Investigative Techniques Of A Bomb Investigation

2. List the questions raised about this situation or that you think that the investigators should ask of

The popular television show, CSI: Crime Scene Investigations has been on the air for 12 years, and it has brought forth the behind-the-scenes actions of criminal investigations, even if its portrayals are not always scientifically accurate. This has caused an interest in the forensic sciences that has led most people to a skewed view of how a criminal investigation actually works. The reality of a criminal investigation is that it is generally more tedious and difficult than the theory of criminal investigation would have you believe. By examining the forensic and investigative procedures of the case of Pamela Foddrill, it is apparent that the theory of criminal investigation was not representative of the procedures concerning examination

In the following days, the AFP conducted thorough forensic investigations into the source of the bombings, as well as the scenes of the crimes. The forensic material was then processed in Australia after an emergency amendment to the Crimes Act, 1901 (Cth) was passed. This speedy response from the nations federal politicians allowed the processing of forensic data from offshore (Bali) in the highly sophisticated labs located in Australia. This quick response is what ensured the integrity of the forensics and ultimately what allowed the bombers to be arrested. With the support of forensic examination, the investigation progressed quickly. This led to the arrest by the INP of the first suspect, Amrozi bin Nurhasyim (Amrozi), on November 5, 2002, and the subsequent identification of other suspects. A second joint INP and AFP investigation team was formed to pursue the remaining suspects, which led to the arrest of Imam Samudra and a number of other suspects on 21 November 2002. This was followed by the arrests of Ali Ghufron (Muklas) on December 4, 2002, and Ali Imron on January 12, 2003. The rapid legal responses from the AFP and the Parliament is what allowed the arrest of the bombers, in what was a greatly effective response.

Clay Dillow’s October 2015 article in Popular Science “To Catch a Bombmaker” explores how FBI forensic skills have been developed since 2003 to benefit United States forces fighting bomb making foreign insurgents. Dillow tells the story of how a small lab at the Marine Corps Base at Quantico has used FBI analytical data to link more than 2,700 suspects to possible terrorist activities, adding more than 350 people to the terrorist watch list. Dillow’s purpose was to reveal how detective skills have evolved to address a growing number of homemade bombs threats to the United States. While the article examines many one case in which insurgents are nabbed, information is not shared on how forensic data alone may not be enough to tell a more balanced story about bomb makers. Dillow writes an article of how one bomber is stopped, but the narrative falls short of offering a deeper account of how effective our efforts have been to stop terrorists in their tracks.

The author of the book, John Hersey, had a good purpose in telling so many individual anecdotes about the life before the bomb. He focused on expressing the stories of these survivors in a way in which the reader could see it from their point of view. His aim was to demonstrate that each individual was a real human being with real feelings just like us. The author seeks to make sure that readers understand that the bombings happened to people who had a daily life and were astonished by what had happened. Hersey demonstrates that the bombing impacted people who had previously been undergoing a lot in life.

Since the time that the scientific science dramatization "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" turned into a tremendous hit and generated its fans, reporters have been worried about what they instituted the "CSI Effect." The hypothesis behind the effect is that fans of the well-known show disguise misguided judgments about the law that they bring with them into the court as jurors. In this way, the trepidation is that the TV show is at last influencing the results of trials - and not in a great manner. Criminal justice researchers have started to study the inquiry of whether nationals who are called to serve on juries bring unreasonable desires and convictions to the court as a consequence of TV projects. The impact that these projects may have on the jurors, their desires, and their choices is known as the CSI effect.

The bomb was set off by Timothy McVeigh, a Persian Gulf Veteran. He was a right wing radical linked to anti-government, white-supremacist, survivalist and militia groups. The events at Waco and Ruby Ridge influenced Timothy McVeigh, prompting him to take action against the United States government (“FBI”, The Oklahoma City Bombing: 20 Years After). Right wing ideology, as in the Turner Diaries, led him

McVeigh and Nichols saw an opportunity to destroy a building full of innocent people, because of their extremist mindset. They decided tp destroy a building full of innocent people who work because of their extremist ways. Something that was seemingly odd was that McVeigh was a Persian Gulf war veteran and Nichols was his military friend. A third man whose name was Michael Fortier also had information regarding the detonation of the bomb at the building, Fortier later plead guilty for harboring information of the explosion.

2. List the questions raised about this situation or that you think that the investigators should ask of the

I think the procedures are different from normal crime scenes to those involving fire and explosions

In the article Argument Supporting the Bomb, by Michael Barnes, the general thesis was that the atomic bomb was necessary. Throughout the article there are many propaganda techniques used to convince the reader. For example, techniques like transferring the blame, lesser of the two evils, and card stacking are used throughout the article. For instance, in the article the author uses the fact that the Japanese attacked the United States first: “the back-stabbing” aspect of the “surprise” attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941”. The transfer technique is used here to distract the reader, and make them think about Pearl Harbour. As a result the reader overlooks the fact that the atomic bomb killed more than a hundred thousand citizens. Not

Two men, who found a bomb planted in Manhattan, are being searched for by the law enforcement agencies. The two men took a duffel bag, after removing the explosive it contained. Investigators released images of the men, believing that the bag taken might have been an important piece of evidence. The authorities do not believe that the two men are related to Ahmad Khan Rahami, the person accused of setting off the bombs. “We have no reason to believe they’re connected” (Santora 1). The police commissioner said that the men are witnesses. As a matter of fact, several law enforcement officials suggested that when the men were jostling the bomb to get it out of the bag they may, unknowingly, caused it to deactivate. Mr. Rahami, during a shootout

evidences can tell what sex, age, and race of the suspect. If the scene was not

The investigation after an incident allows the organization to identify the attacker, tools used in the attack, the vulnerability that was exploited, and the damage caused by the attack. This post-mortem

Since most investigations start with very limited information, care and common sense are necessary to minimize the chances of destroying evidence. A plan of operation is developed and initiated from an initial walk through of the scene. The plan is to decide what evidence may be present, what evidence may be fragile and need to be collected as soon as possible. What resources, equipment, and assistance are necessary for the processing? Consideration of hazards or safety conditions may need to be addressed.