Science and Justice 55 (2015) 509–513

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Science and Justice

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scijus

Utility of the clue — From assessing the investigative contribution of

forensic science to supporting the decision to use traces
Sonja Bitzer a,⁎, Nicola Albertini b, Eric Lock c, Olivier Ribaux a, Olivier Delémont a
a
Ecole des Sciences Criminelles, Université de Lausanne, Batochime, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
b
Police Cantonale Vaudoise, Service d'Identité Judiciaire, Centre Blécherette, 1014 Lausanne, Switzerland
c
Police Cantonale Genevoise, Brigade de Police Technique et Scientifique, Boulevard Carl-Vogt 17-19, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In an attempt to grasp the effectiveness of forensic science in the criminal justice process, a number of studies in-
Received 17 October 2014 troduced some form of performance indicator. However, most of these indicators suffer from different weak-
Received in revised form 17 April 2015 nesses, from the definition of forensic science itself to problems of reliability and validity. We suggest the
Accepted 22 May 2015
introduction of the concept of utility of the clue as an internal evaluation indicator of forensic science in the in-
vestigation. Utility of the clue is defined as added value of information, gained by the use of traces. This concept
Keywords:
Forensic science
could be used to assess the contribution of the trace in the context of the case. By extension, a second application
Utility of this concept is suggested. By formalising and considering, a priori, the perceived utility of using traces, we in-
Effectiveness troduce the notion of expected utility that could be used as decision factor when choosing which traces to use,
Impact once they have been collected at the crime scene or from an object in the laboratory. In a case-based approach,
Investigation utility can be assessed in the light of the available information to evaluate the investigative contribution of foren-
sic science. In the decision-making process, the projection or estimation of the utility of the clue is proposed to be
a factor to take into account when triaging the set of traces.
© 2015 The Chartered Society of Forensic Sciences. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction perspective of the criminal justice process. Albeit their focus is on one
precise aspect of the contribution of forensic science, the responses of
Forensic science, being a relatively young discipline, has developed theses indicators are extrapolated to the global impact of forensic sci-
substantially in the past decades. Due to the increase in DNA and drug ence in the criminal justice process, providing an unbalanced view.
testing, forensic science laboratories have multiplied, university We suggest the introduction of the concept of utility of the clue to
programmes continue to proliferate and technical developments con- evaluate the contribution of traces to the investigation. The latter, de-
tinue to attract most of the attention. At the same time, the broad fined as added value of information attainable by the use of the trace,
media attention shaped the view of forensic science as the omnipotent depends on the informative potential of the clue itself, as well as the in-
tool to help solve crime affecting not only the understanding of the fo- formation available before the selection of traces. The aim is to depict
rensic science role in the overall population, but also the everyday prac- the contribution of forensic science in different chapters of the criminal
tice of forensic scientists and the expectations in courtrooms. This justice process and to suggest an indicator allowing to assess the added
combines to shape a perception of forensic science as being an infallible value of information provided by used traces.
science [1]. By extension, we propose to use utility of the clue in the decision to
Fundamentally opposed to this view is the depiction in recent use traces as an aid to make more appropriate, conscious and targeted
studies, challenging forensic science in its nature (e.g. [2]) and the effec- triaging decisions. Once traces have been collected at the crime scene,
tiveness of its contribution to the criminal justice process [3,4]. In re- a decision has to be made about which traces are used. The factors in-
sponse to this commotion, several studies attempted to measure the volved in this decision are not clearly identified or explicitly stated in
efficiency or effectiveness of forensic science using a range of different the corresponding literature.
indicators, essentially considering an economical, sociological or polic- In the following section the current state of the literature regarding
ing perspective (e.g. [5–7]). However, these indicators adopt an external performance indicators, their connection with the definition of forensic
science and the factors involved in the decision to use traces will be
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +41 21 692 46 21; fax: +41 21 692 46 05. discussed. In Section 3, the concept of utility in general and utility of
E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Bitzer). the clue will be presented and discussed in the context of performance

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2015.05.005
1355-0306/© 2015 The Chartered Society of Forensic Sciences. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
510 S. Bitzer et al. / Science and Justice 55 (2015) 509–513

measurement and decision making processes. Finally, a case example is specialist advisor), without following a reasoning process or selection
presented to illustrate the application of the suggested concept. criteria, and hence, do not acknowledge their substantial contribution
to the complete process [23]. Forensic scientists can assume several dif-
2. Literature review ferent roles corresponding to differentiated needs imposed by the struc-
tural or procedural constraints. Basically, the role is threefold: (1) the
In early studies, police use of forensic science, in terms of number of investigation needs to be carried out and the relevant information
scenes visited and number of traces collected and submitted by scene of found, (2) the information needs to be structured and finally (3) the
crime officers, was scrutinised. Albeit variable between different police traces need to be considered in the light of competing hypotheses of in-
forces [8], the use of forensic science was found to be consistently low terest [24]. Furthermore, the criminal phenomenon at hand needs to be
[9–12]. In 2009, Schroeder and White [13] reinforced this view in their considered and understood and the gained information integrated into
study of the utilisation of biological samples in homicide cases from the investigation process. This may be the definition of the roles, consid-
1996 to 2003. The Pathfinder Project [14] and the DNA Expansion Pro- ering the “procedural” integration model of forensic science and police
gramme [15] tried to address precisely this problem by promoting the investigation described by Williams [21]. This “expert collaboration”
use of traces as a mean to improve policing. However, their conclusions approach recognises and acknowledges the utility of expert knowledge
were contradictory, with one stating that an increased use was influenc- and the potential insufficiency of knowledge on the side of the users of
ing the number of identifications and the other one stating that the in- the service to offer informed assessments of its quality and its investiga-
crease did not measure an effect on case outcomes. Adderley et al. tive potential [21, p.772]. The roles and competences diverge in regard
[16] found that an increase in the number of collected biological traces to the integration system chosen by institutions and organisations [21,
would not “dilute the matching rates for DNA samples” [16, p.176] 25]. In addition, this dissociation of the roles is accompanied by a hier-
and, similarly, Roman et al. [5] determined that an increased use of archy established between the investigator and the scientist.
rapid DNA for burglary cases allowed to increase the number of suspect The commonly understood role of forensic science as the assistance
identifications. of court through the application of scientific techniques in an adversar-
Another way of attempting to measure the effectiveness of forensic ial system is prone to dramatically understate the potential of traces as it
science and its databases is by looking at the possible increase in the focuses on the judicial phase only. It epitomises forensic science as the
number of identifications [14]. While this factor appears to be pertinent analysis of the trace and the interpretation of the results, without con-
at first, especially when comparing to the invested resources (e.g. num- sidering the reasoning processes and all the decisions involved. Most
ber of scenes visited), it constitutes an oversimplified approach to mea- of these studies deal with the anglo–saxon system, or more precisely
sure the value of forensic science. From the decision to send a crime with the British system, which has been influenced by the Home Office
scene investigator to scene to the identification of a suspect by traces, and its policing strategies. In particular, the roles and responsibilities of
multiple decisions need to be made: which scenes are investigated by the actors in the system change depending on the system at hand. These
the crime scene investigator, which traces are collected, which traces concerns, the controversies in the definition of forensic science, the in-
are analysed, which techniques are used in the laboratory to analyse tegration model as well as the use of purely quantitative, narrowed per-
the traces, are the results of the analysis sent to the national database, formance indicators (“forensic yield”, “forensic matches”, lack of validity
etc. When considering the aforementioned ratio, all these decision and reliability), have already been raised by Williams and Weetman
steps are reduced to one measure and confound different indicators of [26] when they described the weaknesses of the current measurement
effectiveness on different stages of the decision making process. of support of forensic science to homicide investigation in the UK. The
As the infrequent use of forensic science was perceived as being definition of forensic science and the integration model chosen are
problematic, its reasons were examined. Generally, several explanations intertwined subjects and as such, are difficult to be changed. However,
were proposed, including the lack of knowledge of police investigators the third weakness mentioned is the choice of the performance
when it comes to the potential value or utility of traces for their indicator.
case [12,17–19], which could possibly be comprehensible in the In order to measure the effectiveness of forensic science, some au-
late 1980s or the early 1990s (due to the recent development of DNA thors concentrated on the predictive power of trace processing on
analysis). However, by 2009, this conclusion still found support [20], case outcomes. Although the proportion of submitted traces was close
which is more surprising considering the large publicity of forensic sci- to 100% for homicide cases, their influence on any of the stages of the
ence and the strong result focused culture of police officers (i.e. investi- process (arrest, referral, charging, conviction) remained ambiguous/
gators rapidly integrate new techniques that deliver decisive results). undefined; two groups of authors working with the same dataset ob-
Nevertheless, this lack of knowledge might not have had the same tained differing results and reached different conclusions [3,7]. Hence,
reasons at this point in time. Inadequate communication, already men- the results and conclusions seem to be more influenced by the chosen
tioned in 1987, might be at the core of the problem [17]. The infrequent methodology than by the data itself. Other factors, such as case charac-
use might be caused by a lack of awareness of the available techniques teristics, seem to be involved in case clearance. An interesting result was
on the side of the police, and a lack of awareness of the available traces that most robberies went unsolved due to a lack of witnesses [3]. Hence,
on the part of the laboratory scientists. Such inadequacy in communica- case circumstances and police strategies (in finding and questioning
tion may be favoured by the model of integration of forensic science witnesses) seem to be the most influential factor regarding the detec-
practice in the enquiry. As described by Williams [21], a “structural” dis- tion of robbery cases. Similar results were found for homicide
sociation of forensic science from police may enhance this knowledge cases [4,27–29]. All these studies determined that police actions or the
gap. An extreme picture that could be drawn is that scientists, separated offender's attitude were indicators for homicide clearance. In the
from police investigation, have to analyse what police investigators ask study performed by Brodeur [4], scientific evidence helped to arrest a
them to. Hence, the decision to use traces with all the dimensions in- suspect in a mere 2% of cases. Whereas, in the study performed by
volved in this decision (which traces, when, how, by which means Mucchielli [28], in only 7% of cases, physical traces collected from
and why) lies essentially with police investigators. This lack of commu- crime scenes were the crucial element leading to the offender(s).
nication and knowledge might therefore cause the tendency for the use These findings conducted Mucchielli to emphasise the determining
of traces as means of last resort [13,22]. role of these traces, noting that they had played only a secondary role
All the latter concerns may be explained by a misconception of the in other cases. He stated further that physical traces were more often
roles and responsibilities of the different actors in the criminal justice than not getting a value once the scenario had been established, so
system. Laboratory scientists perceive crime scene investigators as their role would be again indirect. This would confirm the essential
mere evidence collectors (as opposed to forensic investigators or yet not determinative role of the work on the crime scene.
 S. Bitzer et al. / Science and Justice 55 (2015) 509–513 511

The significance of a potential influence of forensic science on the or less reliability and certainty. Evidence is another state of this same
criminal justice process is still vague, as it appeared to be the mere pres- object, but its consideration by the judge for court purposes makes it
ence of traces (with examination taking place after arrest) being predic- measurable and a link to the case is required [40].
tive for arrest. The question arises if traces are only collected and For a clue to be considered useful, the information retrieved from the
analysed once a suspect is apprehended (direct arrest, e.g. Baskin and trace – the clue – must fulfil three conditions, analogously to the con-
Sommers [30]). Thus, arriving at the conclusion that traces are collected cept of utility defined by Soergel [39]. Not only does it (1) have to be re-
and analysed in order to build the case against the suspect [17,18]. This lated to the case in question, and (2) be understood by its user (e.g.
would also mean that if no suspect is immediately found, investigators investigator), but also, (3) it has to shed light on a question in the
do not see the need to collect or proceed to the analysis of traces for case, without being redundant. The clue needs to add new and valuable
the progression of the case [3]. Similarly, in studies examining the information to the case, which contribute to the processing of the case.
unanalysed traces in rape and property crime cases [31,32], the main It is this second part which is important to consider. The fact that the in-
reason for the non-submission of traces was stated as being the lack of formation is new will not necessarily bring more information to the case
a suspect in the case. However, a large proportion of agencies responded (e.g. processing a fingermark left by a single offender when its identity
also that they were not sure about the usefulness of forensic evidence has already been confirmed by the analysis and comparison of a biolog-
(in their case). This result can be interpreted in two ways: either this ical trace is redundant when considering the sole identification poten-
constitutes a lack of knowledge of the investigators about the usefulness tial of both traces). In addition, this information needs to be gained in
of traces in general, or they lucidly (and maybe correctly) assessed the an efficient way, without redundancies (at best). Thus, utility of the
expected utility of the clues in their case, which led to the decision not clue in the context of each specific case is dependent on the information
to submit traces for examination. In general, the question arises on potential of the trace itself, but simultaneously it is contingent on the in-
what grounds the analysed traces are chosen amongst the collected formation already available, through other analyses or the investigation
ones. Furthermore, it remains undetermined if the not submitted traces itself for instance.
are a consequence of an active choice for other traces (e.g. due to a good
understanding of time constraints or preference for other traces) or are 3.1. Performance indicator for forensic science
consciously rejected, for lack of usefulness to their case for instance.
Traces seem to be preferentially chosen by (internal) managerial or Considering the performance indicators that are currently used to
actuarial rules or political pressure (strategic dimension as proposed by measure the performance, the infrequent use of forensic science is con-
Ribaux et al. [33]), as opposed to the consideration of their utility. The sidered as the manifestation of a low performance of the investigators
main reasons to analyse a trace are the urgency of the case, the serious- regarding the use of traces [41].
ness of the offence, the presence of a suspect and the prosecutor or judi- However, a correct appreciation of the usefulness of clues to the case
cial request [34,35]. However, the simple facilitation of the use does not might appropriately limit or redistribute their use in the investigation.
necessarily lead to a more appropriate use of traces. Hence, the consid- As this factor has rarely been taken into account when studying the
eration of utility of the clue could lead to a more conscious and concert- use of forensic science and their reasons, it remains, thus far, only a con-
ed use of traces, and thus, to a rationalisation in resource consumption. jecture. Notwithstanding, the limited definition of forensic science that
Indeed, a pilot project carried out in Belgium showed that in cases is often promoted (leading to its use for court purposes only) demon-
where a forensic consultant was present during the reunions between strates the incomplete understanding of the diversity of usefulness of
the prosecutor, investigators and analysts, the choice of traces was traces in the criminal inquiry, even in serious crimes [42].
more effective and efficient. The forensic consultant's function was to By 1996, the Association of Chief Police Officers [43] already sug-
advice on the choice of traces to be analysed regarding the pertinence gested to assess the contribution of forensic science from the inside by
or, better, their utility in the case [36]. considering the usefulness of the analysis as performance indicator for
forensic science in the inquiry. Although this concept is closely linked
3. Utility of the clue to the utility of the clue, it is limited by the fact that it assesses the use-
fulness of the result, as opposed to the utility of the information re-
Two concepts related to the measurement of the contribution or im- trieved from that result.
pact of a discipline in a (decision-making) process are efficiency and ef- In their 5-year project, Julian et al. [44] attempted to “identify when,
fectiveness. If efficiency corresponds to doing things right and where and how forensic science can add value to criminal investiga-
effectiveness to doing the right things, what we would really be looking tions, court trials and justice outcomes” [44, p.217]. Indeed, the useful-
for is the combination of both: doing the right thing right. This brings ness of forensic science is much more diverse than solely for
us to utility and expected utility, which have long been used in decision identification purposes or production of evidence. None of the studies
theory [37,38]. The definition used in the context of this study is based accounted for the number of cases in which clues, provided by the use
on Soergel's definition in information theory [39]. An entity is consid- of traces, guided the police interrogation of the suspect, for instance. Al-
ered topically relevant for a question, when it sheds light on the latter. though this utility is indirect, it is of great importance to take into ac-
It is considered pertinent, if it is “relevant and if it is appropriate for count when assessing the beneficial contribution of forensic science to
the person, that is, if the person can understand the document and the overall criminal justice process. Williams and Weetman [26] refer
apply the information gained. […] An entity has utility if it is pertinent to this concept as “contextual utilities”, and which measurement re-
and makes a useful contribution beyond what the user knew already” quires the “consideration of the necessary, typical and exceptional
(see [39], p.590). achievements” at each of the stages of the judicial process “as well as
Before adapting this concept to the context of forensic science, the the practical contingencies to which they are subject” [26, pp.383–384].
difference between the notions of trace, clue and evidence used in this The implementation of utility of the clue as performance indicator
study needs to be clarified. Traces are silent witnesses, which are can also be seen as the utility a posteriori of the used traces, once the
vectors of information. This information is not directly intelligible or analyses have been performed, their results are known, context infor-
seizable, it needs to be perceived and considered in the context of the mation has been clearly determined (e.g. number of suspects), etc. An-
different elements such as the case, the background and the surface other aspect of performance measurement is the consideration of the
on which the trace is left. Traces are ephemeral remnants of past events, expected utility (projection) of the non-used traces, without knowledge
like fading symptoms of an illness, whose causes remain to be clarified. of their analysis outcome, in comparison with the expected utility of the
The information gained through these traces – the clues – are at the used traces. The possibility, by extension, to evaluate the expected util-
basis of the reconstruction process of past events, shape it, with more ity before analysis that could be useful in the decision-making process
512 S. Bitzer et al. / Science and Justice 55 (2015) 509–513

regarding the use of traces will be further discussed in the following is used refers to the question of what information one wants or needs to
section. gain through the use of this trace. The expected utility of the clue needs
to be considered in order to understand why some traces are chosen to
3.2. Decision factor in the decision to use traces be used over others. At the same time, the decision to use a trace is in-
fluenced by factors facilitating or impeding the use of a trace. By exten-
In the processing of traces, from crime scene to court, several deci- sion, the decision not to use a trace is also of great interest as it remains
sion steps are encountered leading to substantial triaging and attrition unclear if the traces, that are not used, are the mere consequence of the
of traces along the process. At first, the trace, once it has been detected, decision for other traces or if it is deliberately chosen not to use these
needs to be collected. This first step depends on multiple factors such as traces.
the quality of the traces on the crime scene or objects judged by the How utility of the clue is implemented in a decision-making process
crime scene investigator and is probably influenced by the anticipated in the investigation remains to be clarified. Many factors influence the
utility of this clue to the case. Then, the decision to use traces in the in- perception of the utility of the various clues, like for instance, the inves-
quiry comes into play, with a wide understanding of the term use: from tigators themselves, the subjective judgement of the quality of the
the use of the information retrievable from the trace as such (without traces, etc.
analysis), to the analysis and the use of the results after analysis. Finally,
the decision to use traces for the production of evidence to court arises, 3.3. Case example
but is of lesser interest in the scope of this study.
While collecting large amounts of traces at crime scenes would be An example is given to showcase the utility of the clues in the case,
understandable, investigators then have to make a choice of traces to and their changing nature depending on the available information. It
be further exploited. It is difficult to defend the decision to limit the mimics, in a simplified manner, a combination of situations of real cases.
number of items or traces to be collected at the crime scene, as conse- Let's consider a robbery case (one offender seen on surveillance
quently, these traces would not be available for use and analysis. How- camera images) with one shoe mark and two biological traces collected
ever, it is likely that the decision to collect certain traces is already at the crime scene. The general expected utility of the shoe mark is to
guided by the anticipation of the traces to be used later in the enquiry. link cases with each other. One biological trace is analysed to identify
The other – obvious – relation between the decision to collect traces the offender The decision for one of the two biological traces was
and the decision to use them is the chronological one: only what is made on the basis of the quality of the trace, the matrix, the pertinence
available can be used. An available and limited set of traces ensues as of the trace, etc. The analysis of the general pattern of the shoe mark
the result of the decision to collect certain traces but not others and in- permits, already at the crime scene, to give information to the enquiry
fluences the decision to use them. in terms of shoe brand. The course of the offender does not need to be
The triaging decision is especially important when handling large reconstructed by the shoe marks, as the surveillance camera images
amounts of traces with limited resources. As the question of efficiency are available and already provide a detailed sequence of the offender's
and effectiveness of forensic science is increasingly of interest due to fi- actions. This sequence of actions can help choose pertinent traces,
nancial pressure, this decision phase becomes the focal point of the ma- which can generally be considered a form of utility of the shoe marks.
terial trace processing. Although the decision to use a trace in order to The result of the analysis of the biological trace is positive and a pro-
extract information from it has never been the subject of a study thus file is yielded (different from that of the victim). However, no DNA
far, it is, together with the factors leading to it, of utmost importance re- match could be provided when comparing with the National DNA
garding the usefulness of forensic science in the investigation. This deci- database. Hence, the utility a posteriori is null, except for its exclusion
sion includes several factors such as which traces are chosen to be used, potential. The expected utility of the not analysed biological trace is
who makes this decision, at what stage in the inquiry process and, why. low, as the profile already available can reasonably be attributed to
As such, the utility of the clue is dependent on the roles and responsibil- the offender due to the high pertinence of the trace. If the pertinence
ities of the actors in the system. Due to the differing access to informa- would not be given, it could still be reasonable to wait until the result
tion, the perceived utility of the clue can change. Furthermore, of the first analysis is obtained before analysing a second trace (to pre-
external factors, similar to the strategic, physical, immediate and crimi- vent redundancy).
nal environments of the case as proposed by Ribaux et al. [33] for the de- In a second robbery case, the offender is arrested immediately after
cision to attend and how to search a crime scene, are also influencing the offence, due to police investigation. In the audition, the offender de-
this decision. nies any implication in other cases. At the second crime scene, one shoe
The utility of a clue can thus be manifold and depends on several mark and one biological trace are collected. The analysis and compari-
factors. The principal and most obvious utility is, of course, son of the shoe mark reveal a possible link with the first robbery case.
individualisation or corroboration of a suspect. However, in many The biological trace is not analysed. However, a buccal swab of the
cases, it can be important to consider also the intelligence component offender is performed and analysed. A DNA match with the biological
of the information or the reconstruction of the micro sequence of the trace from the first robbery case is yielded. Confronted with this result
events [20,45]. In this same direction, Tilley and Townsley [46] sug- during audition, the offender confesses to having committed the first
gested an “organic” integration model. They emphasised that the “re- robbery, too. The utility a posteriori of this biological trace changes
duction of volume crime, the quick elimination of the innocent and then to aid in the inquiry/audition and confirmation of the implication
the conviction of the guilty” are optimal contributions of forensic sci- of the offender in the case. The not analysed biological trace from the
ence and need to be reached by “understanding and managing the second robbery has an expected utility of confirmation of the implica-
human, social side of the forensic process” [46, p.376]. tion of the offender (validation of the confession and corroboration of
The utility of the clue can be put on a same level with the aims of its the possible link unveiled by the shoe marks).
uses, as it is the use of the trace that may lead to a gain new information.
One example of this utility is for the provision of intelligence: “In addi- 4. Conclusion
tion [to be decisive or at least relevant], even where such artefacts are
assumed not be usable for the construction of a case against an actual Effectiveness and efficiency measures used thus far have shown to
or potential suspect for a particular crime, scene examiners still have present several weaknesses which reveal a limited understanding of
to consider whether or not their construction and analysis may contrib- the manifold nature and role of forensic science and an outside assess-
ute to the collation of police intelligence relevant to current or future in- ment of the contribution of forensic science to the inquiry (i.e. econom-
vestigations of other crimes” [21, pp.763–764]. The reasons why a trace ical, sociological, or criminological view in an actuarial perspective (flow
 S. Bitzer et al. / Science and Justice 55 (2015) 509–513 513

analysis)). The introduction of the concept of utility of the clue, defined [6] S. Kelty, R. Julian, Identifying the skills and attributes of good crime scene personnel,
Australas. Polic. 2 (2010) 40–41.
as added value of information obtained by the use of traces, is suggested [7] J. Peterson, I. Sommers, D. Baskin, D. Johnson, The Role and Impact of Forensic
as performance indicator of forensic science in the investigation in order Evidence in the Criminal Justice Process, National Institute of Justice, 2010.
[8] H. McCulloch, Police use of forensic science, Police Research Series1996.
to evaluate its contribution from an internal, clinical perspective, grasp- [9] B. Parker, The status of forensic science in the administration of criminal justice, Rev.
ing the whole variety of its contribution. This concept is intrinsic to the Jurid. Univ. P. R. 32 (1963) 405–420.
traces themselves, it depends on their information potential in the spe- [10] J.L. Peterson, The utilization of criminalistics services by the police, U.S. Department
of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, National Institute of Law
cific situation. In addition, it depends on the other information available Enforcement and Criminal Justice1974.
at the time of decision-making. In this case-based approach, the utility [11] P.W. Greenwood, J.M. Chaiken, J. Petersilia, L. Prusoff, The criminal investigation pro-
cess, Observations and Analysis, vol. III, Rand Corporation, 1975.
can be assessed in the light of the available information, once the
[12] J.E. Eck, Solving Crimes: The Investigation of Burglary and Robbery, Police Executive
analyses have been carried out. The actuarial approach proposed in Research Forum, Washington, DC, 1983.
earlier studies allows for a global view of the use of forensic science [13] D.A. Schroeder, M.D. White, Exploring the use DNA evidence in homicide investiga-
tions: implications for detective work and case clearance, Police Q. 12 (2009)
through means of statistics, where a single (or group of predefined) 319–342.
indicator(s) is measured for a whole set of cases. However, a more clin- [14] J. Burrows, R. Tarling, A. Mackie, H. Poole, B. Hodgons, Forensic science pathfinder
ical, case-based approach would allow to capture the whole variety of project: evaluating increased forensic activity in two English police forces, Home
Office Online Report 46/05, 2005.
the different uses of the traces in order to measure the real contribution [15] Home Office, DNA Expansion Programme 2000–2005: Reporting Achievement,
of forensic science to the judicial system. Through a detailed study of the 2005.
[16] R. Adderley, M. Townsley, J. Bond, Use of data mining techniques to model crime
decision-making process in specific cases, a picture of the contribution scene investigator performance, Knowl.-Based Syst. 20 (2007) 170–176.
of clues to the inquiry can be drawn and might be generalised by recur- [17] M. Ramsay, The Effectiveness of the Forensic Science Service, Her Majesty's Statuary
ring utilisation schemes. The suggested methodology is a case-based Office, London, 1987.
[18] F. Horvath, R. Meesig, The criminal investigation process and the role of forensic ev-
approach by observing ongoing cases in the investigation phase. Fur- idence: a review of empirical findings, J. Forensic Sci. 41 (1996) 963–969.
thermore, the information obtained can be completed by interviews [19] N. Tilley, A. Ford, Forensic Science and Crime Investigation, Home Office, London,
with key actors in the criminal justice system. 1996.
[20] A. Barclay, Using forensic science in major crime inquiries, in: J. Fraser, R. Williams
By extension, an application of this concept can also be conceived in (Eds.), Handbook of Forensic Science, Cullompton, UK 2009, pp. 337–358.
the decision to analyse traces, once they have been collected at the [21] R. Williams, Policing and forensic science, in: T. Newburn (Ed.), Handbook of
Policing, Willan, Cullompton 2007, pp. 760–793.
crime scene. The anticipation or estimation of their utility is proposed [22] J. Burrows, R. Tarling, Measuring the impact of forensic science in detecting burglary
to be a factor to take into account when triaging the set of traces. How- and autocrime offences, Sci. Justice 44 (2004) 217–222.
ever, the expected utility is assessed with more difficulty, as many fac- [23] A. Ludwig, J. Fraser, R. Williams, Crime scene examiners and volume crime investi-
gations: an empirical study of perception and practice, Forensic Sci. Policy Manag.
tors still remain unclear (such as the number of suspects for instance). Int. J. 3 (2012) 53–61.
Furthermore, depending on the other information available at the [24] O. Ribaux, A. Baylon, C. Roux, O. Delémont, E. Lock, C. Zingg, P. Margot, Intelligence-
led crime scene processing. Part I: forensic intelligence, Forensic Sci. Int. 195 (2010)
time of deciding which traces to use, the added value of information
10–16.
gained through the use (analysis and further exploitation) of traces [25] J.G. Fraser, Not science…not support: forensic solutions to investigative problems,
can be balanced against each other and thus, a more informed, con- Sci. Justice 40 (2000) 127–130.
[26] R. Williams, J. Weetman, Enacting forensics in homicide investigations, Polic. Soc. 23
scious and focused decision could be made. (2013) 376–389.
[27] C. Wellford, J. Cronin, Clearing up homicide clearance rates, Natl. Inst. Justice J.
(2000) 2–7.
Novelty statement [28] L. Mucchielli, L'élucidation des homicides: de l'enchantement technologique à
l'analyse du travail des enquêteurs de police judiciaire, Déviance Soc. 30 (2006)
91–119.
The contribution of forensic science in the judicial practice is cur- [29] T.G. Keel, J.P. Jarvis, Y.E. Muirhead, An exploratory analysis of factors affecting homi-
rently being scrutinised. Many indicators have been considered in this cide investigations, Homicide Stud. 13 (2009) 50–68.
[30] D. Baskin, I. Sommers, The influence of forensic evidence on the case outcomes of
perspective trying to assess the contribution of forensic science. These
assault and robbery incidents, Crim. Justice Policy Rev. (2011) 1–25.
indicators are mainly oriented to measure the performance or efficiency [31] N.P. Lovrich, T.C. Pratt, M.J. Gaffney, C.L. Johnson, C.H. Asplen, L.H. Hurst, T.M.
of forensic science, primarily in the perspective of the production of ev- Schellberg, National Forensic DNA Study Report, Final Report, US Department of
Justice, Washington, DC, 2004.
idence for court decisions. We argue that such indicators do not suitably [32] K.J. Strom, M.J. Hickman, Unanalyzed evidence in law-enforcement agencies,
capture all levels of the diverse contributions of forensic science in the Criminol. Public Policy 9 (2010) 381–404.
criminal justice system in general and the investigation in particular. [33] O. Ribaux, A. Baylon, E. Lock, O. Delémont, C. Roux, C. Zingg, P. Margot, Intelligence-
led crime scene processing. Part II: intelligence and crime scene examination, Foren-
Hence, we suggest the introduction of an original concept, the utility sic Sci. Int. 199 (2010) 63–71.
of the clue, as an internal assessment factor. Furthermore, a second ap- [34] J.L. Peterson, S. Mihajlovic, M. Gilliland, Forensic Evidence and the Police: The Effects
of Scientific Evidence on Criminal Investigations, US Government Printing Office,
plication is provided. Utility of the clue could be used as guiding factor Washington, DC, 1984.
in the decision making process when triaging traces in the investigative [35] S.-A. Bradbury, A. Feist, The use of forensic science in volume crime investigations: a
phase. review of the research literature, Home Office Online Report 43/05, 2005.
[36] B. Renard, P. Jeuniaux, Coûts et Pratiques autour des expertises ADN en matière
pénale, INCC, 2012.
[37] A. Marshall, The Principles of Economics, 8th edition Macmillan and Co., London,
Acknowledgments 1920.
[38] L. von Mises, Human Action. A Treatise on Economics, Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1998.
The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their [39] D. Soergel, Indexing and retrieval performance: the logical evidence, J. Am. Soc. Inf.
Sci. 45 (1994) 589–599.
valuable comments that helped improve the quality of the article. [40] D. Hazard, P. Margot, Forensic science culture, Encyclopedia of Criminology and
Criminal Justice, Springer 2014, pp. 1782–1795.
[41] A. Ludwig, J. Fraser, Effective use of forensic science in volume crime investigations:
References identifying recurring themes in the literature, Sci. Justice 54 (2014) 81–88.
[42] O. Delémont, E. Lock, O. Ribaux, Forensic science and criminal investigation,
[1] C. Roux, R. Julian, S. Kelty, O. Ribaux, Forensic science effectiveness, in: G. Bruinsma, Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Springer 2014, pp. 1754–1763.
D. Weisburd (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Springer [43] Association of Chief Police Officers, Using Forensic Science Effectively, ACPO, 1996.
2013, pp. 1795–1805. [44] R.D. Julian, S.F. Kelty, C. Roux, P. Woodman, J. Robertson, A. Davey, R. Hayes, P.
[2] National Academy of Sciences, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: Margot, A. Ross, H. Sibly, R. White, What is the value of forensic science? An over-
A Path Forward, National Research Council, 2009. view of the effectiveness of forensic science in the Australian criminal justice system
[3] D. Baskin, I. Sommers, The influence of forensic evidence on the case outcomes of project, Aust. J. Forensic Sci. 43 (2011) 217–229.
homicide incidents, J. Crim. Just. 38 (2010) 1141–1149. [45] O. Ribaux, S.J. Walsh, P. Margot, The contribution of forensic science to crime analy-
[4] J.-P. Brodeur, L'enquête criminelle, Criminologie 38 (2005) 39–64. sis and investigation: forensic intelligence, Forensic Sci. Int. 156 (2006) 171–181.
[5] J. Roman, S. Reid, J. Reid, A. Chaflin, W. Adams, C. Knight, The DNA Field Experiment: [46] N. Tilley, M. Townsley, Forensic science in UK policing: strategies, tactics and effec-
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of the Use of DNA in the Investigation of High-volume tiveness, in: J. Fraser (Ed.), Handbook of Forensic Science, Willan, Cullompton 2009,
Crimes, Urban Institute — Justice Policy Center, Washington, DC, 2008. pp. 359–379.