Crime Scene Investigator (13 page)

I ran around the Flying Squad office like a headless chicken. I spoke to the officer in the Saul case and probably made no sense whatever to him.

Contacting the property officer at the office, I quickly booked out the Manto jacket in its sealed bag and went straight to the laboratory. I don’t remember the journey but when I arrived I was taken to a small examination room. A crowd of scientists from the biology section had heard the story and assembled at a suitable distance. Dr De Souza opened the bag on a carefully prepared bench. Removing the small square control sample from a plastic bag attached to the file, she lifted the arm of the jacket and offered it up to a small hole. It fitted perfectly. There was wild excitement and applause.

I was pleased but Dick was ecstatic. The jacket could be directly linked to Saul. It is strange that I didn’t notice the hole under the sleeve when I first inspected it, but even if I had it wouldn’t have meant anything to me. The jacket had been paraded on TV to identify its owner, but we had the answer. It was only because I was a common factor in both cases and kept accurate and comprehensive notes that the link was made.

At the trial, the fact that the jacket had been seized in another investigation was carefully introduced so as not to prejudice the case against Saul. We referred to the jacket being seized on another occasion. The evidence that the jacket discarded at the alley belonged to Saul and the key in the pocket fitted his front door was successfully introduced.

The fun wasn’t over yet. The introduction of the bite-mark evidence against Fowler met with interest in the first few days of the trial. I had suggested to Dick that he might want to speak to the defence and see if they intended to examine the marks independently. We were pretty confident about the evidence and didn’t want the usual scrum and confusion on the first day of the trial as often occurs if the defence team realises that there is some scientific evidence they should get checked out independently. If the evidence was sound, and we believed it to be so, it would withstand the rigorous testing by the defence. The best interest of justice and the trial process would be preserved.

Predictably, on the first day of the trial we were informed that the defence were organising their own examination. I was happy to facilitate the examinations and Luigi Ciapperelli gave his full support. The forensic dentistry field is still a small one and Luigi knew the expert instructed by the defence.

The trial was held at Court Number 19 at the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey in the City of London. It is the smallest court in the building and I understand it was converted from an office to provide an additional court. By comparison to the other courtrooms it’s a cupboard and is sometimes referred to as such.

The close proximity of witness, presiding judge, counsel, jurors and defendant make it a very cosy environment. Not that cosy is a word that anyone would want to associate with a criminal trial.

I gave my evidence and was allowed to sit in court and hear the evidence of Luigi. Forensic dentistry evidence is pretty rare in criminal cases and I was interested in seeing how this was delivered, to learn how it was presented and received. I also wanted to know if we could improve how such evidence was presented so that the jurors had the right information on which to make their decision. This was not to improperly influence their decision but to ensure that it was firmly presented in a fair and ethical way.

Luigi gave a very studied and balanced view of the marks and the impressions he had taken from Saul and Fowler. He explained the development of teeth as we get older and referred to the specific dentistry of both defendants. With the aid of charts and diagrams he showed the spatial arrangement of Saul’s and Fowler’s teeth. He could quickly exclude Saul from making the marks. Referring to the shape of the marks of the individual teeth and their spatial arrangement, he stated that it was his conclusion that Fowler, and only Fowler, could have made these marks.

From the beginning of Luigi’s evidence it was apparent that the defence were not going to call their own witness. This is their prerogative and can be for any number of reasons. One, and perhaps the most common, is that the defence expert agrees with the prosecution expert. Another is that, rather than counter the evidence in person, the defence expert remains in court whilst the prosecution expert gives their evidence. In this way the defence expert can advise defence counsel on questions to ask to test the evidence and the witness’s approach.

During Luigi’s evidence the defence expert sat beside Fowler, explaining the evidence. By a series of movements using Luigi’s dental models the defence expert explained what it meant. A quizzical look came over Fowler’s face and I could see that he was asking his own expert what he thought. To this his own defence expert indicated that he too thought Fowler had made the mark. Suddenly Fowler lunged at his own expert and started wrestling with him. All hell seemed to break loose for a moment and the court was cleared. Calm was restored. The judge ordered a break; I mentioned to Dick what I had observed. What Dick did next was something I will never forget, and it was a lesson for me. Dick spoke to the prosecution counsel.

After the break Luigi concluded his evidence, this time the defence expert was sitting next to counsel, most definitely out of Fowler’s reach.

To the surprise of almost everyone in the court, the prosecution counsel asked for the next witness to be called. He called the defence expert! It is very unusual for a lawyer to call a witness whose evidence is not known and without a written report or statement. This could cause damage to his case. The defence were not calling their witness; his presence in court whilst Luigi had given his evidence had indicated that. The scuffle with the defendant indicated more still and so it looked like the prosecution were on to a sure thing.

Sure enough, the evidence of the defence expert was quickly given, he agreed with the methodology of the prosecution and the identification which had been made. The defence expert also concluded that Fowler, and Fowler alone, had made the marks on the key.

Afterwards, Dick reminded me that there is no possession in a witness. The truth is the truth after all. If a defence expert knows it and it is to the prosecution’s advantage and they know about it, then the witness can be called.

At the conclusion of the trial, both men were convicted of armed robbery. Dick and I were both commended by the Commissioner. But I wore a smile of satisfaction for some time, not because two men were detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure, which is a sadness and reality of human life, but because I was trained to do a job and I was working as a member of a professional team.

The elderly lady was terrified, she could not see her attacker, but she could see the large knife and hear his violent shouts.

On an unremarkable morning, the peace of a local community was broken by a terrifying act of violence. A man walked into a bank in Debden High Street, grabbed an elderly woman from behind and held a long-bladed knife to her throat.

He hurled threats at the bank staff who, in response, handed over £4,000. This was an unusually high amount because, contrary to common belief, banks, especially small local branches, don’t hold much cash.

The man was masked so no one got a really good look at his face, and his tracksuit hid his otherwise stocky build.

The robber left the bank, and his terrified victim, and ran off down the high street and into a wooded park area. Police officers were quick to respond and the wood was sealed off. The police helicopter arrived quickly overhead but there was no sign of the suspect.

Then, out of the far end of the wood, a jogger emerged. Dressed in running shorts and T-shirt he was sweaty and out of breath. All very normal perhaps, but not in the circumstances which had shattered the day’s peace. He was approached by the officers who were protecting the wide cordon and searching the wood. They were not happy with his account and he was arrested.

Debden is a community on the border of London and the Essex countryside. Its high street provides for the sprawling leafy community. It had its own station, part of the London Underground network, and a quick link into the heart of the metropolis. The term underground station is a bit of a misnomer, the station and track are elevated high above the ground and passengers travel many miles into London before the tunnel disappears beneath the surface. It’s a quiet place and not used to such acts of violence and certainly not in broad daylight.

Having heard the call on Channel 7, the Met’s main HQ crime radio channel. I made my way quickly to the scene. It would be possible that the local SOCO would get there before me but my interest heightened when I heard that a suspect had been arrested.

Although the remit of the Flying Squad was to investigate all armed robberies at banks, building societies, Post Offices and security vehicles, it was always the local officers who arrived first. Each Squad office had a large area to cover, so it would be the local uniformed officers and perhaps detectives who would take the first steps, but the Squad would take over as soon as it could.

For my part, I could not be in two places at the same time. I was the only SOCO at the north-east London branch office so, in many cases, my divisional colleagues would attend if I was already committed elsewhere. Where the robbery scene may have been dealt with by the local SOCO, I always dealt with any vehicle recovered myself. This was for two reasons. Firstly, because it could be dealt with at a more leisurely pace later. Secondly, vehicles are a great source of evidence and intelligence about the robbery and those who have committed these offences.

Although I may be beaten to the scene by the local SOCO, any slight delay in my response would allow time for me to hear if any suspect had been arrested. Prisoners were a priority for the Squad. Any suspect arrested was a bonus not to be missed.

I quickly got to the scene and reviewed what had taken place. There was little to do at the bank itself, the suspect had been gloved as well as masked, but the public door to the bank would still need examination. If the suspect who had been arrested was the offender, his description had changed from that of a masked, gloved, tracksuited man carrying a knife and a bag containing £4,000, to that of a jogger in a pair of shorts, training shoes and a T-shirt.

I anticipated that a search of the woods would reveal, if we had the right man, a pile of clothing including the mask and the money and knife. By now the description of the mask was that of a dark woolly balaclava. My interest intensified further. So I decided that the suspect should receive my attention. I called on a colleague to examine the bank whilst I went to the local police station where the suspect was being held.

By the time I arrived I got news that a dog handler with his canine assistant had indeed found such a pile. Clothing, money, knife, mask, gloves, it was all there. I gave instructions on how the find should be recovered and a local detective made his way to deal with it. There wasn’t another SOCO available, and officers were trained to deal with such matters. They had been doing so long before the arrival of SOCOs, even if the science was moving on. It was covered.

For the moment I wanted to do one thing and one thing only. Comb the hair of the suspect. Everything else could wait a little longer.

When I arrived at Loughton Police Station, tensions were high. The suspect was still protesting his innocence.

I quickly identified myself to the custody officer, the officer in charge of the prisoner area. There were only local officers there; I had yet to be joined by colleagues from the Squad. A group of uniformed police officers involved in the arrest were also in the charge room. I informed the custody officer that it would very important to obtain a combing of the hair of the suspect and the reasons behind this. We would have to deal with the situation carefully because the suspect had to be informed of his rights in such matters. I didn’t want the suspect to use any lull in the process to try and remove any traces of evidence once he knew what my intention was.

The custody officer’s role is one of the two most demanding roles within the police service. The other one is the role of senior investigating officer, to which I refer elsewhere. The custody officer’s role is governed by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984) and its later amendments. Their role is to manage the detention of persons in police custody. They are not part of the investigation but ensure that the prisoner and their detention are properly managed.

Taking the custody officer to one side, I reminded him, just in case he needed it, of the particular parts within the Act which covered the taking of non-intimate samples.

The Act and the Code of Practice, a small book, was my constant companion. I had highlighted the parts referring to the sampling of a suspect for ease of reference and so I could quickly remind custody officers, inspectors and superintendents of the reasons and authorities required. I found that these busy professionals appreciated the targeted reference as they had many things to consider and an accurate prompt always met a welcome response.