The following information has been taken directly from a document published on a police force website, some adjustments have been made to preserve anonymity:
Volume Crime - Research shows that outside the ‘core evidence’ types of DNA, fingerprints and footware [sic], very little success is gained from laboratory examinations of other types of materials, eg glass, fibres etc.
What research? No reference to any publication is made in the document.
The general principal will be that there will be no forensic examination made of any items where ;-
1. There is little likelihood of the offence being detected.
2. The examination will only produce corroborative evidence, unless it can be shown that the forensic evidence will enable a person to be charged with an offence.
3. In cases where a suspect is arrested more than 8 hours after the offence was committed, or the clothing was seized after that lapse of time even though the suspect was in custody, and the potential evidence relates to paint, glass, fibres or firearms residues.
Are these magic traces that spontaneously decompose after 8 hours or perhaps the laws of physics cease to exist in police investigations?
Of course a police force has finite a budget and that decisions have to be made as to how that money is best spent, but this is utter nonsense - dressed up as science. Make the policy, define the criteria for forensic submissions but don't attempt to justify it on scientific grounds unless the science is properly understood and applied correctly.
Forensic submissions are expensive. All forensic submissions need to be examined for their cost effectiveness.
Forensic submissions cost money - of course they do, but to describe them as expensive is unfair. Are forensic submissions more expensive than the cost of running 43 police forces in England and Wales? The United States has about the same number of state police forces and they have to cover 40 times the geographical area and five times as many people.
If this government (or any future one) is serious about balancing the public books and fighting crime, that's the place for big savings to be made - not cutting forensic submissions. After all its what the police want
