Crime Scene Activity #12 Written
Version
Review the updated forensic results, and answer the following questions for your Part 1
Submission. 1.Reference Document on Page #4. The investigative team has reason to believe that the document was
signed by one of the suspects working for WSL. However, the person apparently was intoxicated when the document was signed. If the document were to be introduced as evidence in court, would this pose any issue?
2.Reference Signatures of pharmaceutical scientists on page #5. Could an examiner use the signatures “as is” as exemplars for comparisons? Why or why not? Suppose the suspects agree to provide a written sample, but investigators are concerned that they will try and fudge/alter their real handwriting.
What can they do to improve the chances of getting a more accurate exemplar?
3.Would an examiner need a search warrant to obtain handwriting exemplars to compare to the signature on a document?
4.Dr. Coppertown uses a flip phone. Compared to the phones of Dr. Nickels and Dr. Silversmith, how would an examiner be restricted in the data that could be collected from Dr. Coppertown’s phone? The following evidence/information was retrieved from examiners applying mobile device forensic techniques: The cellphones of past and present suspects’ that work in the building were pinging in the vicinity of the building on the day of the theft. There were several calls made between Blue and Dr.
Nickels phone the week before the theft. There are no call records between Blue and Dr. Silversmith.
There are no call records between Blue and Dr. Coppertown. Exactly one week prior to the theft, Dr.
Nickels and Cheryl Blue’s pinged in the same location at the Olympic Greek Restaurant. They were both there for about one hour. Follow up review of video suggest that Dr. Nickels was intoxicated, and Blue gave him documents to sign. 5.Could the FBI’s use of a Stingray assist in this investigation? How so?
