Special Agent Duane Deaver

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. Today we have a very serious charge before you. We have Dr Richard Kimball, who is before you on the charges of first-degree murder. However, he is not guilty based on our success to provide reasonable doubt that Kimball planned and deliberately kill his wife or that he was provoked into killing his wife in the heat of passion.

The victim was fully nude and beaten, the victim’s clothes was recovered at the crime scene. The murder story was all over the news, which is when the driver saw it and called the police to tell them about the hitchhiker, along where the driver had disposed the t-shirt. Dillon and his brother were at the beach about 5 days later after the crime and were questioned and Dillon was brought to the police station for questioning of the murder. During the investigation the police hired John Preston, who was known for handling scent-tracking dogs. The tests they conducted were a paper lineup, where Dillon had touched a piece of paper along with the t-shirt by linking the t-shirt to Dillon and the t-shirt to the crime. After the tests were completed Dillon was arrested and charged with murder. During the trial the prosecutors had four witnesses that testified against Dillon at the trial, one Dillon’s ex-girlfriend, second John Preston, the dog handler with the t-shirt, third the driver and lastly a jailhouse snitch who stated that Dillon told him that he had murdered the victim. Dillon was sentenced after a five-day

If I were in charge of retrieving bullets at a crime scene I’d first I would have to find a way to remove the bullet out while preserving any possible markings on the bullet. Then the bullets can be placed into a marked container for identification purposes. Then to transport the bullet to the crime laboratory, I’d wrap the bullet in tissue paper and placed in an envelope or pillbox. I would have to be careful with the handling and packaging of the bullet, because I would have to be careful to preserve any trace evidence that might be present on the bullet.

I arrived on scene at approximately 02:11 hours. I approached the front door and the victim, Hollie J. McIntosh (F/W, DOB: 07/26/1988) opened the door and let me inside. I inquired with McIntosh what happened. McIntosh stated she was shoved and choked by her boyfriend, James Dean Carvell (M/W, DOB: 01/25/1988). I observed a red mark on McIntosh’s neck. McIntosh advised Carvell was in the bedroom. McIntosh pointed to the bedroom. I entered the bedroom. Carvell was lying

The case of Kusmider v. State, 688 P.2d 957 (Alaska App. 1984), was a state appeal’s court case that addressed the chain of causation for a murder, which had occurred, and the actions of the trial court judge (Brody & Acker, 2010). In this case, the appellant, Kusmider, appealed his conviction for second degree murder, based on the fact that the trial judge did not let him introduce evidence, which may have shown that the victim may have survived his wounds, if not for the actions of the paramedics.

To refresh the memory and hopefully make things a bit more clear about the crime that Sidney Gleason had originally committed and been sentenced for, a brief summary is provided for the reader. At the age of 24, Sidney J. Gleason of Great Bend, Kansas, was found guilty of capital murder on February 21, 2014. He was found guilty of first degree murder as well, when he and his cousin Thompson shot and killed Mikiala “Miki” Martinez and her boyfriend Darren Wornkey. The charges against the defendant, Gleason, were capital murder, murder of the first degree, aggravated kidnapping, attempted murder, aggravated robbery and possession of an illegal weapon, more specifically a firearm or handgun. Though the evidence seemed to be more than substantial,

In the case of the State v. Stu Dents, the jury found the defendant guilty of the following charges: homicide, assault of a police officer, kidnapping, and crimes related to drugs. They felt that there was no sufficient evidence to charge him with the crime of burglary. It has come down to the sentencing stage of this case. We will hear from both the prosecuting and defending attorneys before the court makes their final ruling on the sentence of one, Mr. Stu Dents.

Projected stains are made from uses of large amounts of force. A basic bloodstain pattern is known as transfer or contact. These are made when someone walks through a puddle of blood leaving footsteps or trails. Gunshot spatters are very common in crime scenes, and give off a sort of mist effect. Sources of blood can reveal the origins of whatever it is investigators are looking for. (Renee Blake)

Bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA), known in the criminal justice field as blood splatter analysis, has been studied since the 1890s. Blood splatter, or bloodstain pattern constructional readings, is a technique that seeks to piece together the incident that caused an individual’s bleeding. Understanding blood splatter on a wall or various surfaces can be instrumental in formulating if a crime was committed and if the blood discovered at the crime scene can be used as evidence. The first documentation of blood splatter research occurred at the Institute for Forensic Medicine in Poland, by Dr. Eduard Piotrowski . During Dr. Piotrowski’s research and documentation period, where he used live bunnies to research blood splatter from head

Through mistakes made within the investigative process of the case, the outcome of the case was affected. On the collection of evidence many pieces were contaminated causing flaws in this evidence. When packaging blood swabs the cotton swatches used were packed in plastic bags and then left in a hot truck. This blood was also contaminated as the technician who handled it still had the blood voluntarily given by Simpson on his gloves (Jones, 2009). Degradation of missed blood, which was left for three weeks after the initial run through, may have turned unusable by the time investigators examined it. It was weeks after finding the socks at O.J. Simpson’s house that the police noted the blood on them. Destruction of evidence may have been caused through the bodies not being taken to be autopsied till 10 hours after they were found. During evidence collection the majority was compiled by a Junior Detective, who was taped dropping blood swabs as well as wiping tweezers with dirty hands, this made the evidence highly contaminated (Deutsch, 1995). To conceal the body of Nicole Simpson a police officer place a blanket over the body, this was done to

The trial was long and was delayed numerous times due to Kunstler’s busy schedule with other demanding trial cases. The delays were also part of Kunstler’s defense strategy. There was an abundance of evidence shown throughout the trial among which was the ballistics test. These test showed that of the five shots that Skagen endured only two were from Richardson’s gun. After a yearlong trial the prosecutor and the defense gave their summations and the jury deliberated. The deliberation took several days. In the end Richardson was convicted with three of the original seven charges; manslaughter in the second degree, possessing a weapon as a felony, and criminal possessing of stolen property in the third degree. The judge sentenced Richardson to a term no more than ten years for the conviction of manslaughter in the second degree. No more than seven years for the conviction of felony possession of a weapon. The criminal possession of stolen property was unconditionally discharged and the sentences were to be served concurrently. Kunstler appealed this sentenced and Richardson was allowed to stay out of jail on bail. On April 13, 1976 the Appellate Division reversed the manslaughter conviction and the felony gun conviction. The case was sent back to the original court and Richardson was resentenced to three years

Recently in Alabama a man by the name of Anthony Ray Hinton was exonerated from death row after already spending thirty years in prison. Hinton was convicted of two separate fatal shootings of fast food restaurant managers in Birmingham, AL. One on February 25, 1985 shooting a John Davidson, and the second occurrence was on July 2, 1985 making Thomas Vason the second deceased. The evidence brought against him was a revolver that somewhat matched the one Hinton had in his home. There was no physical evidence, no fingerprints and no eyewitnesses linking him to the crime. Also, the revolver was questionable at best due to the fact the gun belonged to his mother who he lived with. Ballistics could not accurately tell if the gun Hinton had was even the weapon used in the shootings because they could not tell if his gun had been fired out of recently. They also could not conclusively say that all the bullets used in the two shootings were fired from the same gun. All in all, Hinton was convicted by a possible bullet match to his gun; and an eyewitness’s testimony from a person who was present at a similar, but different crime that Hinton was never accused of. Hinton coming from an underprivileged area only had a $1,000 to hire a ballistics expert to disprove the allegations. Thus leading to a person whose proposed allegations were questionable. Hinton was found guilty and put on Death Row. After sitting in a jail cell for thirty years he was released after firearms experts

“In United States v Davis, Earl Davis was shot and while being treated for his gunshot wound, the Howard County Police Department (HCPD) in Maryland collected his clothing and logged it along with records of Davis’s arrest. The next year the nearby Prince George’s County Police Department (PGCPD) suspected Davis of a murder and obtained the clothes that HCPD had previously collected. PGCPD then

Each sample was tested before it was shipped. He took every possible measure to avoid poor handling and contamination of blood plasma. He closely monitored the shipments of these life-saving plasmas to treat war casualties. For five months, “Blood for Britain” project ran successfully with approximately 15000 people turning donors and approximately 5,000 vials of blood plasma collected.

Any moist or wet biological evidence (blood, body fluids, plants, etc.) like the lottery ticket on the counter with the blood smeared print on it should be collected wearing gloves it should then be placed in a clean unused paper container such an envelope, and or small bag and transported back to an evidence receiving area, it should then be taken out of the bag and allowed to air dry thoroughly. The Ninhydrin process should be applied to this piece of evidence to obtain noticeable prints.