Forensics and Grav-Belts

[Peter Newman]

Consideration One - A planet that has the money to do so should equip their forensic investigators with grav-belts to help them avoid contaminating crime-scenes.

Consideration Two - A criminal that has the money to do so should equip himself with a grav-belt to help them avoid leaving forensic evidence in the first place - unless ownership and/or use of a grav belt leaves more evidence than it preseerves.

Discuss.

 

[BytePro]

Remote droids.

 

[BlackBat242]

Today some cities have installed networks of "sound tracker" pick-ups to allow accurate pin-pointing of gunshots, as well as traffic cameras to help in locating accidents (and in tracking vehicle movements).

Future police departments would likely have a network of sensors that would allow them to tracks movements of grav-affecting vehicles (grav cars, grav cycles, and grav belts), as well as to detect the energy-burst signature of weapons such as lasers, plasma rifles, etc.

 

[BruceEdwinMorrow]

You in a Vacc Suit (no pesky loose cells to give you away), flying around in said Grav Belt.

 

[HiverLord]

Each gravity affecting device would (or should) have differing 'frequencies' [an incorrect term, I believe, but I'm half awake right now...] which said police tracking devices/systems should be able to detect and track.
Which brings up the possibility that the more... 'enforcement minded' agencies (higher law levels) will record the grav signatures of each vessel that enters its jurisdiction.
Just a thought.

 

[Whipsnade]

Consideration One - A planet that has the money to do so should equip their forensic investigators with grav-belts to help them avoid contaminating crime-scenes.

Reality Check One - Hollywood depictions aside, the contamination of crime scenes by forensic investigators is not a problem. Because actual law enforcement agencies know what actual forensics can and cannot achieve, they know that the miracles routinely presented on CSI and all its imitators are fantasies. In fact, judicial systems worldwide now regularly have to "inoculate with the truth" jurors infected with "CSI-itis" during trials.

Consideration Two - A criminal that has the money to do so should equip himself with a grav-belt to help them avoid leaving forensic evidence in the first place - unless ownership and/or use of a grav belt leaves more evidence than it preseerves.

Reality Check Two - Technology always provides criminals with different ways to commit crimes and investigators with different ways to catch criminals.

 

[BytePro]

Ha! - reminds me about something I witnessed not too long ago:

While servicing a small community police station, a resident walked in and asked to see the chief...

Resident (holding beer bottle with a finger and thumb): "I found this in your parking lot."
Chief: "Yes? Looks empty."
Resident: "Yeah, it was when I found it."
Chief: "We have a recycle bin right outside."
Resident: "I know. It wasn't in there and there wasn't any others like it. I only touched these two places."
Chief: "Okay. Would you like me to dispose of it for you."
Resident: "There's saliva on it still, so you should be able to catch them."
Chief (straight faced): "If it hasn't been too long. Its hot outside you know. And windy."
Resident (disappointed): "Oh. So the DNA might be damaged."
Chief (poker face still on): "Perhaps. But, I promise we'll follow standard procedure."
Resident (handing over the bottle): "Well, its worth a try."
Chief: "Thank you. I'll take care of it myself."

The chief waited for the resident to walk off before following SOP and throwing the empty bottle in the recycle bin.

 

[BillDowns]

:rofl:

 

[Omnivore]

Reality Check One - Hollywood depictions aside, the contamination of crime scenes by forensic investigators is not a problem.
<snip>
Reality Check Two - Technology always provides criminals with different ways to commit crimes and investigators with different ways to catch criminals.

I agree, at least at this tech level. Of course, once it becomes possible, its the nature of man and gov't agencies that it'll end up being done some places at least, despite being a relative waste of money most of the time.

In the cases where forensic investigation actually makes sense, at some point, say TL13-15, it might make a certain amount of sense to take the lab to the work rather than vice versa as now. Probably be overused too.

 

[Jame]

Another consideration - caseless bullets and lasers.

 

[BytePro]

Ah - lasers. When advanced Vargr forensics are called for...

Courtroom Transcript, 005-1103, Docket #12
Judge Knodah Jones presiding.

Prosecutor: "Special Investigator Duh'augie would you please verify that this is the laser carbine used in the suspected murder."

Duh'augie (Vargr on virtual stand): "It is."

Prosecutor: "And how have you ascertained this?"

Duh'augie: "Simple. The smell from the laser carbine matches the victim."

Judge (Incredulous): "You can tell the difference between laser smells?"

Duh'augie (stoic): "No. But the carbine actuator smells of Tasty-Joe's Holiday exclusive emperor-berry puff pastry filling - and Joe hadn't been able to sell any before he was killed."

Defense Counsel: "But the carbine wasn't found till 2 days ago - how do you know somebody else didn't eat one of those pastries?"

Duh'augie (annoyed): "I confiscated them all, of course."

 

[Jame]

Not *quite* what I had in mind but :rofl: anyways.

Though I'm sure that there's a lot more TL 10+ forensics that we can't consider.

 

[BytePro]

Psionics.

 

[BytePro]

Note, to be CSI crazy - matter made of atoms constantly interacts with surrounding matter. Stray atoms come and go - traveling fast and far, even when not to the degree of outgassing or diffusion.

Except in extreme temperatures, like those approaching absolute zero, and with really exotic materials (ala atomic buckyball crystalline structures) - any presence is going to leave behind an atomic 'signature'. Maybe not good enough to 'seal a case' as good as say, DNA, but it would provide 'evidence' (in CSI fashion - i.e. generally ridiculous, but theoretically 'sound' enough for fiction).

So even grav assisted, one wouldn't necessarily leave nothing behind ...

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Good luck.

If I have learned one thing in my twenty plus years of studying such things, it is that contrary to popular belief all that CSI stuff is not that common (it tends to cost a butt load of cash and time) and is only used for real serious crimes, like murders.

The other thing I have learned clearing murders is pretty difficult and if a Homicide unit clears 50% percent of their cases they are doing a pretty good job.

Most crimes are still cleared by plain old investigation techniques, like talking to witnesses, people dropping dimes on each other and when you finally get a suspect in the box by tricking them into talking to you and eventually getting them to say something incriminating.

So actually using a clean suit and grav belt will definitely help the criminal to stay out of trouble.