An officer in Massachusetts was recently arrested for the murder of his wife. He reported it as a suicide. My question is wouldn't they have checked him for gun shot residue? You can easily find the story on the web. I don't want to post it because it's close to some of my family members. It took the state police 17 months before they arrested him. Couldn't the length been shorted with the residue test? I'm just wondering how the process of an investigation like that proceeds. Thanks for any input.
Dave

Wouldn’t they have had to suspect him right away in order to even consider any kind of forensic testing? The police are not going to just randomly test people at every suicide crime scene the get called to. I assume that by the time the suicide story started to fall apart it would have been too late for any kind of GSR Testing.

GSR is tricky. It can be transferred to other people, objects and clothing that had nothing to do with the firing of the weapon. It is also easily removed by simple washing.
While GSR may be valid evidence, it is not foolproof.

They should have just got the security camera footage from the gas station down the street, zoomed in on the reflection in a hubcap, enhanced four times, and rotated the image 90* to find the killer. Would have only taken them 46 minutes!

GSR is Ok at best.

Like mentioned above, if they’ve washed their hands is usually no good.

And their lab may not even test under those conditions. Our lab is so overwhelmed that there are very specific situations where GSR will be collected for testing. A suicide that wasn’t hinky from the beginning would probably not get one.

I don't have much faith in GSR. It generally ineffective if the weapon involved is a semi-auto. Even with a revolver it is marginally effective. I've never personally been involved in a case that there was a positive test, even when I was able to prove that the person fired the weapon another way.

Specifically, I worked a case where an intoxicated female fired 5 shots from a Charter Arms revolver at someone she thought informed on her. She missed all 5, but did hit the intended target's elderly grandmother in the head. The offender was arrested and cuffed and her hands placed in paper bags almost immediately. The GSR came back negative.

GSR is over-rated, but I have taken, with consent, samples from other persons present at suicides, just in case. It hasn't been germane to a case.

Yet.

GSR is merely a litmus test. And you can literally wash your hands and dispose of it. The GSR will stay in clothing and fabrics etc....but one cannot tell how old the stuff is. I’ve got a coat that always tests for GSR when swabbed because I use that coat for the range, my gun bag will test positive for GSR due to transfer.

So if I personally didn’t get a GSR swab from a suspects hands, I wouldn’t hold a positive test on clothing a suspect had on, because it can be explained away, whereas on the hands it’s harder to explain why GSR is there

GSR is pretty much useless on a police officer-a defense attorney would simply state they are always handling firearms. I would want the test on the hands of the suicide by gun, it can corroborate other indicators that it was in fact a suicide.

quote:

Originally posted by davea:
An officer in Massachusetts was recently arrested for the murder of his wife. He reported it as a suicide. My question is wouldn't they have checked him for gun shot residue? You can easily find the story on the web. I don't want to post it because it's close to some of my family members. It took the state police 17 months before they arrested him. Couldn't the length been shorted with the residue test? I'm just wondering how the process of an investigation like that proceeds. Thanks for any input.
Dave

Not to knit pick but I don’t consider this an Officer Involved Shooting. OIS is an officer that uses his/her firearm in the line of duty in accordance to laws and regulations. This sounds like an officer that is being investigated and/or being charged with the murder of his wife.

Yeah I guess I may have worded it incorrectly. I wasn't sure the right wording. The officers service weapon was used. I'm trying to keep an open mind. I thought the residue was more definitive. Guess that's more tv stuff.

I've investigated police involved shootings and I've done a bunch of GSR tests. I'll say this, GSR testing is not all it's cracked up to be on TV.

REAL GSR testing (not the quick and dirty alternate light source method) requires very specific protocols, equipment, and a lab with a scanning electron microscope. It isn't quick and it isn't cheap. It also isn't particularly sensitive in that you are far more likely to get a false negative than a false positive UNLESS the suspect routinely handles firearms or certain other substances.

Alternate Light Source can be used on scene and is quick, but is very likely to give false positives. It serves as a handy screening tool to determine if it's worth doing a GSR kit and is a bit of theater to use on a suspect that might be right on the edge of confessing anyway. I'd never testify in court that something found under ALS is GSR.

We don't do GSR tests as a matter of routine on suicides, at least not on the complainant. We always did it on the deceased party however...

It's a lot harder to fake a suicide than people think. On the other hand, you might KNOW the suicide is questionable after the autopsy results come back in a week (or two, or three) but you still have to develop motive and evidence to charge someone. It may have taken 17 months to charge this guy, but I'd be willing to bet that a lot of that was building as solid a case as possible. I've charged police with serious crimes. You REALLY want to build as strong a case as possible before pulling the trigger or letting them know they are under investigation.

I have been doing Crime Scene Investigations and shooting reconstructions full time for a couple of years in a busy city. We do not do GSR tests on suicides. Our lab wont take them, especially from the deceased person.

GSR tests are not good evidence, as others have said.

Dermal GSR testing is not really probative in that you can get GSR on you from firing a gun, being in proximity of a gun being fired, handling a gun that has been fired, or handling fired ammunition components. You can also get GSR on you from coming in contact with surfaces that have GSR on them. As mentioned previously, they can be simply washed or sweat away and sampling typically has to occur in a short window after the event. The absence or presence of GSR can be easily explained, which limits its usefulness in investigations and in court.

Agencies that I work for have ceased such testing except in very rare occasions.

GSR testing to determine muzzle to target distance may be useful in some suicides if the appearance of the GSW is not consistent with suicide. This kind of testing requires scaled pictures of the wound (if on skin) or the clothing where the bullet first struck the decedent, as well as the firearm and ammunition used in event.

These two forms of GSR testing are sometimes confused. One or the other may or may not be relevant depending on the situation the OP is referring to.

quote:

Originally posted by davea:
Guess that's more tv stuff.

Unconsciously, we are all programmed in this way. It's the main reason it's so hard to explain the realities to people who are not in LE. We are fighting that battle internally and externally with DNA right now.

quote:

Originally posted by airsoft guy:
Would have only taken them 46 minutes!

WITHOUT commercial interruption...