who is already an expert. Reading about fabric stain analysis in the identification of fibers does not compare to being shown what the sample fabrics look like, directed to where they can be bought, and informed about common setbacks in the classroom. Methods sections in published papers rarely address troubleshooting issues which come naturally to one who is familiar with a procedure and subject. As part of the workshop, participants were provided with a list of distributors of lab materials used during the workshop, as well as a list of textbooks the organizer (L.J.K.) has found useful in teaching criminalistics to undergraduates. This saves hours or days of time for professors trying to find this information on their own while developing courses. In addition, participants had the opportunity to observe and troubleshoot setbacks during experiments, such as finding more effective methods of lifting fingerprints, discovering that ink stains can become contaminated, or that class I dental stone intended to make an imprint of shoe impression has a shelf life and does not operate well under certain weather conditions. By experiencing these issues, participants can take this into account when planning courses and instructing students.
■
IMPACT OF cCWCS FORENSIC WORKSHOP As a result of this workshop, forensic science was immediately used as a special topic in the liberal education course CHM 111 at Miami University Middletown. The class filled to capacity for three consecutive semesters; it has been formally acknowledged as a new course, CHM 121: Introduction to Forensic Chemistry. In 2014, Miami University approved a new Forensic Science (FS) major and a Forensic Investigation (FI) major. CHM 121 is a required course for the FI major. The workshop also provided the basis for designing a forensic survey course that looks at the many aspects of forensic science; this course is required for FS majors and explores areas of specialization for upper division students. CHM 421 Forensic Science and laboratory are being designed to challenge students to apply the knowledge and skills learned in previous courses to crime scene investigation. It will function as a capstone course for the FS major. At Winston-Salem State University, a one-week annual forensic summer workshop has been implemented. During this workshop, participants were presented with a crime scene scenario and evidence from possible suspects. Participants analyzed the crime scene and performed several analyses to identify a suspect. At the end of the week, they presented their findings in the form of a poster. The first workshop in July 2014 had 15 participants: 4 rising high school seniors, 10 university or community college students, and 1 high school teacher. The organizer (A.B.K.) of the workshop has now taken steps for the chemistry department to start offering a B.S.-degree option with a concentration in forensic chemistry. A new course, CHEM 132: The Chemistry of Crime, has been developed and implemented at St. John Fisher College from the experiences of a 2013 week long cCWCS workshop. This course was designed to fulfill Perspectives Tier 4 of Fisher’s core curriculum, an educational experience common to all Fisher undergraduates. Perspectives Tier 4 (P4) courses are meant to explore specific scientific, mathematical, and technical topics and relate them to historical and contemporary developments. CHEM 132 was designed for both science and nonscience majors and can be used by students to fulfill the P4 core requirement. The course enables students to develop an appreciation for fundamental principles of chemistry and
■
UNIQUE BENEFITS OF THE cCWCS FORENSIC SCIENCE WORKSHOP Beyond the obvious networking opportunities, this workshop had unique benefits associated with its one-week intensive, hands-on format. With the popularity of forensic science as a career path, there is increasing demand on colleges and universities to offer courses in criminalistics or forensic science. For smaller colleges, professors with limited background in the subject are asked to become sufficiently adept to educate undergraduates in basic forensic science. While online resources and textbooks are easily available, the most efficient route to building the necessary skills is through conversations and E
DOI: 10.1021/ed500671x J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
assisting state, tribal, local, and community-based programs. http:// www.justice.gov/archive/ag/annualreports/pr2002/Section03.htm (accessed Jun 2015). (4) Tobin, J. Chemistry for Students in the Criminal Justice Program. J. Chem. Educ. 1978, 55 (11), 724−725. (5) Specht, K. M.; Boucher, M. A. A Forensic-Themed Case Study for the Organic Lab. J. Chem. Educ. 2009, 86 (7), 847−848. (6) Rothchild, R. An Organic Chemistry Experiment for Forensic Science Majors. J. Chem. Educ. 1979, 56 (11), 757−758. (7) Szalay, P. S.; Zook-Gerdau, L. A.; Schurter, E. J. A MultiTechnique Forensic Experiment for a Non-science Major Chemistry Course. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 1419−1421. (8) Anderson, C. Presumptive and Confirmatory Drug Tests. J. Chem. Educ. 2005, 82, 1809−1810. (9) Kaplan, L. J. Forensic Science: Crime in the Chemistry Curriculum. J. Chem. Educ. 1993, 70, 574. (10) Kaplan, L. J. Chemistry and Crime: From Sherlock Holmes to Modern Forensic ScienceA Science Course for Non-Science Majors. Crime Lab. Dig. 1993, 19 (4), 107−132. (11) Elkins, K. M.; Kadunc, R. E. An Undergraduate Laboratory Experiment for Upper-level Forensic Science, Biochemistry, or Molecular Biology Courses: Human DNA Amplification Using STR Single Locus Primers by Real-Time PCR with SYBR Green Detection. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 784−790. (12) Elkins, K. M. Designing Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Primer Multiplexes in the Forensic Laboratory. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 1422−1427. (13) Nienhouse, E. J. Chemistry and Crime: A Laboratory-Based Forensic Science Techniques Course as an Alternative to a Natural Science Requirement. J. Chem. Educ. 1985, 62 (12), 1047−1049. (14) Hasan, S.; Bromfield-Lee, D.; Oliver-Hoyo, M.; CintronMaldonado, J. A. Using Laboratory Chemicals to Imitate Illicit Drugs in a Forensic Science Activity. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85 (6), 813−816. (15) Siggins, B. A.; Hendricks, B. W. Forensic Drug Chemistry: A Cooperative Program. J. Chem. Educ. 1993, 70 (4), 312−314. (16) Clark, M. J.; Keegel, J. F. Chemistry in the Crime Lab. J. Chem. Educ. 1975, 54 (1), 38−40. (17) Schurter, E. J.; Zook-Gerdau, L. A.; Szalay, P. Analysis of a Suspected Drug Sample. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 1416−1418. (18) Chemistry Collaborations, Workshops and Community of Scholars. http://www.ccwcs.org/content/about-ccwcs (accessed Jun 2015). (19) Siegel, J. A. Forensic Science: The Basics; CRC Taylor & Francis: Boca Raton, FL, 2007. (20) Puch-Solis R., Rodgers L. Inventors. Forensic Service LTD (GB). US Patent 2013/0173172 A1, July 4 2013. (21) Wilshire, B. Advances in Fingerprint Detection. Endeavour 1996, 20 (1), 12−15. (22) Hazarika, P.; Russell, D. A. Advances in Fingerprint Analysis. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2012, 51, 3524−3531. (23) Tobe, S. S.; Watson, N.; Daéid, N. N. Evaluation of Six Presumptive Tests for Blood, Their Specificity, Sensitivity and Effect on High Molecular-Weight DNA. J. Forensic Sci. 2007, 52 (1), 102− 109. (24) Harris, D. C. Quantitative Chemical Analysis, 8th ed.; W.H. Freeman and Company: New York, NY, 2011. (25) Bell, S. Forensic Chemistry, 2nd ed.; Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2012. (26) Dinan, F.; Szczepankiewicz, S.; Carnahan, M.; Colvin, M. The Analysis of a Murder, a Case Study. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84, 617−618. (27) Orf, A. C.; Morris, M.; Chapman, J. Arson Investigation: A Gas Chromatography Laboratory Experiment for General Chemistry. Chem. Educator 2009, 14, 10−12. (28) Maurer, M.; Bukowski, M.; Menachery, M.; Zatorsky, A. Inquiry-Based Arson Investigation for General Chemistry Using GCMS. J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87, 311−313. (29) Giannelli, P. C. Chain-of-Custody and the Handling of Real Evidence. Am. Crim. Law Rev. 1983, 20 (4), 527−568.
biochemistry and the importance of modern chemical instrumentation in solving criminal cases.
■
CONCLUSION Criminal cases are most successfully prosecuted today based on physical evidence and less on confessions or eyewitness accounts. In attempting to reliably process a crime scene, it is vital for physical evidence to be properly recognized, collected, evaluated, and brought into court to tell its story to a judge and jury. What we have hoped to achieve in this perspective article is to explore the development of undergraduate training methods for science majors and nonmajors while raising awareness of the roles and interrelationships of the crime scene investigator and the criminalist. Incorporating experience-based forensic chemistry into an undergraduate science curriculum engages students and creates opportunities for students to evaluate experimental data and results in a meaningful, realworld application. The forensic science topics that were chosen for the cCWCS forensic workshop (led by L.J.K.) represent essentially all aspects of criminalistics while introducing participants to analytical laboratory techniques that are standard procedure in multiple scientific disciplines. The inherent nature of crime scene evidence (new suspects, submission of new evidence, false leads, etc.) reinforces the idea that not every experiment is successful and not every piece of evidence leads to the resolution of a crime. Participants learn first-hand the virtues and limitations of laboratory analysis techniques and how basic science can support the field of criminalistics.
■
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
* Supporting Information S
Crime scene evidence collection guide; table summarizing known evidence recovered from suspects. This material is available via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors acknowledge the support of the National Science Foundation for sponsoring the cCWCS annual workshops (Grant No. 1022954). The authors are thankful to Grandee Dang for preparing the scaled crime scene sketch. We also thank Deborah Morandi and Tony Truran for their tremendous support and help during the workshop. Finally, the authors acknowledge all 16 participants at the 2013 cCWCS workshop.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Bell, S. Crime and Circumstance: Investigating the History of Forensic Science; Praeger Publishers: Westport, CT, 2008. (2) Saferstein, R. An Introduction to Forensic Science, 11th ed.; Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2015. (3) (a) Executive Office of the President National Science and Technology Council; Committee of Science Subcommittee of Forensic Science. Executive Office of the President; Executive Office of the President: Washington, DC, May 2014. (b) Ubelaker, D. H. The Global Practice of Forensic Science; Wiley Blackwell: Hoboken, NJ, 2015. (c) Strategic Goal III. Prevent and reduce crime and violence by F
DOI: 10.1021/ed500671x J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
