Violent Crimes Case Review Project
Case Submission
Identifying Cases for Review
(C)old cases are generally at least one (1) year old and cannot be addressed by the original homicide squad, because of workload, time constraints, or the lack of viable leads. The Violent Crimes Case Review Project (VCCRP) conducts case review together with law enforcement and criminal justice partners, prioritizing them according to the likelihood of an eventual solution – identifying those cases that might be amenable to testing with current forensic methods, such as DNA typing. The successful review and investigation of unsolved cases requires the same basic elements as the investigation of new cases: cooperation among law enforcement, the crime laboratory, and the prosecutor’s office. VCCRP staff work with investigators to make them aware of technological advances in forensic testing that may yield results where previous testing was not performed or was unsuccessful. Together, the team works to define minimum requirements for each case – such as the identification of solvability factors, statutes of limitation, etc. – in order to recognize cases that are likely to benefit from a complete review. VCCRP staff also work closely with prosecutors and forensic laboratory staff to establish guidelines for case selection.
Defining Solvability Factors
Because the number of cases that qualify for reinvestigation may be very large, it may be beneficial for a jurisdiction to define cases according to several solvability factors. Solvability factors include facts and circumstances of a case that influence the likelihood that it might be solved through advancements in forensic methods, such as biotechnology. For example, there is a high probability that analysis of a sexual assault kit will yield valuable DNA results, even if a suspect has not been identified. Profiles generated as a result of DNA analysis can now be entered into the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), which can solve a case by matching the evidentiary DNA profile to the profile of a convicted offender, or aid investigations by linking serial rapes to each other. Additionally, if an unsolved murder case contains biological evidence foreign to the victim that did not produce viable results from ABO blood typing or Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP) DNA analysis, evidence could be reanalyzed using the more discriminating Short Tandem Repeat (STR) technology. It is also important to recognize and sort out cases that are not likely to be solved through enhanced technology. An example of this might be an unsolved drive-by shooting where the perpetrator most likely did not leave biological evidence behind.
Establishing Case Review Priorities
Once solvability factors and statute of limitation issues are addressed, it is important to continue the process by identifying the cases to e reviewed first. To preserve investigative resources when considering a larger number of unsolved cases for review, jurisdictions may prioritize according to the likelihood that cases will be solved or the likelihood that investigations will be aided.
High Priority Cases – those in which the murder victim, or even a second surviving victim, has been identified; the death was ruled a homicide; suspects were previously named or identified through forensic methods; an arrest warrant was previously issued; significant physical evidence (such as fingerprints, DNA, or shell casings) can be reprocessed for further clues; newly documented leads have recently arisen; critical witnesses are accessible and willing to cooperate; witnesses can identify suspects; information or evidence can identify possible suspects; or the initial investigation identified witnesses who could not be located or need to be re-interviewed.
Moderate Priority Cases – those in which preserved evidence can be processed and analyzed through modern technology (such as an automated fingerprint identification system or DNA analysis), and whose status as a homicide can be reclassified depending on the results of additional laboratory analysis.
Low Priority Cases – those in which no known physical evidence or witnesses are available to help identify a suspect.
Initial Work
VCCRP personnel are particularly interested in reviewing or locating any gaps or information in the case, including people mentioned in statements that do not have a corresponding interview report in the case file, undocumented investigative actions (such as search warrants without documentation of service), and so forth. Any available evidence is assessed for future usability and additional analysis.
Follow-Up Work
VCCRP personnel produce summaries documenting the follow-up investigation and recommend either further investigation or inactivation. A homicide case can be closed either through arrest of the suspect or by administrative action. The arrest of a suspect renders a case closed regardless of whether the suspect is convicted or even brought to trial.