Forensics Articles

Cheat Sheet / Updated 03-25-2022

Most of the time, forensic accounting is used when someone commits fraud. For this reason, forensic accountants are often referred to as fraud investigators or fraud examiners. Fraud takes many forms, but no matter how you look at it, fraud is theft; it is profiting by deceit or trickery and involves the theft of funds or information or the use of someone's assets without permission. Business practices are changing, leaving more room for fraudulent activity. Because of this, the new field of forensic accounting is filled with job growth and opportunity.

Cheat Sheet / Updated 02-28-2022

Ever wonder just how prevalent various crimes are? Or about what you should do if you witness a crime? This Cheat Sheet covers that and more, such as how investigators approach a crime scene and the tools they bring to bear in their search for clues, as well as how the medical examiner or coroner determines the cause, mechanism, and manner of death.

Article / Updated 03-26-2016

From the moment the first police officer arrives at the crime scene, he follows a strict set of procedural guidelines designed to protect him and everyone else who's present; guard evidence against damage, contamination, or loss; and document everything that occurs at the scene. Following these procedures and maintaining control of the scene until the crime-scene investigators arrive offer the best chance of getting the evidence needed to identify and convict the perpetrator. Failure to follow these directives can result in the crime remaining unsolved or a known perpetrator walking free. Distinguishing between primary and secondary crime scenes There may be more to a crime scene than first meets the eye. In fact, more than one crime scene may exist, depending upon how the crime was committed — not to mention where. Crime scenes therefore are considered either primary or secondary. The primary crime scene is where a crime actually occurred. A secondary crime scene is in some way related to the crime but is not where the actual crime took place. In a bank robbery, for example, the bank is the primary scene, but the get-away car and the thief's hideout are secondary scenes. In the case of a killer who commits a murder in someone's home but transports the victim's body to a river for disposal, the victim's home is the primary scene, and the killer's vehicle and the point along the river where the body was dumped are secondary scenes. Primary scenes typically yield more usable evidence than do secondary scenes, but not always. Sometimes the only crime-scene investigators have to work with is a secondary scene — the place where a serial killer dumps a victim's body, for example. Under these circumstances, investigators may not know where the actual murder took place and therefore use evidence they find at the secondary scenes to help them identify the killer or locate the primary scene. They may be able to use fibers from an expensive or unusual carpet they found on the victim to identify the manufacturer, the seller, and ultimately a list of buyers or locations where that particular product has been installed. Doing so can greatly narrow the focus of the investigation and lead police to the primary crime scene and the perpetrator. Arriving at a crime scene Regardless of whether the first officer to arrive at a crime scene found out about the crime via a phone call to the station, a radio call from a dispatcher, or directly from a concerned person, he or she must make every effort to detain the person who initially reported the crime and not allow that individual access to the crime scene. Anyone who reports a crime may have witnessed the incident or may have seen or heard something suspicious. However, because the officer has no way of knowing whether the person reporting the crime is a witness or a suspect, allowing the informant access to the crime scene can mean losing or contaminating the evidence. After all, a perpetrator may Believe that reporting the crime makes him or her less likely to be a suspect Attempt to destroy or remove evidence Neither of these situations is uncommon, so the officer who arrives first needs to approach the crime scene in a logical and organized manner, protecting the evidence and other people who may be there. Otherwise, harm may come to the officer, fellow officers, victims, witnesses, suspects, and even the perpetrator, or evidence may be damaged or destroyed. The officer who responds first must make personal safety a primary concern and ensure that the perpetrator or perpetrators no longer are present or a threat. Whenever a perpetrator is present, the officer arrests and secures that person. Thereafter, the officer assists any victims who are present, offers first aid as needed, and mobilizes emergency medical services. After these important tasks are completed, the officer begins preserving the crime scene. Additionally, the officer may need to detain suspects and witnesses and keep them separate to avoid collusion, meaning that the detainees work together to create a story to tell police. However, at this stage, the officer may not know which is which: A witness may turn into a suspect, and a suspect may actually be a useful witness. Furthermore, the officer may have no reason or legal right to detain some witnesses and thus must obtain accurate identification and contact information from each person who leaves the area. At the heart of crime-scene protection is the principle of exchange. Locard's Exchange Principle states that when any two people come in contact with each other, they exchange or transfer trace materials, such as hair, fibers, and prints. Every person who enters the crime scene can leave behind evidence of their presence, take away crucial trace evidence on their shoes, clothes, or hands, or otherwise damage or alter any evidence that remains. Thus, access to the scene must be restricted immediately and denied to all witnesses and suspects. Preserving and processing the scene The size of the area in which a crime occurs varies from scene to scene, and police must be prepared to quickly determine the size and boundaries of a crime scene. This task is not as easy at it seems. A crime scene may be a single room, an entire house, everything on a property, or even a whole neighborhood. At a minimum, the crime scene includes The exact spot where the offense took place Areas from which the site can be entered, exited, or even escaped Locations of key pieces of evidence — the body in a murder, a safe or cabinet in a burglary, or an entire structure in a suspicious fire A crime scene can be cordoned off using crime-scene tape, barricades, automobiles, or even by police officers standing guard. Only personnel who are absolutely necessary for processing the scene are allowed in. This restriction often is more difficult to accomplish than you may think. A victim's family members or neighbors may be emotionally unstable and thus difficult to remove from the area. And, of course, members of the press often have clever ways of gaining access to a crime scene, to say nothing of a captain or other high-ranking official trying to push his or her way past a lowly patrol officer who's following orders to keep everyone without a reason for being there away from the scene. Furthermore, you can never underestimate the meanderings of the curious bystander. After the scene is secured, the first officer to arrive establishes a security log, which basically is a sign-in sheet that must be signed by any and all visitors to the scene. This kind of crowd control helps the investigation in many ways, not the least of which is limiting the number of people who must be examined when stray fingerprints and shoeprints are found. If investigators can be ruled out, the print or prints may point to the perpetrator. A crime-scene investigator begins by doing a walk-through examination, getting a feel for the scene and organizing an approach to collecting evidence. During this overview, the crime-scene investigator typically doesn't examine any particular pieces of evidence, but rather looks at the big picture before beginning the tedious work of evidence examination and collection. Documenting the procedure While a crime scene is being processed, everything that transpires is documented in notes, sketches, photographs, and perhaps even on videotape. This documentation includes not only the scene and the evidence, but also the surrounding area, particularly the perpetrator's possible entry and exit points. A designated note taker keeps an accurate account of all activities in and around the crime scene. Sometimes a tape recorder is used, and the verbal notes are transcribed later. Regardless of how they're taken, the notes must be detailed, including an overall description of the scene; an accurate list describing what each piece of evidence is; when, where, and by whom it was found; and who transported it to the crime lab. The note taker also identifies and comments on every photo that is taken at the scene. Photographs of the scene need to be taken as soon as possible so that they show the scene preserved in an unaltered condition. Photos must be taken prior to moving or removing any evidence (or the body, if there is one). Taking several overview images of the area is a good idea, and if the scene happens to be outdoors, pictures of surrounding areas should be taken from multiple angles and points of view. Close-ups of each item of evidence — and, in murder cases, any and all visible injuries to the corpse (while it's still at the crime scene) — are critical. Videotape provides the advantage of including sound so that comments can be added immediately. But whenever video is used, still photos nevertheless need to be taken, because they offer much greater detail resolution. Photos also are taken of any injured parties, including the suspect. Full-body and close-up shots of any injuries are obtained. Whether these pictures are taken at the scene or at the hospital (or even in the operating room) depends upon the nature of the injuries. Bumps, bruises, and scratches can be photographed at the scene, but photos of injuries such as gunshot and knife wounds probably have to wait until the victim is transported to the hospital. In photographs where the size of the object or evidence being recorded is important, the photographer includes a point of reference. A ruler is ideal, but another common object — a cigarette pack, ballpoint pen, or a car key, for example — works in a pinch. Sketches also are extremely important, because they show the relationship of each item of evidence to other items or to the body. Each piece of evidentiary material is mapped, or located by its distance from two fixed points, such as a wall, a lamppost, or a sidewalk. Doing so provides exact graphic coordinates of each item. Sketches made at the scene may be rough, but they need to be accurate. They can be redrawn later for clarity and aesthetics. Several computer programs are available that help generate clear drawings. Reconstructing the crime scene After doing an initial walk-through of the crime scene, the investigator begins mentally formulating a hypothesis of the crime, focusing on the likely sequence of events and the locations and positions of everyone present during the crime. Information like the following may be critical in determining the truthfulness of a suspect or the reliability of a witness: Shoeprints may reveal a perpetrator's every step. Fingerprints may indicate the things the perpetrator touched. Tool marks may signify points of entry or where safes or locked cabinets are pried open. Blood spatters, bullet trajectories, the angle and severity of blows and stabs, and the nature of the victim's injuries can reveal the actual and relative positions of the assailant, victim, and anyone else who was present during a crime. The physical changes that take place in a corpse may indicate whether the body was moved several hours after death. The investigator looks at each piece of physical evidence to find out whether it supports this theory, considering information obtained not only at the scene but also from the crime lab, medical reports of anyone who was injured, and the medical examiner's autopsy examination. Anything that doesn't fit in with or justify the investigator's theory of the crime must be reconciled; otherwise, the theory must change. As a result, the reconstruction of a crime scene is constantly evolving as more evidence is uncovered. The investigator continually tests the developing crime theory against the evidence and avoids making any assumptions, no matter how logical they may seem. An investigator may logically believe that a piece of evidence ended up where it did because of a suspect's actions, but if the hard evidence doesn't support this belief, the theory must be held suspect. If a gun is found just outside the rear door of a house where a homicide took place, logic suggests that the assailant dropped the gun while escaping. Although that's certainly a possibility, without solid evidence, ruling out other possibilities may be difficult. For all investigators know, the gun had been tossed there in an attempt to make a domestic homicide look like a murder committed by a burglar whom the victim supposedly caught in the act. Evidence like the spouse's fingerprints on the gun or the victim's blood on the spouse's shoes may, of course, change the theory, but until all evidence in a reconstruction is considered and explained, investigators can't reach any absolute conclusions.

Article / Updated 03-26-2016

Picture yourself being buried alive. People living prior to the 19th century had good reason to worry about such matters, because stethoscopes hadn't been invented, and determinations of death were more a guessing game than a scientific pursuit. A weak heartbeat meant you'd probably be pronounced dead — only to wake up while your body was being prepared for burial. Fortunately, those days are gone, but plenty of trial and error took place before they could be laid to rest. Looking for a definitive method Determinations of death have never been straightforward. Alcohol, drugs, heart attacks, serious infections, bleeding, shock, dehydration, and other situations may render a supposed victim comatose, cold to the touch, and with weak respiration and pulse — but not dead. Because signs of life can be difficult to accurately interpret, several methods for determining whether a person died were devised and used long ago, when science was in its infancy. Among them are Tongue and nipple pulling Tobacco smoke enemas Insertion of hot pokers into various bodily orifices Finally, in the 17th century, a system of waiting mortuaries — known as vitae dubiae asylums before Latin kicked the bucket — was established. In waiting mortuaries, the suspected dead were placed on cots and watched until decay set in. Although this process was unpleasant for the family of the deceased, it at least enabled a confidant proclamation of death and avoided premature burials, which weren't unheard of at the time. The invention of the stethoscope enabled physicians to determine the presence or absence of breathing and a heartbeat, thus making death a little easier to pronounce. The development of the electrocardiogram (EKG), a device that records the electrical activity of the heart, followed, and the combination of these two devices gave physicians a much more objective measure of death. The 20th century saw the development of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) followed by the use of ventilators and pacemakers that are capable of keeping the heart and lungs working even after death. And the water suddenly became muddier. These advancements brought about the concept of brain death, which means that although the heart and lungs may be working, the brain is dead. Currently, a death pronouncement in someone who has a heartbeat or a pacemaker and is on a ventilator requires the absence of electrical activity in the brain, which is measured on a device known as an electroencephalogram (EEG),or determination of loss of blood flow by radionuclear scanning. And even then, a pronouncement of death under those circumstances is controversial and has resulted in varying definitions for brain death If a person on a ventilator was shot in the head, hit by a drunk driver, or otherwise ended up in that condition as a result of suspicious means, determining death becomes an issue for the coroner or medical examiner. Charges that can be filed against the shooter, driver, or other perpetrator become measurably more serious if the victim dies. Before physicians caring for the victim actually pull the plug on the ventilator, they must be absolutely sure the victim has no hope for survival. Otherwise, doctors can be implicated in the death. Checking out causes and mechanisms of death Simply put, the cause of death is the reason the individual died. A heart attack, a gunshot wound, and a skull fracture are causes of death. They are the diseases or injuries that alter the victim's physiology and lead to death. The mechanism of death is the actual physiological change, or variation in the body's inner workings, that causes the cessation of life. A shot in the heart, for example, is a cause of death that can lead to one of several mechanisms of death, including exsanguination (bleeding to death) or sepsis (infection that enters the blood stream). Similarly, the victim of a skull fracture can die from direct trauma to the brain (cerebral contusion), bleeding into the brain itself (intracerebral bleed), or bleeding around the brain (subdural or epidural hematoma), all of which can lead to compression of the brain and result in a stoppage of breathing (asphyxia). Again, one cause can lead to death by several mechanisms. Conversely, one mechanism can result from several different causes. A gunshot wound, stabbing, bleeding ulcer, or a bleeding lung tumor can cause you to bleed to death. In each case, blood loss and shock are the abnormal physiological changes. For example, say that a man is struck by an intoxicated driver's car and severely injured. The paramedics arrive and transport him to the hospital, where he dies as a result of his injuries. The blunt trauma from the car may have caused lethal brain injuries, and the driver may be charged in the man's death. On the other hand, if the injuries weren't that severe, and the victim died from internal bleeding that paramedical and hospital personnel failed to recognize and treat appropriately, who then is responsible for the man's death? In each of these scenarios the cause of death is blunt trauma from the automobile impact, but the mechanism is either a brain contusion or exsanguination. In cases in which the mechanism of death is unclear, the medical examiner or coroner assesses the evidence to determine what civil legal actions may follow. Uncovering the four manners of death The manner of death is the root cause of the sequence of events that lead to death. In other words, it answers these questions: How and why did these events take place? Who or what initiated the events and with what intention? Was the death caused by the victim, another person, an unfortunate occurrence, or Mother Nature? The four manners of death are Natural: Natural deaths are the workings of Mother Nature in that death results from a natural disease process. Heart attacks, cancers, pneumonias, and strokes are common natural causes of death. Natural death is by far the largest category of death that the ME sees, making up about half of the cases investigated. Accidental: Accidental deaths result from an unplanned and unforeseeable sequence of events. Falls, automobile accidents, and in-home electrocutions are examples of accidental deaths. Suicidal: Suicides are deaths caused by the dead person's own hand. Intentional, self-inflicted gunshot wounds, drug overdoses, and self-hangings are suicidal deaths. Homicidal: Homicides are deaths that occur by the hand of someone other than the dead person. Some people, especially all you fans of The X-Files, may think of undetermined or unclassified deaths as a fifth category. These deaths are situations where the coroner can't accurately determine the appropriate category. The manner of death of a drug abuser with a history of overdoses is likely to be either accidental or suicidal (it also could be homicidal, but it's never natural). When someone dies from a drug overdose (cause), autopsy and laboratory findings would be the same regardless of the victim's intent, but a forensic psychiatrist may be able to delve into the abuser's personal history in an attempt to find any hidden motives for suicide. Even so, the intent or lack of intent of the deceased may not be apparent, and the manner of death therefore may be listed as undetermined or unclassified. Simply put, no certain way exists for determining whether the person overdosed accidentally or purposefully. Just as causes of deaths can lead to many different mechanisms of death, any cause of death can have several different manners of death. A gunshot wound to the head can't be a natural death, but it can be deemed homicidal, suicidal, or accidental. Only natural deaths are caused by disease. The other categories involve trauma or drugs and may lead to civil or criminal court proceedings. Of course, even a natural cause of death may be deemed accidental, homicidal, or — in rare circumstances — suicidal. If, for example, a critically ill person is prevented from visiting a doctor or hospital, and an inheritance is at stake, the individual who prevented the victim from receiving healthcare can be charged with homicide. Death from a heart attack because of an error during surgery is another example of a "natural" death that isn't. Although heart attack is a natural cause of death, the manner by which the heart attack occurred can be deemed accidental and lead to malpractice litigation. Likewise, this same person can have severe heart disease, be assaulted on the street, and, while struggling with an assailant, suffer a heart attack and die. The cause of death again is a heart attack, but the manner is homicide.

Article / Updated 03-26-2016

Solving crime means finding out whodunit, so forensic scientists have long searched for ways of absolutely identifying individuals from materials left at a crime scene. The first discovery that provided positive proof was fingerprints, which are absolutely individual. No two people share the same prints, so fingerprinting became and remains an extremely powerful forensic tool. However, fingerprints aren't found at every crime scene. Criminals have learned to wear gloves and to wipe their prints from any objects they touch. Tracking down every bit of biological debris that gets left behind, however, is impossible for even the best criminals. DNA fingerprinting gives the criminalist a relatively new and extremely accurate tool for using the tiniest bits of genetic material to identify individuals who were present at a crime scene. Tracking down and preserving DNA DNA is found in almost every cell in the human body. Skin, hair follicles, semen, saliva, and blood are common sources of crime-scene DNA. Hair doesn't contain cells, but hair follicles do. Saliva doesn't contain cells, but as it passes through the salivary ducts and washes around the mouth, it picks up cells from the ducts and the mouth. RBCs have no nuclei, so they contain no DNA. The DNA found when blood is tested comes from the white blood cells (WBCs). Using modern techniques, each type of fluid or tissue yields enough usable DNA for testing. After it's secured from a crime scene, DNA must be handled carefully to keep it from degrading. The best DNA samples are the ones that have been adequately dried and stored in protective containers. When drying isn't feasible, wet samples need to be frozen until they're analyzed. Imagine trying to read a book in which all the sentences had been reduced to fragments or single words. War and Peace might be indistinguishable from Green Eggs and Ham. However, if the original books were merely torn into pages, you'd have little trouble distinguishing between the two. Similarly, DNA typing and matching depends upon the preservation of the sequence of the bases that make up the DNA. If the lab has only very short fragments or single bases to work with, it can't effectively type the DNA. The bigger the DNA sample, the better, and yet usable DNA has been obtained from small and unlikely sources. Even a toothbrush, stamp, or bite wound can yield a usable saliva sample. A single drop of blood or a single hair follicle often is enough. In addition, modern technology makes possible the extraction of usable DNA from ancient tissues, even those taken from mummies that are thousands of years old. Scientists have extracted DNA from the bones and teeth of very old skeletal remains, and at times, from severely burned bodies. Looking into the genome The genome is the total DNA within the cell, or the millions of base pairs that make up the long polymers of DNA. Out of that massive number of base pairs, only about 5 percent directly carry out the work of life. These genes are encoded, meaning that they direct the synthesis (or manufacture) of proteins that the body needs for growth and function. The other 95 percent of the genome is non-encoded, which means it doesn't directly code for the production of a protein, but it doesn't simply lie around doing nothing, either. A portion of it regulates how genes function, and much of it is repetitive information whose purpose scientists haven't yet been able to identify. All humans, and indeed all primates, share a large amount of the genome, meaning that much of your DNA is exactly like mine and everyone else's. It's also identical to that of the chimpanzees at your local zoo. Even so, that leaves plenty of unique combinations of DNA to give forensic investigators a keen method of finding out exactly who you are. In 1985, Alec Jeffreys and his associates at Leicester University discovered that each person's DNA is actually unique. They found that certain areas of the long human DNA molecule exhibit polymorphism, a fancy word that means it can take many different forms. These variable areas are unique in everyone, and analyzing these areas allows scientists to make distinctions between one individual and the next. Shortly after discovering this polymorphism, Jeffreys developed a process for isolating and analyzing these areas of human DNA that he termed DNA fingerprinting. Currently, the process is also called DNA typing. Polymorphisms important for forensics can be found in non-encoded, or junk DNA. These areas are highly variable in length and base sequence. The variability in length is called length polymorphism. It's an important factor in forensic DNA typing because certain base sequences within the non-encoded DNA segments are constantly repeated. As a result, forensic investigators look for two types of sequences: Variable Number Tandem Repeats (VNTRs): The same base sequence repeats throughout a specific locus within the strand. These segments can be hundreds of base pairs long, repeating along the length of the DNA strand a variable number of times. Short Tandem Repeats (STRs): Much shorter than VNTRs — usually three to seven base pairs long — these sections also repeat throughout portions (loci) of the DNA chain. STRs repeat over segments of the DNA strand as long as 400 bases, which means that by using STRs, lab technicians can use even severely degraded samples for testing. Many more STRs are known than VNTRs, which gives forensic scientists many more repeats to analyze. The key in DNA typing is that the variability in the pattern of these repeats from person to person is broad, meaning that if technicians can isolate a certain locus of the DNA strand and determine the number of repeats of a given sequence in that area, they can compare it with another DNA strand to find out whether the pattern matches. In addition, research has determined how often a given number of repeats is found at a specific location in the DNA of the general population. Criminalists can use that information to calculate the probability that two DNA samples came from the same person. However, a match from a single locus is not very conclusive. But if several loci match, the probability quickly adds up. Repeating yourself: How duplication identifies you In terms of DNA, all of us repeat ourselves, but the specific ways in which we do it make each of us unique. When working to match DNA, investigators look at the repeats on particular loci of DNA. If my DNA were being compared to yours, for example, investigators would look at the same locus on each of our samples. They may find that you received 8 repeats of a particular STR from one parent and 14 repeats from another, and that I received 15 repeats of the same STR from one parent and 23 from another. Your DNA and mine would be very different. But would your and my DNA be different from everyone else's on Earth? You couldn't tell by looking at only one locus. Other people also may have received 8 and 14 or 15 and 23 repeats for the same locus, but when you look at a dozen loci, the probability that two people received the exact number of repeats from each parent at all 12 loci is only one in several hundred trillion. Looking at another example, when you analyze the STRs of a crime-scene sample at five different loci, you may find the following repeats:Locus 1 12 and 9Locus 2 6 and 14Locus 3 23 and 16Locus 4 5 and 18 Locus 5 8 and 19 Now, say that you already know that each of these STR repeat patterns occurs at these specific loci at respective rates of 1 percent, 3 percent, 8 percent, 1 percent, and 2 percent within the general population. That means 1 in 100 people share the same repeat pattern at Locus 1, 3 in 100 share this same repeat pattern at Locus 2, and so on. Therefore, if a suspect's DNA shows the exact same repeat patterns at all five loci as the crime-scene sample, the probability that the DNA found at the scene came from someone other than the suspect is tiny. In fact, because the inheritance of the STR patterns at each locus is independent of any other locus, the percentages must be multiplied by each other to determine the probability of the DNA coming from someone other than the suspect, which in this case is a whopping 48 out of 10 billion, and that high degree of probability was found using only five loci. Imagine what those odds would be if the suspect's DNA matched the crime-scene sample at 12 or more loci. Book him, Dano.

Article / Updated 03-26-2016

If you don't know what you're looking for, finding it is nearly impossible. Profiling, or looking at evidence and making a best guess as to the type of individual who would commit the crime in question, helps investigators get a firm grasp on whom it is they're trying to track down. The profiler, usually a specially trained FBI agent,looks at the crime scene, autopsy data, victim, and likely precrime and postcrime behaviors of the killer to make this assessment. The profiler answers questions like: How did the killer gain access to the victim? What did the killer do to the victim? Did the killer try to cover his or her tracks and, if so, how? What is it about this victim that attracted the killer? What motive or fantasy drove the killer to harm the victim in the particular manner at the particular time and location? In serial murder cases, offenders often are termed unknown subjects, or unsubs for short. Analysis of the crime scene may offer clues to the type of unsub police should search for. That analysis has become known as offender profiling. Even though profiling may not lead to the exact individual, it often helps police narrow the focus of their investigation. In addition to predicting where other evidence is likely to be located, profiling may suggest the unsub's Physical and psychological makeup Areas of residence and work Behaviors that may have been exhibited before the crime Likely comings and goings after the crime Lastly, the crime scene may reveal aspects of an unsub's modus operandi (MO, or method of operation) and signature. Check out the later section about "Distinguishing MO from signature." Criminal profiling evolved from studies conducted by the FBI's Behavioral Science Unit, which now is known as the Investigative Support Unit. The studies were designed to gain insight into violent criminals. As investigators' collective understanding of violent offenders increased, a useful investigative tool was born. Crime-scene analysis for clues to the offender's personality and motives and offender profiling continually gained popularity and now are considered critically important in tracking serial offenders. The premise that the perpetrator not only leaves behind physical evidence but also behavioral and psychiatric evidence is leading criminalists to understand that this evidence may be key to finding perpetrators. One of the basic tenets of profiling is that behavior reflects personality. How a person acts depends upon his or her personality and psychological needs and fears. Profiling seeks clues to the perpetrator's personality from the behaviors he or she exhibits at the crime scene. These clues can provide insight into the killer's motives, level of intelligence and sophistication, and reasons for selecting a particular victim. Assessing the perpetrator's psyche One basic method of characterizing offenders from crime-scene evidence divides them into the following three categories: Organized offenders: These criminals are more sophisticated in their approach, and their crimes show evidence of planning. These types tend to be of average or better intelligence, employed, and in active social relationships such as with spouses and families. Even though they're driven by their fantasies, they maintain enough control to avoid being impulsive. They prepare and even rehearse. They tend to target specific victims or types of victims and use control measures such as restraints to maintain victim compliance. They bring the tools they need to gain access to and control of the victim and avoid leaving behind evidence. As killers, they generally hide or dispose of the body and are likely to have a dumpsite already selected. Disorganized offenders: These criminals usually live alone or with a relative, possess lower-than-average intelligence, are unemployed or work at menial jobs, and often have mental illnesses. They act impulsively, or as if they have little control over their fantasy-driven needs. They rarely use ruses to gain the victim's confidence, but rather attack with sudden violence, overwhelming the victim. The crime scene often is messy and chaotic. This type of offender doesn't plan ahead or bring tools along, but rather uses whatever is handy. As killers, they typically leave the body at the scene and exert little effort to avoid leaving behind evidence. Some have sexual contact with the victim after killing him or her. Mixed offenders: Some offenders leave behind mixed messages at crime scenes. They show evidence of planning and a sophisticated MO, but the assault itself may be frenzied or messy, which may indicate some control over deep-seated and violent fantasies. Profilers have developed categories of descriptors, or ways that they describe the types of individuals who commit the crimes. Some of the descriptors used in serial killer profiling are as follows: Age: Most serial killers are in their 20s or 30s. Sex: Almost all are male. Race: Most don't cross racial lines. That means, in general, White offenders kill Whites, while Black offenders kill Blacks. Residency: Organized offenders may be married, have a family, and be well liked by their friends. Disorganized offenders, because of their mental instability and immaturity, tend to live alone or with a family member. Proximity: The location of the perpetrator's home in relationship to the crime scene is important. Most kill close to home, a factor that is particularly true with the first few victims. The area close to home is a comfort zone. With experience, however, the killer may move his predatory boundaries farther and farther from home. Social skills: Killers who use a ruse to ensnare their victims, like Ted Bundy did, typically possess good social skills, whereas those who use a blitz-style attack are less comfortable with conversation. Work and military histories: Organized offenders more often have a stable work history and are more likely to have left any military service with an honorable discharge. Disorganized offenders often are quite simply too unstable to hold a job in the long term or to complete military service. Educational level: Organized offenders tend to have more schooling than their disorganized counterparts. Using these descriptors, profilers can create a pretty good picture, or profile, of the type of person who likely committed the crime. This profile may help police home in on a specific suspect and may play an important role during the interrogation of suspects. Knowing the type of individual who'd commit a criminal act helps investigators design the right questions and leverage any pressure points during interrogation that snare suspects in a web of lies or even produce a confession. Profiling also plays an important role in determining whether a crime scene is staged. Staging means changing the appearance of the scene so that it looks like the murder took place in a different manner and for a different reason. A classic example: the husband who kills his wife in a fit of anger, then empties drawers and closets, knocks over furniture, and breaks a door lock or window to make it appear as though a burglar committed the crime. When investigators discover that the wife was severely bludgeoned and stabbed 20 times, the light of suspicion falls on the husband. A burglar wouldn't engage in such overkill, preferring instead to kill and run. Overkill usually is personal, with anger as the common underlying drive. Taking trophies and souvenirs Many criminals take things from the crime scene. Money, jewels, electronic equipment, and other valuables that can be sold commonly are taken, as is incriminating evidence, such as the murder weapon or a used condom. Serial offenders, on the other hand, tend to take objects that have no monetary or evidentiary value. But, regardless of what the object is, it holds some value to the perpetrator, and he will use it to relive the crime in later fantasies. Some killers take jewelry, clothing, even driver's licenses. Some take body parts. Distinguishing MO from signature Modus operandi (MO, or method of operation) describes the tools and strategies a criminal uses to commit a crime and isn't a new concept. It dates back to the 1880s and the efforts of Major L. W. Atcherley, a police constable in the West Riding Yorkshire Constabulary in England, who developed a 10-point system for identifying a perpetrator's MO. Scotland Yard later adopted many of his techniques. Atcherley considered the following factors: Location of the crime Point of entry Method of entry Tools that were used during the crime Types of objects taken from the crime scene Time of day the crime was committed The perpetrator's alibi The perpetrator's accomplices Method of transportation to and from the scene Unusual features of the crime, such as killing the family dog or leaving behind a note or object to taunt the police All these factors address the perpetrator's method of doing things. They are the things that he or she sees as necessary to committing — and getting away with — the crime. An MO may evolve over time as the unsub finds better ways to commit the murders or other crimes, perhaps changing his mode of entry, ruse, disguise, or when the attacks take place — whatever makes the unsub's efforts more effective and helps him avoid detection. In contrast to an MO, a signature is an act that has nothing to do with completing the crime or getting away with it. Signatures are important to the offender in some personal way. Torturing the victim, overkill, postmortem mutilation or posing, and the taking of souvenirs or trophies are signatures. These actions are driven by the killer's psychological needs and fantasies. Unlike an MO, a signature never changes. It may be refined over time, but the basic signature remains the same. For example, if a serial killer poses victims in a religious manner, praying or as a crucifix, details such as candles, crucifixes, or other ceremonial objects may be added later. The signature has changed, but its basic form and theme remain the same. The reason for the stability of the signature lies in its driving force. The signature is derived directly from the unsub's fantasies. These fantasies develop early in life and are refined into an obsession from years of mental reenactment. During the crime, an unsub forces the victim to respond according to the script from his fantasy. The signature is solely for the killer to live out his personal fantasy. Because the fantasy never changes, the signature remains intact.

Article / Updated 03-26-2016

Fraud can be a huge problem for a business or a government entity, and that problem is growing. Most frauds involve financial matters, so the most logical people to investigate them are accountants. Forensic accountants are specially trained to investigate and report fraud in relation to legal cases. If you want to tap into this growing career field, here are some courses to take and certifications to consider so you can be at the top of the forensic accounting pack. You want to first study accounting, of course. Taking a variety of courses in financial and advanced accounting, as well as one or two courses in auditing, is essential. Then, you want to supplement your accounting knowledge with other courses: Forensic accounting: If your school has a forensic accounting course, take it! You'll learn about forensic techniques, internal controls, and legal issues. Computers: You must be proficient in such common programs as Word, Excel, Access, and PowerPoint. When you investigate fraud, you use these programs to perform your analysis, write reports, and present your findings. Also, your targets (individuals and companies that you investigate) use these programs, and you must know how to navigate through complex files and find the frauds. You also need to know about accounting software (such as QuickBooks, Peachtree, SAP, and Oracle) because your targets will keep their accounting records using such software. Law: Knowing business law is invaluable for a forensic accountant so you can know if certain transactions are legal and be familiar with the Uniform Commercial Code (a federal act that governs sales and other commercial transactions throughout the United States). Knowing the basics of civil and criminal law is useful as well. Statistics: Knowing statistics and the principles of chance or odds will help you determine the true rate of errors and defalcations (the amount of money that has been misappropriated) in the transactions you examine. Economics: Understanding incentives that lead people to commit fraud requires knowing something about economics. Behavioral economics is a growing field today. Additionally, knowing economics helps in quantifying damages in civil litigation. Psychology: Accounting is as much about people as it is about numbers. Clients tell accountants about their problems with employees, customers, spouses . . . You need to learn how to handle being a confidant and advisor. Ethics: When you encounter situations where someone's actions are within the limits of the law but are still wrong, what do you do? A study of ethics can help. Languages: Never underestimate the value of speaking a second (or third or fourth) language. If a criminal speaks a language other than English, the investigator should as well. Criminology: Studying crime, criminals, and corrections will help you understand how the fraudsters you are up against work, why they do what they do, and how they interact with the people around them.

Article / Updated 03-26-2016

Businesses lose huge sums of money each year to fraud committed by their employees. Small businesses and large businesses alike must establish strong internal controls to prevent employee fraud, whether it involves employees stealing company inventory, embezzling cash, or fudging expense reports. Here are some crucial steps a business can take to deter employee fraud: Set the right tone from the top of the company. Make sure company managers and board members act honestly and (as much as possible) transparently. If employees suspect shady dealings at the top of the company, they're more likely to justify committing fraud themselves. Establish a segregation of duties policy. Keep accounting tasks and the handling of cash or business assets completely separate. Someone who works a cash register or books checks received in the mail should not also be tallying accounts receivable in the company's financial reports. Establish strict policies for accessing company assets, such as business inventory. That way, if inventory starts disappearing, you have a clear list of candidates for the theft. Require more than one signature on transactions of a significant amount. Depending on the size and structure of your business, that may mean that checks over $100 or over $1,000 require two signatures from company managers and/or board members. Decrease opportunities for employee theft. If you discover a case of theft, put new controls in place to prevent it from recurring. Respond quickly and justly to an incidence of employee fraud. You want other employees to see that theft and other fraud will be punished. Try to gauge employee satisfaction regularly. Keep your eyes and ears open, and employ formal survey tools if necessary to get a sense of how your employees feel about working for the company. Conduct background checks on employees before they join the company. You can likely identify some bad apples even before they join your organization. Rotate duties of employees and make sure that they take vacations. Frauds committed by employees are usually detected when they are on vacation.

Article / Updated 03-26-2016

To become a forensic accountant, no government-issued license is required. However, certifications related to forensic accounting and fraud investigation are issued by several professional associations. Here are some of the certifications you may wish to pursue en route to becoming a forensic accountant: Certified Public Accountant (CPA): You don't have to be a CPA to be a forensic accountant, but this certification is very valuable. These three letters say that you are an accountant who has had a rigorous education and passed one of the toughest licensing examinations in the United States. Also, the Association of Certified Public Accountants issues a Certified in Financial Forensics (CFF) credential for forensic accountants. Certified Forensic Examiner (CFE): The CFE is arguably the most recognized credential related to forensic accounting. The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) issues the CFE designation; visit www.acfe.com. Certified Forensic Financial Analyst (CFFA): The CFFA designation is sponsored by the National Association of Certified Valuation Analysts (NACVA), which is best known for its Certified Valuation Analyst (CVA) certification: a certification in the valuation of businesses. Business valuations are often performed for forensic purposes: matrimonial disputes, torts, and litigation with the IRS related to estate and gift taxes. See www.nacva.org.

Article / Updated 03-26-2016

Many criminals attempt to damage, alter, or remove their fingerprints to avoid identification or connection to prints found at a crime scene. From John Dillinger to more "common" criminals, these efforts are usually unsuccessful. Still, if, after leaving prints at a scene, the perpetrator successfully alters or damages his prints, the fingerprint examiner may not be able to make a reliable match. But do some people actually "lose" their fingerprints? Do they disappear? It seems that this does rarely happen. Certain activities, diseases, chemicals, drugs, and genetic disorders can flatten the friction ridges to such an extent that no print pattern is discernable. Bricklayers can literally "wear down" their finger pad ridges to the point that no pattern is evident. Even secretaries and file clerks who handle paper all day can have the same thing occur. Typists and piano players can suffer similar alterations. Diseases that severely affect the skin can also obliterate the ridge pattern. These would include scleroderma, psoriasis, and eczema, to name a few. Hairstylists, dry cleaning workers, and those who work with lime (calcium oxide) are often continually and repeatedly exposed to chemicals that can "dissolve" the upper layers of the skin and thus flatten the ridges. Drugs, particularly those used in cancer treatment, can eradicate prints. Chemotherapeutic agents such as capecitabine (Xeloda) would be an example. With prolonged use, the finger-pad skin can become inflamed, swollen, and damaged to the point that ultimately ridge detail disappears. The medical term for this is Hand-Foot Syndrome. Those who suffer from a rare genetic disorder called adermatoglyphia are born without friction ridges and thus have no fingerprints.