Overview of the Investigation Process

Greg,

First I'd like to say your ability to resurrect the Checking Masts-CSA thread was impressive. It had been dormant four over four years so if I affectionately refer to you as Dr. Frankenstein please don't take offense.

Please consider me as one that would like to know more about your investigative process. I don't know if this is accurate or not, but I have heard several times that in the UK if you are going to present cell phone records in Court you will always have to have a cell site analysis.

As you are analyzing I'd like to know several things. Do most law enforcement agencies on your side of the pond have individual Detectives or Units that perform this type of analysis for court? Were most of them trained by you,or are they utilizing a process similar to yours?

What are you trying to prove with your analysis? That the masts in the area of a crime scene were working properly at the time of the incident? The suspects mobile could have/ could not have made calls from X location, or is it something else?

This may be a bit outside the scope of what you will be writing, but let's say I just got hired by a law enforcement agency in the UK. My supervisor hands me a big case and says some guy broke into a jewelry store, but the suspect says he was never there. Preliminary call records show him making a series of calls which were handled by a mast that covers the area around the crime scene. In the UK is there a minimum standard of instruction that I would need to present the call record findings in court? Or, is there a specially trained unit that would handle that aspect of the case. Any information you might have is greatly appreciated.

Cheers!

Overview of the Investigative Process

I am considering the release of a background observation document (based upon knowledge and experience by the contributors) often sought by engaging clients wishing to gain an Overview of the Investigative Process from a UK perspective. The document is free and I am not selling anything. I am not entirely sure how many forum members are interested in or are even involved with the investigation process or the impact on a case investigation. So if you want a copy of this .pdf document I shall work on the principle, Don't Ask Don't Want. The document is emailed, so be sure you have an email address available.

Hello Greg,
Please consider my request for this document, it will be a fantastic opportunity for the forum members. Could you please grant me access to your Mteb blog also?

Thanks
BH.

Ed

I have heard several times that in the UK if you are going to present cell phone records in Court you will always have to have a cell site analysis.

The difficulty with the point you raise is that it is not known in which context the comment was being made to you or whether you have misinterpreted what you may have (over-)heard. There is no implicit or explicit rule in the UK that states presentation of call records demands production of cell site analysis everytime for evey case no matter what. Call records can and are used for many difference purposes in the UK by both prosecution and defence, plaintiff and defendant, and so on. It doesn't automatically follow that cell site analysis will be needed.

As you are analyzing

I am not analysing anything, Ed.

The Overview of the Investigation Process document summarises changing procedures from a UK perspective when obtaining data that might be required for investigating a crime and might be used for evidence.

Do most law enforcement agencies on your side of the pond have individual Detectives or Units that perform this type of analysis for court? Were most of them trained by you,or are they utilizing a process similar to yours?

LEAs have adopted and utilise a range of measures in the acquistion process. The acquistion of evidence during police investigation will depend upon the seriousness of the case. Police Detectives and Police Units are most certainly involved in requesting data, the acqusition and analysis of data for Court.

It is not my job nor a training service, I provide to LEAs, to set standards for them to meet the statutory requirements or create a range of criterion for them to meet their encumbent obligations. The "responsibilities" for that are in UK legislation (Statutes), from the Home Office, LEAs own rules or Court Rulings or a combination of all them will do that. The processes observed in the Overview of the Investigation Process are based upon demarcation of identified "roles"and "responsibilities", "practices" and "procedures".

What are you trying to prove with your analysis? That the masts in the area of a crime scene were working properly at the time of the incident? The suspects mobile could have/ could not have made calls from X location, or is it something else?

None of the above. The purpose of the Overview of the Investigation Process document is as I mentioned earlier. How LEA or independent analysts at first instance identify the data for later analyse is another matter outside of the scope of the Overview of the Investigation Process document.

LEAs have responsibilities and held to account for their acts and omissions as set down and defined by UK legislation (Statutes); rules set by the Home Office; internal aims, objectives and audits LEAs set down or initiate to gauge and understand performance; or Court Rulings arising from review of assessment of acts or omissions; or a combination of all them.

The Overview of the Investigation Process document doesn't highlight the following because it wasn't intended to be included into this particular document. Any training or information given by me through training, in my blogs or at forums etc is designed to assist and shed light on areas of mobile communications science that can form a basis for investigating and identifying potential evidence made available by that science. Omitting or living in denial about parts of the science leads to guesswork. I fully accept it is not possible to know everything about everything. If I need support for that then I find it in the number of contributors in this field, each offering varying observations. Should the information my work reveals goes on to inform how an investigation may make use of it or whether evidence has been missed, then this is a positive way forward.

This may be a bit outside the scope of what you will be writing, but let's say I just got hired by a law enforcement agency in the UK. My supervisor hands me a big case and says some guy broke into a jewelry store, but the suspect says he was never there. Preliminary call records show him making a series of calls which were handled by a mast that covers the area around the crime scene. In the UK is there a minimum standard of instruction that I would need to present the call record findings in court? Or, is there a specially trained unit that would handle that aspect of the case. Any information you might have is greatly appreciated.

The Overview of the Investigation Process document doesn't cover this as the document is about identifying intented processes and procedures and roles and responsibilities before evidence is obtained and what happens with the evidence regarding its handling and identification after it has been acquired.