Category Archives: Forensics

THE JFK ASSASSINATION FOR DUMMIES

Here’s the Foreword for my upcoming book, The JFK Assassination For Dummies.

JFKAt 12:30 pm on Friday, November 22, 1963, United States President John F. Kennedy was cold-bloodedly shot in the back by a lone nut with a cheap rifle from a tall building.

This straight-forward crime was solved in a few hours. Yet, five decades later, the facts of JFK’s homicide are doubted by over sixty percent of the American public. There’s no doubt that strands of fate caused Lee Harvey Oswald to squeeze the trigger, however misinformation about what really went down in Dealey Plaza still darkens President Kennedy’s legacy.

JFK Limo 2I was seven when JFK was shot. I was in a one-room school in Manitoba, Canada, and ‘Teacher’ was late returning from lunch. I remember how upset ‘Teacher’ was, telling us that President Kennedy had been assassinated. I didn’t know who JFK was, but figured he must be important as ‘Teacher’ was crying and dismissed us early. When I got home, people were gathering as we were one of few families with a television set. I’ll never forget how distraught the adults were.

Conspiracy Theories were starting by 2 pm. Who was behind it? The Russians? Castro? The CIA? Mafia? A military coup? Maybe even Johnson. Someone said that a Communist had been caught and I was terrified. I was sure the bomb would drop – after all, I’d practised Communist bomb drills under my elementary school desk. Then, on Sunday, I watched Ruby shoot Oswald – live on TV.

JFK WCIn 1973, I did a report on a conspiracy theory book called Rush To Judgement which was a harsh critique of the Warren Report. This ‘Teacher’ challenged me to look deeper as apparently the Warren Report came to a different conclusion. From then, I read everything I could on the JFK case and was fascinated by it. Problem was – all that was available was CT (Conspiracy Theorist), not LN (Lone Nut) stuff. Nowhere could you get this Warren Report, so I jumped on the CT wagon and became a life-long student of the assassination.

In 1978, I joined the Royal Canadian Mounted Police – the RCMP or Mounties. Because I was a curious risk-taker, I worked my way into Emergency Response or SWAT operations and the homicide squad. Also in 1978, the US House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) re-investigated the JFK case and officially concluded that there was a high probability of conspiracy. That re-enforced my CT suspicions, but I was way too busy solving current murders and shooting guns to follow up on JFK. In the back of my mind, though, I kept wondering how such an important investigation like JFK could be so screwed-up and whether the LN finding just might be true.

CE399By 1991, I’d become a recognized firearms expert and had the good fortune to work with an American colleague who’d personally handled JFK exhibits during the HSCA investigation. He gave me a ‘JFK Ballistics 101’ which opened my eyes on the science of the Single Bullet Theory. My CT suspicions changed.

In 2000, I got the Internet and downloaded the Warren Report. After reading the narrative and a good chunk of the Appendices, including witness testimonies, my response was Holy Fuck! They investigated the shit out of this thing! Okay. There’s way more to this than CT bullshit.

About the same time I left the police murder & gun business to become an investigative coroner. That’s an entirely different realm of science and the combination of disciplines solidified my ability to understand and impartially interpret evidence. In other words… cut through bullshit and determine what’s fact and what’s not.

JFK Dealey4So… aside from building my accreditations in firearms, homicides, forensics, and autopsies… I devoted the next decade and a half of free time to understanding the truth about what went down in Dealey. What I’ve found is that the facts are simple, but the root cause and scientific evidence is complex.

And fascinating!

I’ve come full circle in JFK culture – from LN to CT to LN. I’ve now evolved into ‘Teacher’ as I’ve the ability to instruct other students of the JFK Assassination on what truly happened and where to find credible information to understand the facts. Somehow I don’t think the JFK case is ever going to be closed and I don’t want future students to put in the time, and get sucked-in,  like I have.

JFK Snipers nest 5I believe that the JFK Assassination was one of history’s great moments and the facts are what JFK students must seek. Once facts are established, then truth can be known. This book cuts through bullshit and helps you understand what really went down in Dealey Plaza.

I hope you enjoy The JFK Assassination For Dummies.

Garry Rodgers, Vancouver, Canada, March 2015

POLICE SHOOTINGS – TO WOUND OR TO KILL?

AD11The shooting death of unarmed, black teenager, Michael Brown, by white police officer, Darren Wilson, in Ferguson, Missouri, on August 9, 2014, caused an international uproar and a microscopic evaluation of law enforcement’s use of force parameter.

I’m not going into details of this particular, tragic event, but I can say from personal experience what takes place in the training and execution of deadly force application.

AD12Regular police officers undergo a thorough, basic training in the use of their service weapons and in the evaluation of situations where they may be required to use a lethal response. Most officers graduate the academy with a reasonable proficiency with their sidearm and perhaps a shotgun and carbine rifle. They go through yearly qualifications to maintain their skill and, thankfully, most go through their entire service without ever firing a shot.

Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) or Emergency Response Teams (ERT), like I served on, are trained to a significantly higher degree of proficiency, but the principles of using deadly force are the same.

AD2All officers are taught to assess their response to a dangerous situation by applying the Use Of Force Continuum. This is graphed out in either a lineal or a circular model and is a standard that provides guidelines as to how much force may be used against a resisting subject in a given situation.

The assessment process has the officer perceiving the incident and considering the tactical response they need to evoke. Perception ranges from a cooperative subject, to one who is passively resisting, actively resisting, becoming assaultive, or presenting grievous bodily harm or death to the officer.

AD3The officer’s tactical response can vary from simple communication, to soft or hard physical control, to the use of intermediate weapons such as the baton, pepper spray or Taser, right to the lethal force of shooting the subject. This is all fine and well in the classroom but in Real Life and on Real Street, this stuff can go down in seconds.

I don’t know how many times I’ve heard someone say “Couldn’t the police have just shot to wound, not to kill?” Well, that’s just not a reality given that the average police shootings occur within seven feet and in under two seconds.

The basic principle of use-of-force training is to condition a person so they’ll respond appropriately in a situation where they have little time to think. When a situation hits the danger level which requires a police officer to pull the trigger, there’s no time left to gamble on something fancy.

Contrary to popular belief, police officers are not trained to shoot to kill.

AD17They’re trained to neutralize the subject and the most efficient way to do this is to aim for the center of body mass. Not the head. Not the elbow. Not the knee.  Not the groin. And not to shoot the gun out of the bad guy’s hand.

The center of mass, or ‘CX’ as it’s known on the firing range, is the easiest to hit and has the quickest effect in putting the subject down and out of commission. It’s where the vital organs are and where the central nervous system is most vulnerable.

Very few police shootings are found to be an unjustified use of force. In fact, many subjects survive a police bullet. The situation in Ferguson, Missouri, may be debatable about its justification, but all are in agreement that it was tragic.

AD13I don’t believe there’s a police officer out there in their right mind who wants to get into a gun-fight. Believe me, they’re no fun, and when they happen there’s virtually no time to react. That’s why cops are trained to defend themselves, or others, by shooting at the largest target.

Here’s a link to the Police Policy Studies Council which is a credible group of combined departments that formulate policy and direction on the use of force, among many other law enforcement issues:

http://www.theppsc.org/

5 WAYS SHERLOCK HOLMES SHAPED MODERN FORENSICS

“In solving a problem of this sort, the grand thing is to be able to reason backward.” 

AC1So wrote Sir Arthur Conan Doyle as his literary counterpart, Sherlock Holmes, in A Study in Scarlet. Doyle was a scientist and a trained physician, so when he imagined the great detective, he used science to set him apart from other crime practitioners.

Where a policeman of the day would round up the usual suspects and beat a confession out of an unlucky bloke, Holmes employed deduction, the scientific method, and an acute sense of observation. Here’s five of his techniques that were ahead of his time.

1. Detective work.

 “I am glad of all the details … whether they seem to you to be relevant or not.”
– The Adventure of the Copper Beeches

AC4The fictional Holmes revelled in tiny details, and caught everyone by surprise by defining a subject with details relating to height, weight, gait, carrying a load, occupation and other surprising summaries simply by observing a wet foot print in a garden. He also explained how the evidence led to his accurate conclusion. And when the perpetrator was finally discovered and captured, the physical description was uncanny.

In addition, his ability to ‘reason backwards’ (looking at the criminal act and working his way backwards to lead him to evidence) helped guide him to a conclusion, a motive, and a culprit.

2. Fingerprints.

 “As you may know, no two human fingerprints are ever alike.”
– The Brass Elephant

AC6Holmes identified and used fingerprints initially in The Sign of Four, published in 1890. Scotland Yard did not adapt fingerprint recovery, comparison, and identification process until almost 11 years after The Sign of Four was published. He did not use fingerprints as the defining evidence, however — generally, the case was irrefutably solved by a variety of clues leading to the correct solution.

In The Adventure of the Norwood Builder, Inspector Lestrade thought he had his murderer when he was able to match a bloody print to John Hector McFarlane, an obvious suspect. Holmes was able to prove that MacFarlane was innocent.

Today, fingerprints are a standard method of identification for human individuals. Now stored in computer databases, analyzed and compared within seconds, fingerprints still require corroborating evidence to tell the whole story.

3. Ciphers.

 “But what is the use of a cipher message without the cipher?”
– The Valley of Fear

AC11In many cases in Victorian times, clues were hidden in ciphers, or coded messages which required a ‘key’ to ascertain letter substitutions. In The Dancing Men, Holmes analysed 160 separate cyphers, determined that the letter ‘e’ was the most common letter in the English language, and was able to proceed to the answer. In “The Gloria Scott”, he deduced that every third word in lines of gibberish created the message that frightened Old Trevor.

Many of these cipher techniques were applied during the World Wars to decipher messages from the enemy, and law enforcement in many countries have also worked through ciphers using procedures described by Conan Doyle.

4. Footprints.

“Footprints?” ” Yes, footprints.” “A man’s or a woman’s?”
“Mr. Holmes, they were the footprints of a giant hound.”
– The Hound of the Baskervilles

AC10From the very first story in the Holmes series to the 57th story (The Lion’s Mane from 1926), 29 of the 60 stories revealed and solved footprint evidence. Footprints were found in soil, mud, and clay. They were on carpet, in snow, ash, and even on drapes and doors — each mark was worth discussion, each print told a story that was instrumental to the outcome.

Sherlock Holmes ‘wrote’ an educational treatise on the preservation of footprints, entitled “The tracing of footsteps, with some remarks upon the uses of Plaster of Paris as a preserver of impresses”. The techniques so described have become a mainstay in preserving prints of shoes, tires, tools, and other depressions by police departments worldwide.

5. Handwriting.

“We must look for consistency. Where there is a want of it we must suspect deception”
– The Problem of Thor Bridge

In Victorian London, handwriting was more prevalent than it is today.

AC12Holmes was able to deduce many details from the written word. By inspecting the pressure, angle, swirls, and consistency, Holmes could tell the gender, class, and maturity of the author. He could also make determinations about the character of the person whose penmanship was under scrutiny. In The Norwood Builder, Holmes determines by the timing of the imperfections in the scrawl of a will, that it was written aboard a train. Knowing that such an important document would not be transcribed in such a fashion, he correctly assumed duress.

Today, handwriting analysis is used to determine forgeries, psychological profiling, and alterations in handwriting due to the influence of drugs, alcohol, duress, exhaustion, or illness.

The ransom note left at the scene of the JonBenet Ramsey murder is a prime example. It was intensely scrutinized and attempts were made to tie it to one of the parents.

The results remain inconclusive.

*   *   *

AC13This article was originally published by my friends at Forensic Outreach, one of the best forensic education sites on the internet. They’ve now launched a new site called CASE Academy which I’m proud to support.

AC15Doug Filter wrote this article for Forensic Outreach. He’s worked in legal support for three decades, developing visual communication tools that help litigators, prosecutors, and defense attorneys tell stories in court. Doug is an author, presenter, and designer. He’s worked on cases ranging from mapping body locations by interviewing a serial killer to explaining and animating the life style of trout in a water pollution case.

Doug’s speciality is learning scientific, technical, medical and complex case details and then explaining them to an audience of fact finders in a courtroom setting. He’s worked in jurisdictions in North America, South America, and Europe.