![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Drawing upon quantitative and qualitative data gathered during a four-year ethnographic study of 44 British homicide investigations, this paper advances the sparse literature on how closed-circuit television (CCTV) contributes to criminal investigations and the risks associated with its use. Based on insights gleaned from interviews with homicide detectives, analysis of case files and observations of live homicide investigations, we examine how CCTV is used during homicide investigations focusing principally on two key investigative moments – identifying and charging suspects. Our quantitative data indicate that CCTV is used more frequently than any other kind of forensic science or technology to both identify and charge suspects. Nevertheless, our qualitative data reveal numerous challenges associated with how CCTV footage is recovered, viewed, shared, interpreted and packaged for court. We reveal the individual and organisational processes and workarounds that have emerged in a socio-technical landscape that lacks clear standards and principles. We discuss the implications of these findings for practice and policy and their relevance to questions about the socially constructed nature of forensic scientific knowledge.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. The paper is based upon research that was funded by a Leverhulme Trust Grant and which involved Professor Robin Williams (Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University and School of Applied Social Sciences, Durham University) and Professor Jim Fraser (Centre for Forensic Science, University of Strathclyde). The authors wish to thank the Trust for the opportunity to undertake this research. The authors extend their gratitude to all of the detectives; police staff; forensic scientists; crime scene managers and coordinators; forensic accounts, submissions, and budget managers; prosecutors; judges; and other specialists within and beyond the criminal justice system who kindly gave up their time to take part in the research. We are also grateful to Dr Gill Tully, Forensic Science Regulator, for her insights on a draft of our CCTV Insight Briefing Paper and for meeting with us on several occasions to discuss the challenges of digital forensic evidence.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 We adopt a broad and inclusive view of the range of FSTs that can be utilised in homicide investigations, such as DNA profiling, fingerprint examination, blood pattern analysis, ballistics interpretation, trace evidence analysis and digital evidence from mobile phones, computers and CCTV.
2 The term public in this context refers to forensic science provision that is funded by the police service or the police authority.
3 In this case, whilst detectives considered that the victim’s partner was in some way responsible for her death, the forensic pathologist was unable to determine whether her injuries were caused in some kind of attack or were the result of inappropriate attempts at assistance, movement and resuscitation. The prosecuting authority determined that there was insufficient evidence to charge the suspect.
4 In England and Wales, over the 10-year period 2008/09-2017/18, police charged a suspect in an average of 86% cases (Morgan et al. Citation2020, calculated from table for figure 22) and in Scotland, for the period 2010/11-2019/20, 98% of cases were classed as solved, i.e. an accused individual had been identified (Scottish Government Citation2020).
5 130 suspects (94 relating to a cold case from the 1980s) were eliminated from these investigations, and will not be considered in this paper.
6 In some instances, identification included implication, i.e. the suspect was already known to the police but findings from FSTs implicated them in the offence allowing SIOs to categorise them as a suspect.
7 The total number of times FSTs were used is greater than the number of suspects identified or charged because decisions often relied upon a combination of FSTs.
8 For the remaining two cases, one related to the reinvestigation of a cold case from the 1980s, the second was a domestic homicide, which occurred in the family home and the suspect admitted killing his wife.
9 For a fuller list of recommendations for practitioners and policy-makers, refer to Brookman et al. (Citation2020). HIFS Project Research Insight 3: The Use of CCTV during Homicide Investigations: Contributions, Challenges and Risks [online]. Available from: https://criminology.research.southwales.ac.uk/cirn/journals-and-publications/.
10 Fingerprint examination is perhaps another example since the retrieval of marks are undertaken by police employees. Nevertheless, in contrast with CCTV, reporting fingerprint examiners have undertaken training, their work is peer reviewed and the majority of police fingerprint comparison bureaux have achieved accreditation (Tully Citation2020).
11 In August 2020, the Court of Appeal ruled that use of Live Automated Facial Recognition technology by South Wales Police was unlawful ([Citation2020] EWCA Civ Citation1058).