The Gazette 1979

GAZETTE

JULY-AUGUST 1979

intelligence, for lack of scientific expertise and for placing too much reliance on interrogation of suspects. Considering how hampered the Gardai are by passive and active resistance and by restrictive rules and regulations, most of which have not been reviewed for centuries, it often amazes me that so many crimes are solved. Apart from the small number or instances where culprits are caught in the act of committing a crime or in possession of firearms, explosives or stolen property the only means of detecting crime are:— (1) Expert examination of the scene of the crime; (2) Collection of evidence from the injured party and witnesses; (3) Criminal intelligence and obtaining information from informers 'fellow criminals'; (4) The questioning of suspects. (1) Entails a thorough meticulous éxamination of the scene of the crime for minute traces and clues left by the culprit at the scene or which may have become attached to his person or clothing from the scene. The most common of these clues are fingermarks, blood smears, semen, hair, fibres, soil stains, saliva, explosives residue, cartridge cases, fragments of glass. Professional criminals don't make a habit of leaving obvious material clues lying around the scene of a crime. So to locate and develop such traces requires highly skilled scientific techniques and processes embracing many of the physical sciences. Some clues have a positive investigative value as they indicate a definite line of enquiry but most of them are of no use until a suspect is traced and matched up with the evidence found at the scene. How can this be done if we cannot detain the suspect and get samples? (2) The collection of evidence from victims, if alive, and from witnesses. This entails deep penetrative questioning with great attention to detail, but while we can ask questions and are expected to make such enquiries, there is no obligation on any potential witness to answer. There is a distinct reluctance by most people to become involved, first there is the traditional fear of being regarded as an informer; there is the fear of retaliation by a criminal or criminal groups; there is the fear of having to go to Court as a witness and to being subjected to severe cross- examination and even abuse. There is the inconvenience of being involved at all. Even those who might be willing to assist are often too frightened to do so. There are many instances of people who are not only reluctant to co-operate but who do everything to thwart the investigation and to help the suspect to cover up. This unwillingness to become involved, results in many potential witnesses refusing to answer any questions or make a statement. Others who are better disposed to assisting will disclose any knowledge they have, only on a strictly confidential basis and on the clear understanding that their names will not be used and that they will not under any circumstances be brought to Court as a witness. In many instances this information may be positive, clearly naming the culprit, but as it cannot be used as evidence the Gardai must try to do, what the ordinary citizen shirks doing, and the only way they can is to interrogate the suspect. These are understandable reluctances and fears and unless some statutory means of protecting witnesses is

introduced by making any form of intimidation a more grave offence than that under investigation and by making the withholding of information an offence, then the Gardai will have no alternative but to rely even more on interrogation of the suspect in the hope of getting an admission. The third method of detecting crime is the building up of a system of intelligence from police observation, from developing contacts and obtaining information from fellow criminals and informers. In the case of fellow criminals and informers the reliability of the information has to be carefully assessed and checked for accuracy lest it be motivated by revenge, or in the hope of currying favour. Special care has to be taken to shield and protect the source, lest he or his family be embarrassed or their lives endangered. Of course no matter how reliable or accurate this information is, it is of no evidential value and again the investigator has no alternative but to resort to questioning of suspects. So no matter how good criminal intelligence, no matter how accurate the information, if witnesses are not prepared to come forward and give evidence, and if interrogation of suspects is not permitted, or if permitted and the suspect will not answer any questions and is under no obligation to do so crimes just cannot be solved. The effectiveness of the law depends on the ability to enforce it. Which brings me to the final method of investigation that one that is practically forced on us, the interrogation of suspects. It is not with any relish that we rely on interrogation as a means of obtaining evidence, it is simply that in most cases there is no option and this applies not only to the Gardai but in all countries where a system similar to ours is operated. At the initial stages of the investigation of any major crime there are for various reasons a number of possible suspects. Any experienced investigator realises that any one of these may be the actual culprit but he also realises that as additional facts are discovered additional suspects may be indicated so one of the first priorities is to eliminate the suspects who were not involved. This process is made very easy when the suspect readily co- operates by accounting for where he was at the crucial times and which when checked is found to be correct. If however he tells lies and his story does not check out this heightens the suspicion. It may transpire on deeper probing that he lied to cover up some embarrassment which has to be satisfactorily checked out before he can be eliminated from the investigation. When he doesn't answer any questions and refuses to talk then the suspicion remains and he cannot be eliminated from the investigation. This means that members of the investigation party must concentrate on finding other evidence to either eliminate him from the investigation or if this is not possible to target him as a prime suspect. The process works on the basis of reducing the number of suspects as quickly as possible by working from known facts to establish the unknown — never trying to make the suspect fit the facts which is regarded as the hallmark of inexperience. A lot has been said and written about the danger of innocent persons being suspected, being subjected to interrogation and being wrongly convicted and this is very proper and it is a matter that we must all guard against. The present system of advising every person whether

112