2
Abstract
The City of Houston, Texas has been in the headlines for its forensic science
shortcomings for quite some time. The standards for processing a crime scene, writing reports,
and the handling of evidence, have been heavily scrutinized after a major audit was performed
on 07/26/2016. The audit came after one CSI agent in particular was accused of not following
protocol, leaving behind evidence, not taking notes/writing reports, among others. I, the Deputy
Director of The Evidence Collection Division that oversees the Crime Scene Unit, must address
these critical issues within our department and enact new measures and methods for hiring CSU
in the future to ensure the quality of care we give to our community. We are in a position of
service to the public and we must never forget that. I have devised a plan that, over time, will
heal our relationship with the community, teach us based on our past mistakes, and that will
catapult us forward as better public servants. When interviewing a potential hire for the position
of Supervisor in the Crime Scene Department, I will weigh on these principles heavily.
3
“Houston, We Have Several Problems”
“Protect and Serve”, the most basic job description of someone working in law
enforcement. If its so basic and simple though, why are we not able to fulfill it? As I see it, it
boils down to three main possibilities, it is either because of ethical discrepancies, educational
insufficiencies, or both. Either way, we must strive to hold ourselves to the highest standard and
treat every single case like we would want others to do for our loved ones. One particular
applicant I am interviewing for the position of Crime Scene Unit Supervisor, has years of
experience in the field, which at first was very positive until I was made aware of an audit that
was performed on this person’s behalf involving a long list of issues related to their quality of
work. In part, the recommendations read, “an over reliance on photos with no notes, insufficient
experience for how complex some scenes were, random decisions to not collect evidence, and
speculating far too much with their collection of evidence”. I intend to ask the candidate about
these four specific recommendations because I feel the answers to these will give insight into his
train of thought and motive while earning the other recommendations. I chose these four
qualities specifically because two issues can be attributed to training and two issues can be
attributed to moral issues.
Over-reliance on photos without providing any notes and having insufficient experience
in relation to the type of crime scene being processed can most likely be attributed to the
departments lack of vetting new hires, not holding them to a consistently high standard, regularly
having work checked by partner or higher up, annual testing and education. When asking the
candidate about this recommendation in their audit, I expect them to answer honestly. I would
anticipate their answer would have something to do with lack training and not being held
accountable, that is why I think that training and being held accountable is the best response. In
4
the audit, it also stats “random decisions to not collect evidence and too much speculation with
the collection of evidence”. I believe these are moral or ethical based problems because the only
way a person would be able to negligently process crime scenes, especially those involving
children, would be if they had a skewed moral compass. Honestly the candidate would require an
unobtainable and remarkable response to these allegations for me to even consider hiring them. I
would expect them to say that they were in a rush for time and that prevented them from doing a
sufficient job, but that also would not be an acceptable answer.
What I expect from every officer in my department, especially those in a position of
authority, is as close to perfection as possible. I expect at the very least, the intentions and work
ethics of all my officers to be of the highest merit. I must put forth a method of calibrating
prospective employees ethical, professional, and educational servitude. To do that I intend to
only hire candidates that have completed at least an associate’s degree with added training or a
bachelor’s degree with department specific training. I also intend to look intensely into all
candidates’ backgrounds, two intensive fingerprinting and background checks at the state and
FBI level (similar to that of childcare workers). I want to know about their morals and character
so I would ask them questions about their hobbies, passions, what matters to them, why they
want to serve the public, what does this job mean to them, and so forth. This will paint a picture
of who they are as a person a little bit. There is no “test” to see if someone has morals so it will
have to be based on facts, history, personal judgement of character, and requiring they pass a
similar interview with one or more of my colleagues to ensure we are all in agreement. The
agents that are already employed by us will endure regular audits, testing, and continued training
and education to maintain our high standard.
It seems like an arduous and time-consuming process, and it is, but it is absolutely
5
imperative we do not stray from this, as it is the only way to regain trust in ourselves, our
community, and serve the public in the manner it deserves. Ideally our standards in these areas
include but are not limited to: having at least two CSI agents at every scene, requiring only fully
trained agents to work a scene, having a fully staffed department, and making sure that all CSI
staff are involved in prioritizing the evidence that gets submitted to the lab. Such high standards
require equally high commitment, motivation, and moral high ground.
In conclusion, as a department we are not where we want or need to be, and that is
because of our failures to properly vet, train, and maintain quality standards for our CSU
employees. In interviewing a prospective candidate for Crime Scene Unit Supervisor, many
issues were brought to my attention regarding their past work in the industry, I will ask them
about the audit recommendations they received and base my decisions off of their double
background check, fingerprinting, education, skill level, moral compass, character, and I will test
and educate them annually.
Standard Operating Procedures for All CSU
Educational and Training Requirements for all CSU
Extreme vetting before hire
Continued testing, quality control measures for each agent
Continued training offered
Two agents per scene, check each others work/space
Morality and ethics training
Probationary period after hire to ensure quality
Every shift requires at least one experienced/fully trained agent
Classes and training in other specialties related to the field available
6
With morals needing to be at the forefront of every agent's mind when processing a crime scene,
it’s easy to look to the Bible for guidance. It is important to remember that “To be carnally
minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity
against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. (Romans 8:6-7)
7
References
Evidence Submission & Testing. (2024, July). Harris County Institute for Forensic
Sciences.Dhttps://ifs.harriscountytx.gov/Learning-Center/Evidence-Submission-Testing
Texas Forensic Science Commission. (n.d.). Texas Judicial Branch. Retrieved August 6, 2024,
fromDhttps://www.nist.gov/spo/forensic-science-program/human-factors-forensic-science
The Bible. English Standard Version, 1st ed., Crossway, 2023.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
