# data[].attributes.body
A bloody shoeprint in the snow found at a crime scene.  GClark

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Fresh blood at a crime scene with evidence marker. L.Black

# data[].attributes.body
Drops of blood with a quarter showing measuring the droplets. Kayla Harden

# data[].attributes.body
This website explains how blood is collected from a crime scene. -I.Tinsley

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
George Schiro
Forensic Scientist
Louisiana State Police Crime Laboratory

Preliminary Considerations

Since blood evidence associated with a crime can provide information that may solve the case, it is essential to correctly document, collect, and preserve this type of evidence. Improperly handled blood evidence can weaken or destroy a potential source of facts in a case. Properly collected and preserved blood evidence can establish a strong link between an individual and a criminal act. Blood evidence or the lack of blood evidence can also be used to bolster or contradict a witness statement or any statements that the suspect may make. Blood evidence can also point the investigator in the direction he or she needs to go to solve the case. If blood evidence is documented, collected, and stored suitably, it can be presented to a judge or jury several years from the time of the criminal act. Perhaps the most powerful application of blood evidence is the ability to absolutely eliminate a person as a potential suspect in a crime.

Communication is the key to effectively processing blood evidence. Clear and open communication must exist between a crime scene's first responding officer, the case detective, the crime scene investigator, the forensic scientist analyzing the evidence, and the assistant district attorney handling the case. Of prime importance is the communication between the crime scene investigator and the forensic scientist. A crime scene investigator should know the crime lab's capabilities, the methods of blood collection and preservation preferred by the crime lab, the investigative information relevant to the forensic scientist, and the type of reference samples required by the crime lab. This information may change periodically as technology changes, lab policies change, lab personnel change, or lab administrations change. The preferences of forensic scientists also vary from lab to lab. A good method of blood evidence collection for one forensic scientist may not be a good method for another forensic scientist. The crime scene investigator should meet regularly with his or her crime lab's forensic scientists to determine the most suitable manner for collecting and preserving blood evidence. This ensures that the evidence is collected efficiently and effectively.

The technological state of blood evidence analysis has rapidly advanced in the last 20 years. ln the early seventies, most crime labs relied upon the ABO blood grouping system to characterize bloodstains. This meant that the blood could have come from 4 to 49% of the population. In the 1990's, most crime labs are relying on DNA analysis to characterize bloodstains. A blood source can now be statistically narrowed down to one person out of several million or even several billion. (1) A crime scene investigator should know which method or methods of bloodstain analysis are available from his or her crime lab, the FBI lab, and private labs.

Currently, bloodstain analysis falls into three broad categories. A crime lab may use one, two, or all three methods when analyzing blood. These three categories are:

Conventional serological analysis

Analysis of the proteins, enzymes, and antigens present in the blood. These substances are more susceptible to degradation than DNA and this type of testing usually requires a "large" sample (quarter size) in good condition for optimal results. This type of testing is rarely statistically individualizing.

Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP) DNA analysis

Direct analysis of certain DNA sequences present in the white blood cells. DNA is much less susceptible to degradation than proteins, enzymes, and antigens. RFLP DNA testing is commonly statistically individualizing (one out of several million or several billion) and it has withstood rigorous court challenges on its validity. This method also usually requires a "large" sample size to obtain significant results.

Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) DNA analysis

Analysis of certain DNA sequences that have been copied multiple times to a detectable level. PCR based testing works well on degraded samples and "small" samples (pinhead size). Currently, it is not as statistically individualizing as RFLP analysis; however, more DNA sequences for PCR analysis are being discovered and in the near future it will be as statistically individualizing as RFLP. PCR based technologies have also withstood rigorous court challenges on its validity. Recently, there has been some concern over the possibility of incidental contamination giving false results in PCR tests. At least one study has shown that if PCR protocols are followed, it is not likely that incidental contamination will give false results. The only way that false results were induced was by direct cross contamination of wet samples. (2)

Presently, the courts do not recognize blood evidence as evidence that can be absolutely linked to an individual, such as fingerprints, bitemarks, broken fingernails, and handwriting. If DNA analysis is utilized, then blood evidence falls into the category of evidence that can be linked to an individual with a high degree of probability. Originally, RFLP DNA analysis was given the misnomer "DNA fingerprinting." The courts have since ruled that a DNA result can only be given in statistical terms. A forensic scientist cannot testify that a bloodstain came from a specific individual. He or she can testify that based on population studies, only one person in several million or billion has a particular DNA profile. He or she can then testify if the suspect or a victim has that DNA profile.

Before a crime scene investigator begins documenting and collecting blood evidence, he or she must recognize the value of this evidence and how it fits in the overall events associated with the crime. The most common applications of blood evidence are:

1. Finding blood with the victim's genetic markers (ABO blood type, DNA profile, etc.) on the suspect, on something in the suspect's possession, or something associated with the suspect (such as the suspect's fingerprints).

2. Finding blood with the suspect's genetic markers on the victim, on something in the victim s possession, or something associated with the victim.

3. Investigative information determined from blood spatter and/or blood location.

Generally, blood evidence is usually more informative in cases where a suspect and victim are in contact or close proximity. For example, if a suspect stabs or beats a victim, there could be an exchange of blood between the victim and the suspect. If a suspect shoots a victim from across a room. It is less likely that an exchange of blood will occur.

Occasionally, investigators blindly collect blood samples from a scene without any thought about the facts they are trying to establish. An example is a crime scene consisting of the body of a shooting victim found alone in his residence. Some investigators will collect several blood samples from around the body. This is unnecessary since it will only establish that the victim bled at the scene of the crime. This fact is already proven by the presence of the body; however, one sample of pooled blood next to the body can be collected to confirm the results obtained from the victim's reference blood sample.

The crime scene investigator must make an effort to collect the evidence that is going to provide the most useful information in establishing the facts about a crime scene. The investigator must balance this with the philosophy of too much evidence collected is better than not enough evidence collected. The investigator should concentrate on collecting representative samples of the "peripheral" bloodstains, such as the bloodstains that are away from the body and the main area of action, or blood spatter patterns that differ from the majority of the blood spatter patterns. These bloodstains may provide useful investigative information. The investigator should also search for blood trails leading away from the scene. These trails could have originated from a wounded suspect. If a suspect is established in a case, then he or she should be examined for wounds. The suspect's wounds should be documented and photographed. This is additional useful evidence if blood with the suspect's genetic markers is found in an incriminating location.

Because blood analysis is a comparison analysis (comparison of the victim's blood and the suspect's blood to blood found at the crime scene), reference blood samples are needed from the victim and suspect. A comparison must be made between the genetic markers in the victim s blood and the suspect's blood. The blood samples from the crime scene can then be analyzed for those genetic markers that are different in the suspect and victim. This is especially true in conventional serology analysis. Requests are made occasionally to do an ABO blood type determination of blood on a suspect's clothes to a known blood sample from a victim. This type of analysis is useless without a known blood sample from the suspect. If both parties have the same ABO blood type, then part of the sample has been wasted and no real information of value is produced. If reference samples of blood from both parties are provided, then it can be determined if they have the same ABO blood type. If they do, then further analysis of the reference blood samples may show that the two parties have different PGM types. The unknown stain could then be analyzed for the genetic marker PGM. This analysis may then show the possible origin of the stain.

Suitable reference samples (a suitable reference sample is collected directly from a person into a tube or "Vacutainer") from all of the involved subjects must be sent to the crime lab. An unsuitable reference sample is bloody clothing or some other bloody item. These are unsuitable because the histories of these bloodstained items are usually questionable and there may be factors present on the items that will give misleading results. The sample must be collected in the proper "Vacutainer." The investigator should check with the lab he or she is using to determine the analysts' preferences on reference sample collection tubes. This is a summary of the forensic uses of "Vacutainers":

Yellow Top Vacutainers (contain Acid Citrate and Dextrose solution)

Useful for conventional serological testing and DNA testing (author's personal preference).

Purple Top Vacutainers (contain EDTA)

Useful for DNA testing; may inhibit certain conventional serological tests. (3)

Red Top Vacutainers (no additives)

Useful for conventional serological tests; less useful for DNA testing; can be used for pregnancy and HIV testing (4) (if a yellow top is not available, then the author prefers receiving red top and purple top Vacutainers from a subject).

Gray Top Vacutainers (contain Sodium Fluoride and sometimes EDTA)

Useful for toxicological testing; not suitable for conventional serological analysis (5) and may not be suitable for DNA analysis.

If the investigator is collecting blood from an autopsy, then one of each type of Vacutainer should be collected from the victim. This will insure that any necessary forensic testing can be performed. These Vacutainers should be stored in a refrigerator (not frozen) at about four degrees Centigrade until they are transported to the crime lab.

In recent years, blood visualization enhancing chemicals have regained popularity with crime scene investigators. The chemical of choice is usually luminol. Luminol is a chemical that when applied to bloodstains, even very dilute bloodstains, will cause the bloodstains to glow in the dark. Because it has several drawbacks as a presumptive test for blood, spraying luminol at a crime scene should be an investigator's last resort for detecting blood. The problems with luminol include:

1. One of the empirical tests for determining if a stain is blood is its appearance. If it is a bloodstain, then it should look like blood. A bloodstain also has to be present in sufficient quantity to perform confirmatory testing and testing for genetic markers. This requires that the bloodstain is visible to the naked eye. The luminol reaction is at best a presumptive test for blood. If the stain is so dilute that it can only be visualized with luminol, then no further analysis can be performed to confirm the presence of blood.

2. Luminol will give false reactions. Luminol will react with copper ions, copper compounds, iron compounds, and cobalt ions. It will also react with potassium permanganate (found in some dyes) and hydrated sodium hypochlorite (bleach).(6) Ferricyanide and plant peroxidases could also give false reactions.(7)

3. Studies have shown that luminol will cause the loss of several genetic markers.(8,9)

4. Because luminol is water based, it could cause, latent, possibly bloody impressions to smear. Luminol could also further dilute an already diluted stain. This may push the stain beyond the genetic marker analysis detection limits.

Unfortunately, some crime scene investigators use luminol as their first choice for detecting blood. By using luminol in such a reckless manner, it is possible to lose valuable information from a bloodstain. When searching for blood at a crime scene, especially blood that may have been cleaned up, the investigator should first use a high intensity light to search for any traces of blood. Bloodstains are not easy to eradicate. Diluted blood will often leave a brownish stain where a person has tried to clean it. Blood also has a tendency to flow into floorboard cracks, into carpet padding, behind baseboards, etc. By conducting a thorough examination with a high intensity light source, the investigator can usually find these areas. These items can then be removed or collected and submitted to the crime lab for confirmatory testing.

Because luminol is so sensitive to dilute bloodstains, it is occasionally used to enhance bloody impressions (shoeprints, fingerprints, etc.). Luminol is not the best reagent for enhancing these impressions because of its water base. Better methods for enhancing bloody impressions use either rapidly evaporating organic solvents (such as merbromin and ortho-tolidine) or they use a water based chemical after treating the impression with a fixative (such as the amido black staining technique).

Once the investigator realizes the potential of blood evidence as well as problem areas in documenting, collecting, and preserving this type of evidence, he or she will be more effective in finding the best bloodstains. Some commonly encountered problems are lack of communication (especially between the investigators and the forensic scientists), unfamiliarity with the types of bloodstain analysis, lack of knowledge about which stains will yield the most useful information, poor reference samples, and indiscriminately using luminol at crime scenes. If these problems are solved, then the blood collection and analysis should progress without any major problems.

Documentation and Examination of the Crime Scene

An investigator should take a slow and methodical approach to collecting and preserving evidence. The only time that an investigator should make rapid decisions concerning evidence is when the evidence is in danger of being destroyed or compromised. In that case, the evidence should be preserved, or documented and collected as quickly as possible. Before setting foot in the crime scene, the investigator must gather as much information as possible to determine the scope and value of any evidence that may be present. This information may include witness statements, suspect statements, victim statements, information from the first responding officer, information from the detectives, etc. Information is collected to prevent the destruction of any valuable and/or fragile evidence such as shoeprints, trace evidence, etc. The investigator should then use logic and common sense to search for evidence; however, he or she should also use imagination and avoid becoming narrow-minded. As investigators become more experienced, they know that certain patterns emerge and certain elements are common among similar cases. They also know that they have to keep an open mind when deciding what is evidence and where it will be found. This is due to the unpredictable nature of people and the forces of chaos. Once the investigator has gathered as much information as possible about the case, then he or she should form a mental or written plan to proceed with the documentation, collection, and preservation of the evidence. The investigator should also pass any relevant information to the lab analyst. This will allow the analysis to make decisions concerning the best approach to the analysis and what information can be determined from the evidence.

The investigator should thoroughly document every aspect of the crime scene investigation from the initial walk through to the securing of the collected evidence. Documentation is necessary to record the condition of the crime scene and its related evidence as closely as possible to their original condition at the time of the crime. Of course, there is usually some alteration of the scene that will occur between the time of the crime and the time that the scene is documented. EMS personnel, police officers, and fire fighters may have to alter the original scene in the course of performing life saving measures. Other people entering the scene may also unknowingly or unconsciously alter the scene. ln any case, the evidence must be documented in as pristine a condition as circumstances allow. The investigator has a number of tools available for documenting evidence including notes, videotape, photographs, sketches, and chain of custody forms. The investigator may elect to use several or all of these methods of documentation. This documentation will also be used in the future to refresh the investigator's memories of the case.

The first tool for documenting the crime scene investigation is note taking. An investigator should be as thorough as possible when taking notes. All of the pertinent times and actions taken should be recorded, such as who contacted the investigator and when; when did the investigator leave for the crime scene; when did the investigator arrive at the scene; what actions were taken by the investigator and when; when did the investigator leave the scene, etc. Notes should be recorded throughout the entire crime scene investigation.

Examination of the crime scene will usually begin with a walk through of the area along the "trail" of the crime. The trail is that area where all apparent actions associated with the crime took place. This trail is usually marked by the presence of evidence. Point of entry, location of a body, areas where the suspect may have cleaned up, and the point of exit are all included in the trail. The purpose of the walk through is to note the location of potential evidence and to mentally outline how the scene will be processed. The walk through begins as close to the point of entry as possible. The first place the investigators should examine is the ground on which they are about to tread. If any evidence is found, then a marker should be placed at the location as a warning not to step on the item of interest. When searching for blood evidence, it is important to use a high intensity light. A high intensity light source will aid in the visualization of bloodstains, even stains that have been diluted. The light source can also be used to provide oblique (side) lighting. Oblique lighting is an excellent tool for finding trace evidence and other small items of interest.

As the walk through progresses, the investigators should make sure their hands are occupied by either carrying notebooks, flashlights, pens, etc. or by keeping their hands in their pockets. This prevents the investigator from depositing unwanted fingerprints at the crime scene. As a final note on the walk through, the investigators should examine the areas above their heads (ceiling, tree branches, etc.). These areas may yield blood spatters, bullet holes, etc. Once the walk through is completed, the notes must be supplemented with other forms of documentation, such as videotape, photographs, and/or sketches.

Videotape can be an excellent medium for documenting bloodstains at a crime scene. If a video camera is available, it is best used after the initial walk through. This is to record the evidence before any major alterations have occurred at the scene. Videotape provides a perspective on the crime scene layout that cannot be as easily perceived in photographs and sketches. It is a more natural viewing medium to which people can readily relate, especially in demonstrating the structure of the crime scene and how the evidence relates to those structures.

The value of videotaping blood evidence is that the overall relationship of various blood spatters and patterns can be demonstrated. One example of this could be a beating homicide. In this case, videotape can show the overall blood spatter patterns and how these spatters are inter related. The videotape can also show the relationship of the spatters to the various structures at the crime scene. In cases where the suspect may have been injured (such as stabbing homicides), the video camera can be used to document any blood trails that may lead away from the scene. If videotaping indoors, the camera can show how the various areas are laid out in relation to each other and how they can be accessed. This is particularly valuable when recording peripheral bloodstains that may be found in other rooms. The high intensity light source can also be used for illuminating the bloodstains to make them more visible on the videotape.

Whether a video camera is available or not, it is absolutely essential that still photographs are taken to document the crime scene and any associated blood evidence. If a video camera is available, then still photography will be the second step in recording the crime scene. If video is not available, then still photography will be the first step. Photographs can demonstrate the same type of things that the videotape does, but crime scene photographs can also be used to record close up details, record objects at any scaled size, and record objects at actual size. These measurements and recordings are more difficult to achieve with videotape.

Blood evidence can be photographed using color print film and/or color slide film. Infrared film can also be used for documenting bloodstains on dark surfaces. Overall, medium range, and close up photographs should be taken of pertinent bloodstains. Scaled photographs (photographs with a ruler next to the evidence) must also be taken of items in cases where size relevance is significant or when direct (one-to-one) comparisons will be made, such as with bloody shoeprints, fingerprints, high velocity blood spatter patterns, etc. A good technique for recording a large area of blood spatter on a light colored wall is to measure and record the heights of some of the individual blood spatters. The overall pattern on the wall including a yard stick as a scale is then photographed with slide film. After the slide is developed, it can be projected onto a blank wall or onto the actual wall many years after the original incident. By using a yardstick, the original blood spatters can be viewed at their actual size and placed in their original positions. Measurements and projections can then be made to determine the spatters' points of origin.(10)

Another method of documenting blood evidence is by drawing a sketch of the crime scene. The drawback of photographs is that they are two-dimensional representations of three dimensional objects. As a result, photos can distort the spatial relationships of the photographed objects causing them to appear closer together or farther apart than they actually are. If spatial relationships of the evidence are important or if something needs to have proportional measurements included in it for calculations (such as blood spatter patterns) then a sketch must be made.

Computer programs are available for sketching crime scenes and blood spatters by inputting certain measurements associated with the scene and the individual spatters. This blood spatter program will then calculate and draw the spatters' points of origin. These programs might come in handy where there are many blood spatters and the points of origin need to be determined. For more in depth information on videotaping, photographing, and sketching crime scenes, refer to the recommended reading list.

The final method of evidence documentation is the chain of custody form. The chain of custody form is a written record of all evidence transfers from the crime scene to possession of the court or the clerk of court. Proper chain of custody thoroughly documents the movement of evidence, the security of the evidence, who had possession of the evidence, and when the evidence was in a person's possession. The chain of custody form must accompany the evidence all the way to its final destination. A copy should also be kept in the case folder. The following information must be recorded on the form: A description of the evidence and its container; the specific recovery location of the evidence; case numbers; the date and time it was collected; who collected it; whether or not the evidence container was sealed upon transfer to another individual; who received the evidence; the dates and times of any evidence transfers; who delivered the evidence; and the final disposition of the evidence. This is necessary to demonstrate that the evidence was not contaminated in a way to alter the information that the evidence originally contained. It also demonstrates that the original evidence was not planted or changed in some way before its presentation in court. After the evidence has been documented using videotape, photographs, sketches, and chain of custody forms, the evidence collection process can begin.

Collection and Preservation of Blood Evidence

Once the crime scene has been thoroughly documented and the locations of the evidence noted, then the collection process can begin. The collection process will usually start with the most fragile or most easily lost evidence. Special consideration can also be given to any evidence or objects that need to be moved. Collection can then continue along the crime scene trail or in some other logical manner. Photographs should continue to be taken if the investigator is revealing layers of evidence that were not previously documented because they were obscured.

Most items of evidence will be collected in clean, unused paper containers such as packets, envelopes, and bags. Moist or wet biological evidence (blood, body fluids, plants, etc.) from a crime scene can be collected in clean, unused plastic containers at the scene and transported back to an evidence receiving area if the storage time in sealed plastic is less than two hours and this is done to prevent contamination of other evidence. Once in a secure location, wet evidence, whether packaged in plastic or paper, must be removed and allowed to completely air dry. That evidence can then be repackaged in a new, clean, unused, dry paper container. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD EVIDENCE CONTAINING MOISTURE BE SEALED IN PLASTIC OR PAPER CONTAINERS FOR MORE THAN TWO HOURS. Moisture allows the growth of microorganisms that can destroy or alter evidence.

Any items that may cross contaminate each other must be packaged separately. The containers should be closed and secured to prevent the mixture of evidence during transportation. Each container should have the collecting person's initials: the date and time it was collected; a complete description of the evidence and where it was found; and the investigating agency's name and file number.

Before transporting any items of evidence, the investigator should examine the items to determine if there is any loose trace evidence (hairs, fibers, paint chips, etc.) that may be lost in transportation. If there is, then this loose evidence should be collected in a paper packet and placed in an envelope. The envelope should have the required information giving a description and the source of the trace evidence. The actual item can then be processed and collected.

Blood evidence must never be exposed to excessive heat or humidity. If possible, the bloodstained evidence should be refrigerated until it can be transported to the crime lab. The evidence should also be taken to the lab as soon as possible. The following are guidelines, listed in order of the author's preferences, for collecting and preserving blood evidence:

ALWAYS TAKE SAFETY PRECAUTIONS WHEN HANDLING BIOLOGICAL
EVIDENCE. BE SURE TO WEAR PROTECTIVE CLOTHING, GLOVES, MASKS,
AND/OR EYE PROTECTION AS THE SITUATION WARRANTS.

Dried Bloodstains

If the bloodstained item is small and transportable, package it in a paper bag or envelope.
Advantages: Requires a minimal amount of interaction with the bloodstains by the investigator: allows the serologist to make the decisions involved in collecting the samples; dilution and contamination potential minimized by eliminating the use of water as the collection medium.
Disadvantages: More work for the serologist: bulky items require more storage space.

If the bloodstained item is large or not easily transported, then the following techniques can be used for collecting the bloodstains. If possible, the investigator should also collect samples from unstained areas of the item for negative controls.

1. Cutting out the portion(s) of item with the bloodstain(s). A negative control area should also be cut out if available. Package cuttings in separate paper envelopes.
Advantages: Dilution and contamination potential minimized by eliminating the use of water as the collection medium: requires only a small amount of investigator interaction with the bloodstain: does not usually take up much storage space.
Disadvantages: Investigator must decide which stains and controls to collect: some materials are harder to cut than others.

2. Tape lifting bloodstains - Place fingerprint tape (do not touch sticky surface with bare hands) over bloodstain and surrounding negative control area. Rub non-sticky side of tape with a pencil eraser or other blunt object. This is to insure that good contact is made between the stain and the tape. Lift the bloodstain like a fingerprint and place the tape on a vinyl acetate backing (do not use a paper backing - paper makes the stain difficult to handle during analysis). The lifting process can be repeated several times on the same stain if necessary. Label the stain(s) and package in a paper envelope.
Advantages: Dilution and contamination potential minimized by eliminating the use of water as the collection medium; negative control is readily collected; requires little storage space; fairly easy technique to perform.
Disadvantages: Investigator must decide which stains to collect; bloodstains do not lift well on certain surfaces.

3. Scraping bloodstains into a paper packet - Use a clean sharp instrument to scrape the bloodstain into a paper packet. The packet can be labeled and placed in a paper envelope. Do not use a plastic container in place of a paper packet because the static charge from the plastic will cause the blood flakes to disperse and stick to the sides of the container. This technique can be combined with the tape lift method by scraping the stain near the tape's sticky side. The static charge will cause the flakes to stick to the tape. The tape can then be placed on vinyl acetate.
Advantages: Dilution and contamination potential minimized by eliminating the use of water as the collection medium; requires little storage space.
Disadvantages: Investigator must decide which stains to collect; when scraped, bloodstains tend to break into small, very hard to handle flakes; the flakes have a tendency to be easily lost during the scraping process (except when used in combination with the tape lift); some surfaces are not easily scraped.

4. Absorbing stains onto moistened 1/2" long threads - Use only distilled or deionized water to moisten clean, 1/2" long, number 8, white cotton threads. Do not handle the threads with bare hands. Place thread on bloodstain with a pair of clean forceps or a clean cotton swab. Roll the thread on the bloodstain, so the stain is absorbed onto the thread. Repeat until a minimum of four threads are collected. Place the threads (and swabs, if used) in a secure area and allow them to air dry. When air dried, package into a paper packet and place in an envelope. For transportation purposes and to prevent cross contamination, the threads may be placed in a plastic container for no more than two hours. Once in a secure location, the threads must be removed from the plastic and allowed to air dry. They may then be repackaged into a paper packet and placed in an envelope. Threads must also be taken from a negative control area, if available.
Advantages: Stain is concentrated onto a small surface area; requires little storage space.
Disadvantages: Dilution and contamination potential introduced by using water (it may be possible to reduce contamination and dilution effects by using acetone or 70% ethanol to collect bloodstains. At least one study has shown that DNA yield can be increased by using either acetone or 70% ethanol to collect bloodstains. The 70% ethanol produced a higher DNA yield.(11)); investigator must decide which stains to collect; threads can be difficult to handle.

5. Absorbing stains onto moistened 1/2" X 1/2" cotton squares - The procedure for collection is the same as for threads, except that white, 100% cotton muslin is used instead of threads. The muslin must be boiled in distilled or deionized water and allowed to air dry prior to its use. This removes interfering factors from the muslin. Do not handle the muslin with bare hands.
Advantages: Stain is concentrated onto a relatively small surface area; easier to handle than threads; requires little storage space.
Disadvantages: Same as for threads, except dilution and contamination potential is increased due to using more water.

Wet Bloodstains

1. If the item is small and transportable, then package it in a paper bag (or plastic bag to prevent contamination of other objects). Bring it to a secured location, take it out of the bag and allow the evidence and the bag to thoroughly air dry. Repackage in the original paper bag or, if necessary, a new paper bag. If a new paper bag is used, then the air dried original container should be packaged with the item of evidence.
Advantages: Requires a minimal amount of interaction with the bloodstains by the investigator; allows the serologist to make the decisions involved in collecting the samples.
Disadvantages: More work for the serologist; bulky items use more storage space.

2. If the bloodstained item is large or not easily transported, then absorb the stain onto a 1" X 1" square of the cotton muslin as described in part 2E under dried bloodstains. Package it in paper (or plastic to prevent contamination of other objects). Bring it to a secured location, take it out of the container and allow the cotton square and the container to thoroughly air dry. Repackage in the original paper container or, if necessary, a new paper container. If a new paper container is used, then the air dried original container should be packaged with the cotton square. If possible, the investigator should also collect samples from unstained areas of the item for negative controls.
Advantages: Requires little storage space; fairly easy technique to perform; stain is concentrated onto a relatively small surface area.
Disadvantages: Investigator must decide which stains and controls to collect; investigator must have direct interaction with bloodstain.

If the investigator has any questions, he or she should contact his or her crime lab or the author.

FOOTNOTES

1. See the testimony of Dr. Robin Cotton on 5/11/95 in the case State of California vs. Oenthal James Simpson.

2. According to the FBI's Biochemical Methods Course Manual, the polymorphic enzyme Peptidase A is inactivated by the presence of metal chelators such as EDTA.

3. Personal communication with Forensic Pathologist Juanito Lim, MD of Earl K. Long Hospital, Baton Rouge, LA.

4. FBI Forensic Serology Course Manual.

5. Scott, S. Elaine, "Bloodstain Pattern Analysis - Five Years Later," Juried Paper presented at the Southern Association of Forensic Scientists' Fall, 1987 Meeting, September 18, 1987, Atlanta, Georgia.

6. Warren. Joseph. "Optimal Medium for the Transfer of Crime Scene Stains for DNA Analysis", Paper presented at the La. Association of Forensic Scientists' Fall, 1991 Meeting, October 26, 1991, Harahan, La.

Recommended Reading

Evidence Handling Guide. La. Dept. of Public Safety and Corrections, Office of State Police, Crime Laboratory.

Fisher, Barry A.J., Arne Svensson, and Otto Wendel. Techniques of Crime Scene Investigation. New York: Elseveir,

Sketching Crime Scenes. U. S. Department of Justice, FBI.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thanks to my supervisor Jim Churchman and my co-workers Carolyn Booker and Mary Quinn for their reviews and comments. -- GS

by George Schiro
Louisiana State Police Crime Laboratory
P. O. Box 66614
Baton Rouge, LA 70896

Article submitted by the author

This information is posted on the Crime Scene Investigator Network website at https://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/blood.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Collection and Preservation of Blood Evidence from Crime Scenes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Since blood evidence associated with a crime can provide information that may solve the case, it is essential to correctly document, collect, and preserve this type of evidence. Improperly handled blood evidence can weaken or destroy a potential source of facts in a case.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Once a blood sample is collected it must be refrigerated or frozen and brought the to lab as quickly as possibly. L.Black 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The collection and preservation of blood stain evidence is important because this evidence can be used to type blood or run DNA analysis.

There are two different types of blood that can be collected at a crime scene: liquid and dried blood. Liquid blood evidence is generally collected from blood pools but can be collected off of clothing as well, using a gauze pad or a sterile cotton cloth. Once the sample is collected it must be refrigerated or frozen and brought to the laboratory as quickly as possible. The sample must first be dried thoroughly at room temperature. It is important to get the sample to the laboratory as quickly as possible because after 48 hours the sample might be useless. If the sample has to be mailed it should be completely air dried before packaging. If the sample isn't completely dry when it needs to be packaged, the sample should be rolled in paper and labeled and then put into either a brown paper bag or a box. The paper bag or box is then sealed and labeled again. It is important to only place one item per container to avoid contamination and samples should not be placed in plastic containers. Samples shouldn't be in plastic containers because if the sample is still damp the moisture from the sample can cause microorganisms that can destroy the evidence. Also, due to this fact, samples should not be in any container for more than two hours.

Dried bloodstains can be found on small objects, larger objects and on clothing. When dried blood is found on a small object the entire object can be sent to the lab after it's been properly packaged and labeled. When dried blood is found on a larger object that is transportable, an investigator should cover the stained area with paper and tape the paper to the object to avoid contamination. If the object that is stained is not transportable there are different ways that an investigator can collect the sample. One option is to cut out the stained area of the large object. If the portion is cut out the sample is packaged the same way as described above but a control sample should also be provided in a separate package. Another option is to use fingerprint tape and lift the sample as well as the surrounding control area. If this method is used it is important for investigators to not touch the sticky side of the tape with bare hands and the investigator should run an eraser or some type of blunt object over the placed tape to ensure that contact is made with the dried stain. The lifted stain is then be packaged and labeled, then delivered to the laboratory. Another way to collect a sample off of an object is to use a clean sharp object to scrape flakes of the stain into a paper packet. The last two methods of collection of a dried bloodstain on a large object require the use of distilled water to dampen the stain before rolling a thread in the stain or absorbing the stain with a cotton square. These two methods are not recommended due to the risk of contamination. When dried blood is found on clothing the entire article of clothing should be packaged and labeled and delivered to the lab.

It is important for the investigator to remember to keep each sample separated so that there is no contamination between samples.

Back to Crime Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blood Evidence: Collection and Preservation - Crime Museum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The collection and preservation of blood stain evidence is important because this evidence can be used to type blood or run DNA analysis. There are two different types of blood that can be collected at a crime scene: liquid and dried blood.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
An investigator collecting blood evidence from a crime scene. E.Tharpe

# data[].attributes.body
There are 2 types of blood that can be collected dried and liquid. Liquid evidence is generally collected from blood pools and off clothing. Dry blood is collected with clean forceps and a cotton swab. L.black

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How is blood collected at a crime scene?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There are two different types of blood that can be collected at a crime scene: liquid and dried blood. Liquid blood evidence is generally collected from blood pools but can be collected off of clothing as well, using a gauze pad or a sterile cotton cloth.

# data[].attributes.body
This website explains the collecting method used by CSI. Kayla H.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The collection and preservation of blood stain evidence is important because this evidence can be used to type blood or run DNA analysis.

There are two different types of blood that can be collected at a crime scene: liquid and dried blood. Liquid blood evidence is generally collected from blood pools but can be collected off of clothing as well, using a gauze pad or a sterile cotton cloth. Once the sample is collected it must be refrigerated or frozen and brought to the laboratory as quickly as possible. The sample must first be dried thoroughly at room temperature. It is important to get the sample to the laboratory as quickly as possible because after 48 hours the sample might be useless. If the sample has to be mailed it should be completely air dried before packaging. If the sample isn't completely dry when it needs to be packaged, the sample should be rolled in paper and labeled and then put into either a brown paper bag or a box. The paper bag or box is then sealed and labeled again. It is important to only place one item per container to avoid contamination and samples should not be placed in plastic containers. Samples shouldn't be in plastic containers because if the sample is still damp the moisture from the sample can cause microorganisms that can destroy the evidence. Also, due to this fact, samples should not be in any container for more than two hours.

Dried bloodstains can be found on small objects, larger objects and on clothing. When dried blood is found on a small object the entire object can be sent to the lab after it's been properly packaged and labeled. When dried blood is found on a larger object that is transportable, an investigator should cover the stained area with paper and tape the paper to the object to avoid contamination. If the object that is stained is not transportable there are different ways that an investigator can collect the sample. One option is to cut out the stained area of the large object. If the portion is cut out the sample is packaged the same way as described above but a control sample should also be provided in a separate package. Another option is to use fingerprint tape and lift the sample as well as the surrounding control area. If this method is used it is important for investigators to not touch the sticky side of the tape with bare hands and the investigator should run an eraser or some type of blunt object over the placed tape to ensure that contact is made with the dried stain. The lifted stain is then be packaged and labeled, then delivered to the laboratory. Another way to collect a sample off of an object is to use a clean sharp object to scrape flakes of the stain into a paper packet. The last two methods of collection of a dried bloodstain on a large object require the use of distilled water to dampen the stain before rolling a thread in the stain or absorbing the stain with a cotton square. These two methods are not recommended due to the risk of contamination. When dried blood is found on clothing the entire article of clothing should be packaged and labeled and delivered to the lab.

It is important for the investigator to remember to keep each sample separated so that there is no contamination between samples.

Back to Crime Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blood Evidence: Collection and Preservation - Crime Museum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The collection and preservation of blood stain evidence is important because this evidence can be used to type blood or run DNA analysis. There are two different types of blood that can be collected at a crime scene: liquid and dried blood.

# data[].attributes.body
Bloody shoe and knife at the state of a crime scene. -I.Tinsley

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
iStock Crime Scene Investigation Bloody Knife And Victims Shoes With Criminal Markers On Ground Homicide Evidence Stock Photo - Download Image Now

Download this Crime Scene Investigation Bloody Knife And Victims Shoes With Criminal Markers On Ground Homicide Evidence photo now. And search more of iStock's library of royalty-free stock images that features Murder photos available for quick and easy download.Product #:gm819737384 $ 12.00 iStock In stock

Crime scene investigation, Bloody knife and victim's shoes with criminal markers on ground, Homicide evidence. Crime scene investigation, Bloody knife and victim's shoes with criminal markers on ground, Homicide evidence. Murder Stock Photo

Description

Crime scene investigation, Bloody knife and victim's shoes with criminal markers on ground, Homicide evidence.

Keywords

Browse top photo categories

Frequently asked questions

What's a royalty-free license?

Royalty-free licenses let you pay once to use copyrighted images and video clips in personal and commercial projects on an ongoing basis without requiring additional payments each time you use that content. It's a win-win, and it's why everything on iStock is only available royalty-free.

What kinds of royalty-free files are available on iStock?

Royalty-free licenses are the best option for anyone who needs to use stock images commercially, which is why every file on iStock - whether it's a photo, illustration or video clip - is only available royalty-free.

How can you use royalty-free images and video clips?

From social media ads to billboards, PowerPoint presentations to feature films, you're free to modify, resize and customize every asset on iStock to fit your projects. With the exception of "Editorial use only" photos (which can only be used in editorial projects and can't be modified), the possibilities are limitless.

Learn more about royalty-free images

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Crime scene investigation, Bloody knife and victim's shoes with...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
iStock Crime Scene Investigation Bloody Knife And Victims Shoes With Criminal Markers On Ground Homicide Evidence Stock Photo - Download Image Now Download this Crime Scene Investigation Bloody Knife And Victims Shoes With Criminal Markers On Ground Homicide Evidence photo now.

# data[].attributes.body
Packaging and labeling shows is important. Blood must be packaged in a way it can't be damaged or contaminated. Kayla H.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Forensic Supplies | Staff Development and Training | A Forensic Approach to Building Teams

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Part 7) Packaging and Labelling the Evidence:
Once an item of physical evidence has been removed from the location at which it was found, it must be packaged in such a way that it cannot become contaminated or damaged. It is equally important that the item is unable to escape from its packaging for two reasons. First, to preserve the item from contamination in an unprotected environment. Secondly, to prevent the item contaminating other packaged evidence. For example, imagine the consequences of a suspected drug in the form of a powder escaping from its package. This could end up (and no doubt will end up) on the outside of another package so that when this is handled, that drug becomes transfered to the person who opens the package and then on to other items for examination!

So, the CSI needs to have a wide range of different types of packaging material and know exactly which is best for the items of evidence being collected. Each package must be sealed to prevent anything getting into the package, and anything getting out of it. And each package must be labelled with information that 1) uniquely identifies it,
2) says exactly where it was recovered, 3) says exactly when it was recovered, 4) shows the name and job (e.g., CSI) of the person who recovered it, and 5) provides details of exactly who has handled the item after it has been recovered and packaged. This (5th) part is very important because it gives details of the chain of custody, otherwise called the continuity in the "life" of the item from the moment it was recovered and thereafter. The labels (in the UK) used to record details of the packaged evidence are often called CJA (Criminal Justice Act) labels.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Investigating a Crime Scene - 7 - Packaging and Labelling the Evidence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Part 7) Packaging and Labelling the Evidence: Once an item of physical evidence has been removed from the location at which it was found, it must be packaged in such a way that it cannot become contaminated or damaged. It is equally important that the item is unable to escape from its packaging for two reasons.

# data[].attributes.headline
Blood Splatter evidence in Joe Bryan Case

# data[].attributes.subject
Blood Splatter evidence in Joe Bryan Case

# data[].attributes.body
Joe was convicted on killing his wife. The blood splatter indicated the weapon was a .357, like the one Joe owned. There was also a flashlight with small drops on the victims blood on it found in Joe's car. L.black

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Recent testimony from an evidentiary hearing in the Joe Bryan case in Texas has centered on blood spatter interpretation. Bryan was a school principal who has been serving a 99-year prison sentence for the 1985 murder of his wife. His conviction was based in part on the testimony of an expert witness in blood spatter interpretation.

The blood spatter testimony indicated that the weapon used was a .357, like the one that Bryan owned. The prosecution stated that a flashlight found in Bryan's car days after the murder contained small drops of the victim's blood, although only presumptive tests were conducted. The blood spatter analyst testified the killer held the flashlight as he shot from close range.

Bryan continues to assert his innocence and an evidentiary hearing was held last month in which his attorney argued - backed by the testimony of a crime scene investigator - that the blood spatter testimony presented at trial was scientifically unsubstantiated. The hearing is currently in recess, awaiting the results of DNA testing on the flashlight that are expected to come back sometime in the fall.

In May, Pamela Collof published a two-part article describing in-depth the background of the case and the testimony of the blood spatter expert witness. The articles are available at: https://features.propublica.org/blood-spatter/mickey-bryan-murder-blood-spatter-forensic-evidence/ (Part I) and https://features.propublica.org/blood-spatter/joe-bryan-conviction-blood-spatter-forensic-evidence/ (Part II).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recent testimony from an evidentiary hearing in the Joe Bryan case in Texas has centered on blood spatter interpretation. Bryan was a school principal who has been serving a 99-year prison sentence for the 1985 murder of his wife. His conviction was based in part on the testimony of an expert witness in blood spatter interpretation.

# data[].attributes.body
Blood can be collected 1 or 2 ways dry or wet. -I.Tinsley

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The collection and preservation of blood stain evidence is important because this evidence can be used to type blood or run DNA analysis.

There are two different types of blood that can be collected at a crime scene: liquid and dried blood. Liquid blood evidence is generally collected from blood pools but can be collected off of clothing as well, using a gauze pad or a sterile cotton cloth. Once the sample is collected it must be refrigerated or frozen and brought to the laboratory as quickly as possible. The sample must first be dried thoroughly at room temperature. It is important to get the sample to the laboratory as quickly as possible because after 48 hours the sample might be useless. If the sample has to be mailed it should be completely air dried before packaging. If the sample isn't completely dry when it needs to be packaged, the sample should be rolled in paper and labeled and then put into either a brown paper bag or a box. The paper bag or box is then sealed and labeled again. It is important to only place one item per container to avoid contamination and samples should not be placed in plastic containers. Samples shouldn't be in plastic containers because if the sample is still damp the moisture from the sample can cause microorganisms that can destroy the evidence. Also, due to this fact, samples should not be in any container for more than two hours.

Dried bloodstains can be found on small objects, larger objects and on clothing. When dried blood is found on a small object the entire object can be sent to the lab after it's been properly packaged and labeled. When dried blood is found on a larger object that is transportable, an investigator should cover the stained area with paper and tape the paper to the object to avoid contamination. If the object that is stained is not transportable there are different ways that an investigator can collect the sample. One option is to cut out the stained area of the large object. If the portion is cut out the sample is packaged the same way as described above but a control sample should also be provided in a separate package. Another option is to use fingerprint tape and lift the sample as well as the surrounding control area. If this method is used it is important for investigators to not touch the sticky side of the tape with bare hands and the investigator should run an eraser or some type of blunt object over the placed tape to ensure that contact is made with the dried stain. The lifted stain is then be packaged and labeled, then delivered to the laboratory. Another way to collect a sample off of an object is to use a clean sharp object to scrape flakes of the stain into a paper packet. The last two methods of collection of a dried bloodstain on a large object require the use of distilled water to dampen the stain before rolling a thread in the stain or absorbing the stain with a cotton square. These two methods are not recommended due to the risk of contamination. When dried blood is found on clothing the entire article of clothing should be packaged and labeled and delivered to the lab.

It is important for the investigator to remember to keep each sample separated so that there is no contamination between samples.

Back to Forensic Investigation

Back to Crime Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blood Evidence: Collection and Preservation - Alcatraz East Pigeon Forge

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The collection and preservation of blood stain evidence is important because this evidence can be used to type blood or run DNA analysis. There are two different types of blood that can be collected at a crime scene: liquid and dried blood.

# data[].attributes.body
Agencies submit blood to the unit from individuals who are required by law to do so. These include individuals convicted of, arrested for, or facing charges of certain qualifying federal crimes or convicted of qualifying. -I.Tinsley

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Starting in October 2016, FDDU began to issue a new and smaller oral DNA collection device. This new collector allows for a direct transfer from inside the cheek onto collection paper in a similar manner to the current collection device, and allows for the possibility of self-collection by offenders. Detailed instructions for its use is included in the kits, and the FD-936 form has not changed. FDDU will continue to accept the old kits, so please use all the current kits in your inventory before ordering new kits.

What We Do

The Federal DNA Database Unit (FDDU) serves the greater forensic community by aiding investigations through hit confirmations against individuals whose profiles are in the National DNA Index System (NDIS). Agencies submit blood or buccal samples to the unit from individuals who are required by law to do so. These include individuals convicted of, arrested for, or facing charges of certain qualifying federal crimes or convicted of qualifying District of Columbia offenses, as well as non-U.S. citizens who are detained under the authority of the United States. FDDU then produces a DNA profile for each of these individuals and uploads it to the NDIS, which is part of the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS).

These known DNA profiles are then searched against unknown forensic profiles from crime scenes across the country. If a match is identified, the casework laboratory can request FDDU to confirm the offender sample DNA profile. Once the profile is confirmed, the FDDU will then release the subject's personal identifying information back to the casework laboratory. This information can then be passed on to investigators in the hopes of apprehending the perpetrator. Thanks to law enforcement agencies and their sample submissions, FDDU has uploaded over one million profiles to NDIS and has aided thousands of investigations to date.

Under the overall direction of the FDDU chief, unit operations effectively cascade across two supervisors and are guided by their respective management of integral program teams. A team of accessioning scientists handle the initial triage of submissions into the unit, inventorying samples, inputting specimen data, and preparing specimens for the beginning stages of testing. A team of laboratory scientists apply robotic processing stations and high-throughput instrumentation to generate DNA typing results from samples within days of sample acceptance. A team of reporting scientists interprets the resulting DNA profiles, approve data for upload, and author correspondence to casework laboratories regarding database associations confirmed between FDDU specimen DNA profiles and corresponding evidentiary DNA profiles.

On a compliance level, the FDDU is supported by teams of DNA technical specialists and DNA program specialists, who have critical responsibilities within the unit for ensuring the quality assurance and quality control of analytical testing, as well as conformance of database operations with established procedural requirements.

Administratively, the unit is supported by a team of management and program analysts with responsibilities for budgetary execution, procurement, inventory, and logistical applications. The unit relies heavily upon an information technology team to support the unit network and overall infrastructure backbone that drives the various operational applications.

From a technology perspective, a DNA Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS) is critical for the automated development of specimen works lists, controlling the stepwise progression of each sample through the entire analytical process. The FDDU utilizes robotic systems in the laboratory to achieve high-throughput processing, allowing for a day-through-evening uninterrupted workflow without human intervention, permitting maximum operational efficiency. A sophisticated software analysis tool (expert system) permits an automated review of resulting DNA data with a reduced level of scientist intervention, increasing throughput rate while consistently meeting or exceeding required performance measures.

History of the Unit and Legislation

FDDU was initially established in 2000 as the Federal Convicted Offender (FCO) Program as a result of the DNA Backlog Elimination Act. Expanding DNA legislation over the next decade significantly impacted both the scope and direction of the FCO Program, which began overseeing the uploading of DNA profiles into NDIS in 2002 and became its own unit, FDDU, in 2009. By July 2015, the unit uploaded its one millionth sample to NDIS.
Read more about major milestones in the history of FDDU and the legislation directing the unit's mission.

DNA Kit Collection Instructions

The current Bode Buccal Collection Kit, released October 1, 2016, and previous kits can be submitted to FDDU by following the instructions in the respective links. The letters "B", "C", "D", and "E" referenced for the kit will be the first character of the kit barcode printed on the main kit envelope:

The Federal DNA Database has created an instructional DVD video available for training and education about our unit and DNA collection kits. These DVDs are available for official law enforcement and other federal collection agencies only. They are free of charge; please email us at fddu@ic.fbi.gov if you would like to place an order.

Contact Information

For further information, please contact FDDU by e-mail at fddu@ic.fbi.gov, or alternatively:

By phone - (703) 632-7529

By fax - (703) 632-7620

By mail - Federal DNA Database Unit, 2501 Investigation Parkway, Quantico, VA 22135

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Federal DNA Database Unit analyzes the Core CODIS loci DNA markers from buccal and blood samples of federal convicted offenders, arrestees facing federal charges, individuals convicted of certain District of Columbia offenses, and non-U.S. citizens detained under the authority of the U.S., for development of DNA profiles that are uploaded to the National DNA Index System (NDIS).

# data[].attributes.body
Darlie Routier was accused and convicted of the brutal murders of her two precious children--based solely on controversial forensic evidence known as bloodstain pattern analysis. -I.Tinsley

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The prosecution's case against Darlie Routier included bloodstain pattern analysis by Tom Bevel. The National Academy of Sciences has stated that this approach to crime scene analysis is "more subjective than scientific."

Testimony by Bevel contradicted the physical evidence in the Routier case. For example, Bevel testified that because bloodstains on the right shoulder area of Darlie's nightshirt contained a mixture of Darlie's blood and each of her two children (one stain contained Darlie's blood mixed with Devon's and the other contained Darlie's blood mixed with Damon's) it showed that Darlie had to have been bleeding when the boys were stabbed.

This testimony contradicts the state's case because of the sock, found about 75 feet down an alley way that ran behind the Routier home. The sock contained Devon and Damon's blood on it. This means that by the time the sock was deposited in the alley, the Routier children had already been attacked. However, the state never explained how Darlie could have gotten the sock into the alley without leaving a trail of blood leading to or around where the sock was found. As evidenced by the crime scene photographs, Darlie bled a great deal from her injuries.

The above is a major problem because the prosecution's own expert acknowledged she had to have been bleeding when she allegedly stabbed the boys. For the prosecution to have been correct, Darlie also had to have been bleeding when she deposited the sock (which we know because blood for each child was on that sock).

Another problem with the blood evidence is that Darlie's nightshirt was cut and removed from her while she was treated by a paramedic. Though special care should have been taken to preserve the bloodstains on the shirt it appears the shirt was eventually placed into a bag prior to being dried.

In addition, the chain of custody for the shirt, as well as the clothing removed from Damon Routier, is highly problematic. The clothing was placed into bags and taken to the fire station. The items were then retrieved from the station by police.

Officer Mayne testified that he picked up two paper sacks from the fire station. He said that he opened the bags and observed blue jeans and underwear in one, and Darlie's nightshirt in the other. Nowhere in the entire trial transcripts is there a description of which sack contained the shirt Damon was wearing when he was murdered. Was the shirt placed into the bag with the jeans or with Darlie's nightshirt? This question remains and is important because of the possibility of cross-contamination of blood from one item onto another.

Darlie's shirt was also put into a paper bag without being folded or dried. Mayne testified at trial that there was blood on the bottom of the bag indicating the shirt had wet blood on it when placed into the bag. This could have allowed blood to seep from one area of the nightshirt onto another. This means that the information garnered from any of the clothing was questionable simply due to the lack of a process used to protect the integrity of the evidence, and then also the problematic chain of custody.

The nightshirt should have been inadmissible for these reasons alone, and yet Tom Bevel was given the go ahead to testify about the two above-referenced stains on the shirt. A question that no one will ever be able to answer now is if those mixed blood stains were a result of cross-contamination. Moreover, did Bevel realize that such a serious problem existed regarding the clothing and possible cross-contamination?
Tom Bevel
Tom Bevel, a charter member of the Scientific Working Group on Bloodstain Pattern Analysis ( SWGSTAIN), has testified for prosecutors throughout the nation. His testimony has helped to secure convictions of many people. He helped to convict Tim Masters who was later exonerated in 2011 due to advanced touch DNA analysis. Richard and Selma Eikelenboom helped to demonstrate that the physical evidence retrieved from murder victim Peggy Hettrick did not match Timothy Masters. Instead, it matched Peggy's ex-boyfriend, Matthew Zoellner. Tim's case is detailed here. Tim recently published a book about his experiences, with the help of coauthor Steve Lehto, called Drawn to Injustice: The Wrongful Conviction of Timothy Masters. A review of the book is here.

Tom Bevel originally testified that Peggy was murdered in the area where she was found. He later claimed that the prosecution had not shown him all the pertinent photographs relating to the case. Upon examining other existing photographs, Bevel stated that Peggy was murdered elsewhere and dumped in the location she was found. This was critical to Tim's case because police and prosecutors claimed the teenager (who was 15 at the time and did not have a car) murdered Peggy near his home and dragged her body further into the field.

Bevel was also involved in helping to convict Warren Horinek. The investigator, medical examiner, and district attorney all believed that Horinek's wife Bonnie committed suicide. However, Bonnie's parents disagreed and hired an attorney to help them obtain an indictment against Horinek. At a later trial, Horinek was convicted based on Bevel's testimony that blood on his shirt came from him shooting his wife instead of from CPR efforts that Horinek was observed conducting. A more detailed account of Warren Horinek's case is located here.

This site contains links to information about other cases Tom Bevel has been involved in that are suspected wrongful convictions. These include Jason Payne and David Camm.
Bevel's Testimony at Darlie's Trial
As described above, Tom Bevel testified at Darlie's trial on behalf of the prosecution. Lloyd Harrell testified for Darlie's defense. He was employed with a private investigation firm. Before working as a private investigator, Harrell worked for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as a special agent.

At trial he testified that the prosecution's transcript of the 911 call Darlie made to the Rowlett police on June 6 of 1996 was not accurate. He also discussed the secret wiretapping of Devon and Damon's grave site, by the Rowlett police, stating it was an unlawful act because it violated federal law. When asked if he had seen a warrant or other document authorizing the secret recordings, Harrell stated that he hadn't.

On December 30th of 1996, before Darlie's murder trial, Harrell met with Tom Bevel, Douglas Mulder, Richard Mosty, and Curtis Glober. He testified that Bevel made "materially different" statements during that meeting then the ones he made under oath and on the stand.

Bevel explained in the meeting that specific bloodstains had been picked for testing for several reasons. Harrell testified: "His first concern was that a stain must have directionality. He explained that directional means in a bloodstain that one axis of the stain is longer than the other one. From the axis he then can determine the directionality, whether the stain is up or down or sideways. In order to make a proper determination, he indicated he made every effort to sample a single stain as multiple stains may cloud the issue of directionality."

During the meeting, Bevel informed the attendees that one of the issues regarding the stains in question was that they contained a mixture of Darlie and her children's blood. As described above, the lab reports show that Darlie was the main contributor of each blood stain. Each individual stain contained a minor contribution from each of her children. There was no way to determine how the stains became mixed.

Bevel's statements during the December meeting were not in line with his later testimony at Darlie's trial. At trial Bevel attempted to suggest that the mixed bloodstains occurred due to two separate events involving cast off or blood spatter. Harrell was asked on the stand if he believed that Bevel's testimony was contradictory to what he told people in the earlier meeting. He said the following:

"Absolutely, for this reason: In Oklahoma City he was asked at least twice, does this mean that each of those stains, the knife tip had to contain the blood of Darlie and the blood of one of her children?" Harrell stated that Bevel's answer was "yes".
Other Cases Involving Bevel
As discussed on the evidence page, Tom Bevels name comes up in other cases that are confirmed or suspected wrongful convictions. The following include cases Bevel has been involved in and the circumstances surrounding each. Click on the links to read more about each one.

The following are cases where people were exonerated after having been convicted at trials where Tom Bevel testified on the side of the prosecution.

The book And Justice for No One discusses Tom Bevel's testimony on behalf of the prosecution. Parts of the book are available here.
The Knife
A separate, but seemingly related problem existed with the knife as well. The prosecution claimed that a single knife was used in the attack and that the knife came from inside the Routier home. However, when the knife in question was tested for DNA only Darlie and Damon's blood was identified on it. Devon's blood was not. The prosecution did not try Darlie for Devon's murder, however. They only tried her for Damon's.

Some have said that prosecutor Greg Davis only sought a conviction against Darlie for Damon's murder because he planned to try her for Devon's if she was acquitted. However, this does not make sense because since blood from Damon was found on the knife, and blood from Devon was not, it means the state's case that Darlie committed the murders was stronger in Damon's case then Devon's. If the prosecution had been unsuccessful in getting a conviction for Damon's murder, they would have been even less likely to get a conviction for Devon's.

Due to Damon's age at the time of his murder, the offense qualified as a capital one. When convicted for the murder, Darlie received the death penalty. At least one juror has emerged to state that he now believes Darlie is innocent and that he made a mistake in his decision to declare her guilty.
Bloody Towels
Towels found in the living room and the hallway confirmed claims made by Darin and Darlie that she had gone into the kitchen to get towels and also wet towels in the sink. A more thorough write up on the towels may be found by clicking here.
Darlie's Pillow
The prosecution contended that Darlie cut her own throat while she stood at the kitchen sink. However, blood from Darlie's pillow (and the pillow cover) supports that her throat was cut while she was sleeping on the couch. Pictures of this evidence were entered as exhibits at trial, but the myth that there was no blood on Darlie's pillow erroneously persists to this day. Click on the pictures below to see the larger version.

The blood was mentioned at trial when defense attorney Richard Mosty questioned Charles Linch.

Mosty: Now, did you ever see this maroon pillow?
Linch: Yes, I did.
Mosty: Did you take that?
Linch: No, I didn't.
Mosty: Who collected that?
Linch: That was collected by the Rowlett Police Department.
Mosty: And, it had blood, it had - this maroon pillow had blood on both sides of it, didn't it?
Linch: Right.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The prosecution's case against Darlie Routier included bloodstain pattern analysis by Tom Bevel. The National Academy of Sciences has stated that this approach to crime scene analysis is "more subjective than scientific." Testimony by Bevel contradicted the physical evidence in the Routier case. For example, Bevel testified that because bloodstains on the right shoulder area...

# data[].attributes.body
When blood is collected at a crime scene, it goes into the system. When another crime occurs and the DNA is a match or a close match detectives know where to look. L.black

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Starting in October 2016, FDDU began to issue a new and smaller oral DNA collection device. This new collector allows for a direct transfer from inside the cheek onto collection paper in a similar manner to the current collection device, and allows for the possibility of self-collection by offenders. Detailed instructions for its use is included in the kits, and the FD-936 form has not changed. FDDU will continue to accept the old kits, so please use all the current kits in your inventory before ordering new kits.

What We Do

The Federal DNA Database Unit (FDDU) serves the greater forensic community by aiding investigations through hit confirmations against individuals whose profiles are in the National DNA Index System (NDIS). Agencies submit blood or buccal samples to the unit from individuals who are required by law to do so. These include individuals convicted of, arrested for, or facing charges of certain qualifying federal crimes or convicted of qualifying District of Columbia offenses, as well as non-U.S. citizens who are detained under the authority of the United States. FDDU then produces a DNA profile for each of these individuals and uploads it to the NDIS, which is part of the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS).

These known DNA profiles are then searched against unknown forensic profiles from crime scenes across the country. If a match is identified, the casework laboratory can request FDDU to confirm the offender sample DNA profile. Once the profile is confirmed, the FDDU will then release the subject's personal identifying information back to the casework laboratory. This information can then be passed on to investigators in the hopes of apprehending the perpetrator. Thanks to law enforcement agencies and their sample submissions, FDDU has uploaded over one million profiles to NDIS and has aided thousands of investigations to date.

Under the overall direction of the FDDU chief, unit operations effectively cascade across two supervisors and are guided by their respective management of integral program teams. A team of accessioning scientists handle the initial triage of submissions into the unit, inventorying samples, inputting specimen data, and preparing specimens for the beginning stages of testing. A team of laboratory scientists apply robotic processing stations and high-throughput instrumentation to generate DNA typing results from samples within days of sample acceptance. A team of reporting scientists interprets the resulting DNA profiles, approve data for upload, and author correspondence to casework laboratories regarding database associations confirmed between FDDU specimen DNA profiles and corresponding evidentiary DNA profiles.

On a compliance level, the FDDU is supported by teams of DNA technical specialists and DNA program specialists, who have critical responsibilities within the unit for ensuring the quality assurance and quality control of analytical testing, as well as conformance of database operations with established procedural requirements.

Administratively, the unit is supported by a team of management and program analysts with responsibilities for budgetary execution, procurement, inventory, and logistical applications. The unit relies heavily upon an information technology team to support the unit network and overall infrastructure backbone that drives the various operational applications.

From a technology perspective, a DNA Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS) is critical for the automated development of specimen works lists, controlling the stepwise progression of each sample through the entire analytical process. The FDDU utilizes robotic systems in the laboratory to achieve high-throughput processing, allowing for a day-through-evening uninterrupted workflow without human intervention, permitting maximum operational efficiency. A sophisticated software analysis tool (expert system) permits an automated review of resulting DNA data with a reduced level of scientist intervention, increasing throughput rate while consistently meeting or exceeding required performance measures.

History of the Unit and Legislation

FDDU was initially established in 2000 as the Federal Convicted Offender (FCO) Program as a result of the DNA Backlog Elimination Act. Expanding DNA legislation over the next decade significantly impacted both the scope and direction of the FCO Program, which began overseeing the uploading of DNA profiles into NDIS in 2002 and became its own unit, FDDU, in 2009. By July 2015, the unit uploaded its one millionth sample to NDIS.
Read more about major milestones in the history of FDDU and the legislation directing the unit's mission.

DNA Kit Collection Instructions

The current Bode Buccal Collection Kit, released October 1, 2016, and previous kits can be submitted to FDDU by following the instructions in the respective links. The letters "B", "C", "D", and "E" referenced for the kit will be the first character of the kit barcode printed on the main kit envelope:

The Federal DNA Database has created an instructional DVD video available for training and education about our unit and DNA collection kits. These DVDs are available for official law enforcement and other federal collection agencies only. They are free of charge; please email us at fddu@ic.fbi.gov if you would like to place an order.

Contact Information

For further information, please contact FDDU by e-mail at fddu@ic.fbi.gov, or alternatively:

By phone - (703) 632-7529

By fax - (703) 632-7620

By mail - Federal DNA Database Unit, 2501 Investigation Parkway, Quantico, VA 22135

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Federal DNA Database Unit analyzes the Core CODIS loci DNA markers from buccal and blood samples of federal convicted offenders, arrestees facing federal charges, individuals convicted of certain District of Columbia offenses, and non-U.S. citizens detained under the authority of the U.S., for development of DNA profiles that are uploaded to the National DNA Index System (NDIS).

# data[].attributes.body
The database shows the exposures of an individual in a lifetime and how these exposures relate to health. Kayla H

# data[].attributes.body
This website explains how blood is collected and preserved. E.Tharpe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The collection and preservation of blood stain evidence is important because this evidence can be used to type blood or run DNA analysis.

There are two different types of blood that can be collected at a crime scene: liquid and dried blood. Liquid blood evidence is generally collected from blood pools but can be collected off of clothing as well, using a gauze pad or a sterile cotton cloth. Once the sample is collected it must be refrigerated or frozen and brought to the laboratory as quickly as possible. The sample must first be dried thoroughly at room temperature. It is important to get the sample to the laboratory as quickly as possible because after 48 hours the sample might be useless. If the sample has to be mailed it should be completely air dried before packaging. If the sample isn't completely dry when it needs to be packaged, the sample should be rolled in paper and labeled and then put into either a brown paper bag or a box. The paper bag or box is then sealed and labeled again. It is important to only place one item per container to avoid contamination and samples should not be placed in plastic containers. Samples shouldn't be in plastic containers because if the sample is still damp the moisture from the sample can cause microorganisms that can destroy the evidence. Also, due to this fact, samples should not be in any container for more than two hours.

Dried bloodstains can be found on small objects, larger objects and on clothing. When dried blood is found on a small object the entire object can be sent to the lab after it's been properly packaged and labeled. When dried blood is found on a larger object that is transportable, an investigator should cover the stained area with paper and tape the paper to the object to avoid contamination. If the object that is stained is not transportable there are different ways that an investigator can collect the sample. One option is to cut out the stained area of the large object. If the portion is cut out the sample is packaged the same way as described above but a control sample should also be provided in a separate package. Another option is to use fingerprint tape and lift the sample as well as the surrounding control area. If this method is used it is important for investigators to not touch the sticky side of the tape with bare hands and the investigator should run an eraser or some type of blunt object over the placed tape to ensure that contact is made with the dried stain. The lifted stain is then be packaged and labeled, then delivered to the laboratory. Another way to collect a sample off of an object is to use a clean sharp object to scrape flakes of the stain into a paper packet. The last two methods of collection of a dried bloodstain on a large object require the use of distilled water to dampen the stain before rolling a thread in the stain or absorbing the stain with a cotton square. These two methods are not recommended due to the risk of contamination. When dried blood is found on clothing the entire article of clothing should be packaged and labeled and delivered to the lab.

It is important for the investigator to remember to keep each sample separated so that there is no contamination between samples.

Back to Crime Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blood Evidence: Collection and Preservation - Crime Museum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The collection and preservation of blood stain evidence is important because this evidence can be used to type blood or run DNA analysis. There are two different types of blood that can be collected at a crime scene: liquid and dried blood.

# data[].attributes.body
The Michael Peterson case is a famous case. A deciding factor for the guilty verdict from the jury was a bloodstain found inside Mr. Peterson’s shorts. Kayla H.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On December 9th, 2001 in Durham, North Carolina, Kathleen Peterson died. According to the 911 call, she was found by her husband Michael Peterson at the bottom of a staircase in their home. He was soon charged with first degree murder, that it had not been a fall, but he had in fact beaten her to death. He was found guilty at trial, and sentenced to life in prison. Eight years later, he was granted a new trial.

A deciding factor for the guilty verdict from the jury was a bloodstain found inside Mr. Peterson's shorts. It was eventually found out that the prosecution's Blood Spatter Analyst, Duane Deaver, was reporting false information, withholding information, and being inattentive in, not only Mr. Peterson's case, but numerous other cases.

During the trial, the district attorney, Jim Hardin, made the case Kathleen had been beaten to death at the bottom of the stairs by Michael due to the large quantity of blood and the injuries to her head. She had seven tears of the scalp but no skull fractures, no brain swelling, and no bruising of the brain. They believed the seven lacerations must be from a beating by a weapon such as a blow poke, a brass fireplace tool, because it could cause lacerations yet it is hollow so it would not cause further damage. Deaver came to the conclusion that there had to be at least four blows to Kathleen's head to cause the spatter on the wall. In an experiment, Deaver placed a bloody sponge in the staircase that represented Kathleen's head and showed the jury he was able to get blood on the inside of his shorts, like Michael's. Since there was no cast-off blood pattern, he proposed the weapon had been cleaned in between strikes.

The defense team included defense attorney David Rudolf, Dr. Werner Spitz, a Forensic Pathologist, Dr. Faris Bandak, an Injury Biomechanics Expert, Dr. Henry Lee, a Forensic Scientist, Tim Palmbach, a DNA Expert, and Ron Guerette, a Private Investigator. Collectively, they proposed the idea Kathleen tripped walking up the staircase, fell backwards and hit her head on the door frame, causing the larger lacerations and a lot of blood to be drawn. She likely knocked herself out then tried to stand upon waking, but was dizzy and slipped on her blood and fell again causing the other lacerations. She likely had a lot of blood on her face, in her hair and if she was coughing, it would have produced a bloodstain pattern on the wall.

After the guilty verdict, Mr. Peterson spent eight years of his life sentence in prison before some key issues regarding his trial came to light. One piece of key evidence that was overlooked was Michael's navy blue shirt. Deaver said bloodstain pattern analysis is a "visual examination" and since he did not see blood on the shirt it was not tested. In reality, not all blood spatter can be seen with the naked eye. There are other methods to enhance one's ability to see blood such as chemical techniques or alternative light sources. Deaver eventually admitted that he did do a Luma-Light test on Michael's shirt and did not find blood spatter, supporting the defense. This information was withheld from the defense team and came out during the trial.

Another problem was with Deaver's experiment mentioned above; he lifted his leg and pulled his shorts leg open before beating the sponge with an object that resembled a blow poke, a guaranteed way to get blood in the shorts and match the evidence. The sponge was also moved to a location in the staircase that could be struck more easily by a blow poke than in the location Deaver calculated Kathleen's head was allegedly hit.

Furthermore, the instructions from the police department were to do DNA testing on Michael and Kathleen's clothing before bloodstain analysis. Susie Baker, who worked with Deaver, changed the instructions to have the clothing sent straight to Deaver for bloodstain analysis. The evidence was never tested for DNA and was not stored properly.

The issues with the compromised forensic evidence gave the defense team enough leverage to come to a plea agreement with the new district attorney in 2017, that Peterson would take and Alford Plea in order to avoid a new trial. An Alford plea means that the defendant does not admit to guilt, but acknowledges that the state either has enough evidence to convict, or in Peterson's case, he simply did not want to go through the ordeal of a new trial, when he felt the system had failed him once and may do so again. He was sentenced to time served. The judge in the case later acknowledged that he felt a second trial would have left reasonable doubt not to convict.

The Peterson case is the subject of the popular documentary series on Netflix The Staircase.

Back to Crime Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On December 9th, 2001 in Durham, North Carolina, Kathleen Peterson died. According to the 911 call, she was found by her husband Michael Peterson at the bottom of a staircase in their home. He was soon charged with first degree...

# data[].attributes.body
This website explains how blood is collected and packaged.- Evan Tharpe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Whole blood is collected from a suitable donor animal for blood transfusion purposes into a blood bag containing citrate phosphate dextrose as the anticoagulant. Once the blood has been collected, it can be stored at 4°C and used in its natural state or can be converted into a variety of components. These blood components are packed red blood cells, platelet-rich plasma, platelet concentrates, fresh plasma, fresh frozen plasma, frozen plasma, cryoprecipitate and cryosupernant. Double, triple and quadruple blood bags (a single whole blood collection bag with various satellite bags) are used for producing and separating components within a sterile closed environment. Blood component production is highly desirable for these reasons:

Components maximize the yield of products from a single blood donation.

Ability to use the optimal products (in high concentrations) for specific diseases.

Minimize exposure to unnecessary foreign material in recipients, particularly red blood cell antigens, which can incite transfusion reactions.

Increased efficacy of treatment through providing only the factors that are required in the animal, e.g. cryoprecipitate for treatment of von Willebrand disease or Hemophilia A (cryoprecipitate is enriched in von Willebrand factor and Factor VIII, which are deficient in these two diseases, respectively).

The most commonly available blood components are whole blood, packed red blood cells, fresh frozen plasma and cryoprecipitate. Production of these components requires a specific type of refrigerated centrifuge (bucket centrifuge) which can fit the large transfusion bags and sediment cells from plasma. Click on the thumbnail to the right to see a visual representation of how these products are produced.

Whole blood

This is blood collected directly from a donor animal into a blood transfusion bag containing citrate-phosphate-dextrose with (CPDA-1) or without adenine (CPD) as an anticoagulant. For dogs, a 500 mL transfusion bag is used (which contains approximately 63 mL of anticoagulant, obtaining approximately 450 mL blood from the donor dog). For cats, anticoagulant is usually placed in a 30 or 60 mL syringe (in the appropriate anticoagulant to blood volume ratio), although pediatric transfusion bags can be used. Production of components from whole blood (with complete sterility) is only achievable if blood is collected into transfusion bags. Whole blood can be used immediately or stored at 4°C for future transfusion or separation into blood components.

Additives have been developed that can be added to the whole blood in a sterile fashion (they are attached to the original transfusion bag as a satellite bag). These are used to optimize red blood cell storage viability. These additives usually contain dextrose and adenine, for red blood cell energy metabolism, and mannitol, which decreases red blood cell lysis. Several additives have been evaluated with canine red blood cells. Both Nutricel® and Adsol® increase the post-transfusion viability of stored canine red cells to 35 and 37 days, respectively. Separation of whole blood into components ideally requires a refrigerated centrifuge with rotor heads large enough to hold a 500 mL blood bag - these are generally bucket centrifuges and refrigeration of the centrifuge is required to produce cold-dependent components such as cryoprecipitate.

For species in which red blood cells settle rapidly with gravity alone (horses), compression devices can be used to obtain red blood cell-depleted plasma and red blood cells. The red blood cells are allowed to settle in the bag at room temperature (takes a minimum of 20 minutes), then the bag is placed in a gentle compression device which squeezes the supernatant plasma into a separate transfusion bag. The plasma contains some leukocytes, platelets (which can cause febrile transfusion reactions) and some red blood cells (which will sensitize the recipient to foreign red blood cell antigens). This procedure is not commonly used due to the less than clean separation of red blood cells from plasma, but is an option when packed red blood cells are not available and the donor's plasma contains antibodies which will destroy the recipient's red blood cells (i.e. an incompatible minor cross-match reaction).

RBC components

Packed red blood cells

These are a concentrated source of red blood cells that remain in a small amount of plasma once supernatant plasma is removed after centrifugation of the blood transfusion bag containing whole blood. Packed cells are an excellent source of red blood cells for anemic animals that need the additional oxygen-carrying capacity these cells provide. Packed red blood cells can be used immediately or stored at 4°C. They need dilution in sterile isotonic solution prior to infusion (due to the high hematocrit, packed cells without dilution are very thick and flow sluggishly through infusion lines). The current standard for red blood ell storage is that there should be about 75% post-transfusion viability after storage, that is at least 75% of the transfused red blood cells must remain in the recipient's circulation 24 hours after transfusion. The post-transfusion viability of canine red blood cells collected into CPDA-1 is 20 days. Changes that do occur in packed red blood cells with storage over 28 days include a decrease in pH (mean 7 to 6.4 units), likely due to increased lactate concentration (mean 2.7 to 19.7 mmol/L), increased potassium concentrations (mean 2.7 to 6.7 mEq/L; attributed to defective sodium-potassium pumps in cells) and increased hemolysis (mean of 0.2% to 0.7%, with higher hemolysis seen in individual units, up to 2%). The stored red blood cells were administered to dogs without overt complications ( Rodrigues et al 2020).

Platelet components

Platelet-rich plasma

Platelet-rich plasma is produced by separating plasma from red blood cells (within 6 hours of whole blood collection) using a slow spin to prevent pelleting of the platelets. Platelet-rich plasma is useful for the treatment of disorders of platelet number and function but must be infused within 8 to 12 hours (maintained at room temperature) due to platelet instability (which limits its use).

Platelet concentrates

Platelet concentrates are produced by separating most of the plasma from platelet-rich plasma. Platelet concentrates are used similarly to platelet-rich plasma.

Plasma components

Platelet-poor plasma: Fresh, fresh-frozen, frozen

Platelet-poor plasma is produced by separating plasma from red blood cells using a high spin to pellet platelets with the red cells. This is the starting point for production of most blood components. Separation of platelets is desirable because they provide an additional source of foreign antigens and micro-aggregation can cause transfusion reactions. Approximately 200 to 400 mL of plasma are obtained from each whole blood transfusion bag. One unit of plasma is defined as that obtained from a single whole blood transfusion bag.

Fresh plasma: This is platelet-poor plasma that is separated from red cells and infused within 6 hours of blood collection (with the blood bag being maintained at 4°C until separation).

Fresh frozen plasma (FFP): This is platelet-poor plasma that is separated from red cells within 6 hours of blood collection and frozen in a dedicated freezer (at or below -20°C).

Fresh frozen plasma and fresh plasma contain all coagulation factors and plasma proteins (such as albumin).

Stable for 1 year if maintained in a dedicated freezer (one that does not undergo freeze-thaw cycles like household freezers) at or below -20°C

One unit of FFP is defined as that obtained from a single whole blood transfusion bag (approximately 250 mL).

Frozen plasma: Frozen plasma lacks certain coagulation factors which are quite unstable, including factor VIII, von Willebrand factor and Factor V. It is a source of plasma proteins and inhibitors. It can come from several sources:

Plasma that is separated and frozen longer than 6 hours after whole blood collection

Fresh plasma that is not used within 6 hours of collection and then frozen

Fresh frozen plasma maintained for longer than 1 year in a dedicated freezer.

Cryoprecipitate (CPP) and cryosupernatant (cryosuper)

These products are produced by slow thawing of fresh frozen plasma at 4°C. Cryoprecipitable proteins (von Willebrand factor, factor VIII, fibronectin, fibrinogen) precipitate at this temperature and can be concentrated in a very small amount of remaining plasma (approximately 1/10 of the starting volume of FFP, or about 20 to 30 mL).

Cryoprecipitate: This is produced by slow-thawing (at 4°C) fresh frozen plasma, followed by centrifugation at 4°C and removal of most of the supernatant plasma.

Concentrated source of von Willebrand factor, fibrinogen, Factor VIII and fibronectin.

Cryoprecipitate is stable for 1 year from the date of collection of the whole blood for transfusion purposes (not the date of preparation of the product) if maintained at or below -20°C in a dedicated (not frost free) freezer.

One unit of cryoprecipitate is defined as that obtained from a single FFP bag (approximately 250 mL plasma).

Cryosupernatant (Cryosuper): Thisis the remaining plasma after removal of the pelleted cryoprecipitate.

Source of all coagulation and plasma proteins, except for Factor VIII, fibrinogen, von Willebrand factor and fibronectin.

Cryosupernant is stable for 5 years if stored in a dedicated freezer at or below -20°C.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Whole blood is collected from a suitable donor animal for blood transfusion purposes into a blood bag containing citrate phosphate dextrose as the anticoagulant. Once the blood has been collected, it can be stored at 4°C and used in its natural state or can be converted into a variety of components.

# data[].attributes.body
This website shows how blood can be compared to other profiles within the data base. -Evan Tharpe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Making connections

Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) molecules contain the information all living cells in the human body need to function. Apart from identical twins, each person's DNA is unique. As such, it can be used as evidence to help convict a suspect of a crime, but also to clear an innocent person.

Samples from crime scenes or suspects, usually obtained from blood, hair or body fluids, are analysed, resulting in a DNA profile which can be compared against other profiles within a database.

This creates the opportunity for 'hits' - person-to-scene, scene-to-scene or person-to-person matches - where no previous connection was known.

DNA can also be used to identify victims of disasters, locate missing persons, and even pinpoint from where trafficked goods such as ivory or wood originated.

DNA database

Created in 2002, INTERPOL's DNA database currently contains more than 247,000 profiles contributed by 84 member countries.

Police can submit a DNA profile from offenders, crime scenes, missing persons and unidentified human remains, with a search result provided within minutes. Our database has enabled investigators around the world to link offenders to different types of crime including rape, murder and armed robbery.

There is no nominal data attached to the profile, which is submitted in the form of an alphanumerical code. Member countries retain ownership of the information, in line with our rules on the processing of data. Countries can also choose which other countries they share their data with.

Identifying missing persons

Searching for missing persons in their home country may not be enough; sometimes international police cooperation is needed to find them. In the event of a body being found, INTERPOL can use DNA to identify them.

We compare the DNA profile of the unidentified body with that of the missing person to see if they match. The missing person's DNA sample can be taken from personal items such as toothbrush or hairbrush.

Where a direct DNA profile of the missing person cannot be taken, DNA samples from consenting family members can be used to help identify a relative that is missing. This is done through our separate service for family DNA matching, known as I-Familia.

Solving environmental crimes

DNA analysis was first used in police investigations in the mid-1980s; since then it has been applied to a growing range of criminal enquiries, including environmental crimes.

DNA samples from seized ivory can be analysed to identify the original herd and geographic region, and potentially identify the criminal networks behind large-scale elephant and rhino poaching.

With the global illicit trade in timber worth billions of dollars every year, DNA analysis is also showing great potential for accurately identifying the species and origin of seized timber specimens, even down to an individual tree.

What is a DNA profile?

DNA is a molecule that is found in most cells of the human body. Some regions of this molecule (genes) carry information that serves as a code for our individual traits such as eye colour. However, most of our genetic makeup is "non-coding DNA" which varies greatly among non-related individuals and as such, serves as a basis for individualisation.

DNA is extracted from a sample by forensic biologists in specialised laboratories. Each country decides which tools their laboratories will use to analyse the genetic markers, known as Short Tandem Repeats. The combination of markers constitutes a DNA profile; different tools may target different markers but there is sufficient overlap to allow for comparison between countries.

How is a match made?

Member countries submit DNA profiles to our DNA database which then performs a search. The profile is given a reference number by a member country and no nominal information is entered into the database.

If that profile is already in our database because another country has previously submitted it, then the search result is positive. In this case, we inform both countries about the match, and we invite them to pursue the investigation once the two countries have verified the database hit.

If the profile is being entered into the database for the first time, it results in a negative search result. In this case, with permission from the submitting member country, the profile will remain in the database for potential future matches.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) molecules contain the information all living cells in the human body need to function. Apart from identical twins, each person's DNA is unique. As such, it can be used as evidence to help convict a suspect of a crime, but also to clear an innocent person.

# data[].attributes.body
This website analysis the bloodstain pattern in the case of David Camm. -Evan Tharpe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By: Bill Clutter

The first use of blood stain analysis in an American courtroom occurred in 1966, in the re-trial of Sam Sheppard, an Ohio physician who spent over 10 years in prison before being freed. Sheppard had been convicted in 1954 of bludgeoning his wife to death in her bed, but maintained his innocence, claiming the attack was perpetrated by an intruder. This famous case inspired the TV series The Fugitive (1963-67) and the 1993 movie, starring Harrison Ford. The U.S. Supreme Court vacated the original conviction because of pre-trial publicity that made it impossible to receive a fair trial. F. Lee Bailey, gained fame as a criminal defense lawyer by winning an acquittal on re-trial. Dr. Paul Kirk, a criminologist at the University of California, Berkley, conducted a reconstruction of the crime scene and provided the first expert testimony interpreting for the jury patterns of cast-off and impact spatter bloodstains that were present at the crime scene. His testimony helped win Sheppard's freedom.

However, it was Herbert L. MacDonell, who is credited with establishing the profession of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis (BPA). In 1971, MacDonell wrote Flight Characteristics and Stain Patterns of Human Blood, the first authoritative BPA training manual. In 1983, he organized a meeting of his disciples whom he trained in Corning, NY and organized the International Association of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts (IABPA).

To acquire a better understanding of this specialty, I attended a bloodstain pattern analysis course sponsored by Bevel Gardner & Associates.

THE CAMM CASE: "A BLACK-EYE" TO THE BPA PROFESSION
After giving an overview of BPA history, the instructor mentioned that the bloodstain profession has taken a few hits with the 2009 report from the National Academy of Sciences that was critical of some of the practices of BPA in American courtrooms. He noted that one case in particular, the David Camm case in Indiana, has given the profession "a black eye".

I had watched the CBS 48 Hours story on the Camm case several years earlier, so I was aware that former Indiana State Trooper, David Camm's alibi had been corroborated by eleven men. He had been playing basketball at a church where his uncle was the pastor. The game started around 7 p.m., about the same time that his wife and two children were last seen alive.

The men played basketball for about two hours and David was there the entire time, according to those who played ball with him. At approximately 9:26 p.m. he arrived home and called his old post at the Indiana State Police after finding the bodies of his wife and two children in the garage of their home in Georgetown, Indiana.

David told police he found his wife lying on the floor of the garage. She had a single bullet wound to the head. He found his five-year-old daughter, Jill, in her seat belt in the back seat of his wife's Ford Bronco inside the garage. Jill had been shot once in the head. His son Brad was slumped over the back seat as if he had attempted to escape to the back cargo area when he was shot. David said his son's body felt warm, possibly still alive. David climbed into the back seat, carried his son out of the vehicle and laid him next to his mother so he could perform CPR. Brad died from the single gun-shot wound that entered just under his arm pit. At autopsy, the pathologist found possible evidence of a possible "sexual assault" in Jill's vaginal area which immediately changed the dynamics of the homicide investigation. The demeanor of the questioning toward David became accusatory. However, a week earlier, the child's pediatrician had noticed the same inflammation, but attributed it to aggressive wiping or possibly a reaction to bubble baths. A mandatory reporter, the family doctor was not alarmed. No report of child abuse had been made at that time.

Prosecutors decided to call in a bloodstain pattern "expert" who had a reputation for assisting in the prosecution of cases that were difficult to prove. Two days later, David Camm was arrested for first degree murder, based on an interpretation of eight tiny bloodstains on his t-shirt. The "expert" who had been called to the crime scene interpreted these stains as high velocity impact spatter from allegedly firing the gun that killed his family. Some of the leading experts in BPA, however, disagreed, and said the stains were caused by transfer from coming into contact with his 5 year-old daughter's hair that was saturated with her blood when he removed his son from the vehicle.

Robert Stites was the so-called "expert" in crime scene reconstruction and bloodstain pattern analysis who arrived in New Albany, Indiana to assist Floyd County prosecutor Stan Faith. Stites, however, was merely a crime scene photographer who was working at the direction of Rodney Englert. The real "expert" was Englert, who was a Charter Member of the International Association of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts (IABPA). Englert was not able to travel to the crime scene, so he sent his photographer.

Police were unaware at the time that Stites was unqualified to render opinions about blood-stain analysis, but he did. Prior to traveling to Indiana, Stites had never taken any courses on bloodstain analysis or crime scene reconstruction, and was not a member of any blood stain analysis organization. The Indiana State Police evidence technician, who was initially in charge of processing the crime scene, had strong reservations about the so-called "expertise" of Robert Stites. After watching Stites the seasoned CSI realized that Stites didn't know what he was doing.

The CSI came to this realization after Stites claimed there was evidence of clean-up at the crime scene. He said there had been a clear watery substance added to the large volume of blood that flowed downward to the edge of the garage away from the wife's head wound. It turns out that it was serum separation, which helped provide a timeline as to when the murders happened. A defense bloodstain expert calculated that it would have taken about two hours for the serum to separate, placing the time of death at around 7:30 p.m. Stites arrived at the crime scene on Sept. 30, 2000. On the following day, David was arrested based on Stite's opinion that high velocity impact spatter was present on David's gray t-shirt known as Area 30. The police officer who served the arrest warrant, had reservations about arresting David based on the opinions of Stites.

The affidavit that prosecutors drafted that provided probable cause to arrest Camm relied entirely on the opinions of Stites. Stites observed eight small blood stains on the front left side of David's t-shirt that were less than one millimeter in diameter. The size of stains, he said, meant this had to have been high velocity impact spatter from being in close proximity to a fired gun.

Backspatter and forward spatter from a bullet penetrating a blood source at high velocity can project a fine mist pattern of blood stains; backward as the bullet penetrates the object and forward as the bullet exits. Blood stains from high velocity impact spatter typically are less than a millimeter in diameter, as is found on David's t-shirt.

However, as I learned from my BPA training, "Both expectorate blood [aspirated from the mouth] and flies produce patterns that an analyst can misidentify as impact spatter", according to Tom Bevel's book Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: with an Introduction to Crime Scene Analysis. Bevel cautions that it is, therefore, important for the analyst to consider the full context of the crime scene.

EXPERTS FOR THE DEFENSE
Blood stain experts Bart Epstein, Terry Laber, Stuart James, and Paul Kish, some of the most respected bloodstain experts in the country testified for the defense. They expressed their professional opinions that the small spots of blood on David's t-shirt were transfer stains caused by the t-shirt coming into contact with blood saturated strands of his daughter's hair.

However, none of the State's bloodstain experts reported observing high velocity impact spatter stains on David's shorts. The absence of spatter stains on David's pants adds strength to the conclusion that the stains on Area 30 were caused by transfer from the shirt coming into contact with his daughter's blood soaked strands of hair.

The linear pattern of the stains is also not consistent with high velocity impact spatter. One would expect to see a conical pattern of dispersal from high velocity impact spatter (both forward and back spatter) when a bullet fired from a gun impacts a body of blood. However, the bloodstains on Area 30 form a straight line, a pattern that is more consistent with a transfer of blood from strands of hair from a head wound.

MISUSE OF BPA IN AMERICAN COURTROOMS
My first case involving Rodney Englert, was a Lawrenceville, IL woman who was facing the death penalty. In June of 2000, I received a phone call from Katharine Liell, a criminal defense attorney from Bloomington, IN. Ironically; she would later represent David Camm. Her client, Julie Rea, was a Ph. D. student at Indiana University. It was a cold-case. Three years had gone by since the murder of Julie's son, 10 year-old Joel Kirkpatrick. On Oct. 13, 1997, at 4 a.m., Julie was awakened by her son's screams for help. When she went into his room, she startled an intruder. He had just stabbed her son to death with a knife that came from her kitchen.

The elected state's attorney resisted pressure from the sheriff and her ex-husband to place her under arrest. The prosecutor made a public statement that there was not enough evidence to arrest anyone. After he left office, a special prosecutor intent on charging Julie Rea with a capital offense was appointed to take charge of the investigation. The special prosecutor hired Rodney Englert.

Englert was able to see evidence of cast off bloodstains in his interpretation of the night-shirt Julie was wearing when she encountered the intruder. Englert opined that the cast-off stains were allegedly caused when the mother drew back the knife after repeatedly stabbing her son to death. Bloodstain interpretations previously made by forensic scientists from the Illinois State Police could only find transfer patterns consistent with the mother's story about colliding into an intruder and struggling with the man. She had a black eye where the man had punched her in the face, and she had a gash on her arm that required sutures.

I told Julie's attorney that if I was appointed to her client's case, I would want to investigate whether Tommy Lynn Sells had been in the area at the time of the murder. A child serial killer, Sells had just been arrested in Del Rio, TX, for a similar crime in which he broke into a trailer at 4 a.m and used a knife from the kitchen to kill Kaylene Harris while her mother slept. However, prosecutors decided not to seek the death penalty in a maneuver to avoid reforms that would have leveled the playing field by providing Julie's defense with financial resources to investigate her innocence prior to trial. After Julie was convicted in March of 2002, Diane Fanning published Through the Window: The Terrifying True Story of Cross-Country Killer Tommy Lynn Sells. Sells had told Fanning about a murder in Illinois in which he had killed a child and was startled by the mother who came into the room. He said he would have killed her too, if he hadn't dropped the knife. Crime scene investigators found the bloody knife on the floor at the doorway, where Julie said she encountered the man.

I was able to corroborate the confession with witnesses who reported to their sheriff an intruder who matched Sell's physical description. Based on this evidence, Texas Ranger John Allen provided an affidavit supporting Julie's petition seeking to overturn her conviction. However, after her conviction was overturned the same prosecutors and police investigators who got it wrong dug in their heels and decided to disbelieve the confession before consulting with Texas law enforcement authorities. They re-arrested Julie just as she was about to be released from prison and set her case for re-trial. A new jury, hearing the evidence of the serial killer's confession found her not guilty in 2006. She was represented by the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University Law School pro bono. She subsequently received a Certificate of Innocence.

On June 2, 2003, a year after Englert's testimony was used to persuade juries to convict David Camm and Julie Rea, an ethics complaint against Englert was filed with the American Academy of Forensic Science by some of the most respected bloodstain experts in the country alleging that Englert had misrepresented his education, training and experience. Subsequent to this, Englert filed suit against Herb MacDonell (regarded as the father of the BPA profession) alleging slander for calling Englert among other things "a forensic whore", "liar-for-hire", "a very smooth charlatan", and "the Bin Laden of bloodstains".

In 2009, the National Academy of Sciences released a critique of forensic science practices in U.S. courtrooms, noting that since the introduction of DNA testing in 1989 that "faulty science" was found to be responsible for the wrongful convictions of a number of post-conviction DNA exonerations. BPA was one of several disciplines that were faulted because of the interjection of "examiner bias" that may lead to erroneous conclusions when interpreting evidence like bite marks, tool marks and bloodstains. The report noted "many sources of variability arise with the production of bloodstain patterns, and their interpretation is not nearly as straightforward as the process implies". The report found, "some experts extrapolate far beyond what can be supported", and went on to conclude that "extra care must be given to the way in which the analyses are presented in court. The uncertainties associated with bloodstain pattern analysis are enormous".

DNA IDENTIFIES CHARLES BONEY
Four years after David Camm was arrested, his conviction was reversed in Aug. 2004, because prosecutors had unfairly inflamed the jury by introducing testimony about his extramarital affairs. Some of his affairs were with women with whom he worked at the Indiana State Police Sellersburg Post, which had taken charge of the homicide investigation.

A new team of investigators were called into the case to be "fresh eyes". They discovered from their review of the file that there had been a grey sweatshirt that was foreign to the crime scene. The sweatshirt was found underneath Brad Camm's body, where his father laid his son next to his wife.

The inside collar had the moniker "BACK-BONE" written in black ink. At the very beginning of the investigation the collar had been swabbed by a forensic scientist to identify the wearer's DNA. An unknown male DNA profile was identified. Prior to David's first trial his defense attorney asked the prosecutor, Stan Faith, (who had charged David) whether this DNA profile had been entered into CODIS, the FBI offender DNA database. The prosecutor told the defense attorney that it was submitted, but there was no hit. This was a false representation, which obstructed justice for David Camm.

Years later, after an appellate court reversed David's conviction, Camm's new attorney, Katherine Liell, requested that the DNA be entered into CODIS. In Feb. 2005, a CODIS hit came back identifying a career criminal named Charles Darnell Boney whose prison nickname was BACK-BONE. He had been released from prison a few months before the Camm family was killed. Known as the "Shoe Bandit", Boney had a foot fetish and was sexually aroused by holding women at gunpoint and stealing their shoes.

One of the female troopers who arrived at the crime scene had noted in her report that it was odd that the shoes of David's wife had been removed from her feet and were placed on top of the vehicle.

Now, it all made sense.

Although his wife's shoes and pants had been removed, there was no evidence of a sexual assault in the conventional sense. So investigators dismissed the idea that the crime was motivated by the behavior of a sexual predator. But knowing Boney's sexual predilection of being aroused by women's bare feet and legs, the artifacts of the crime scene fit perfectly with his MO.

THE PROSECUTION COMPLEX
Chicago Sun Times reporter Tom Frisbie described the "Prosecution Complex" in his book Victims of Justice, about the infamous Nicarico case. Instead of seeking justice when new and exonerating evidence was found proving the innocence of Rolando Cruz, which included DNA and confession of a serial killer, the police and prosecutors who got it wrong tend to circle the wagons to fend off the attack on the original conviction. In that case, police and prosecutors were eventually indicted for a conspiracy to obstruct justice.

Less than a month after DNA identified Charles Boney, his palm print was found on the door frame of the passenger side of David's wife's Ford Bronco. This palm print is consistent with Boney having reached inside the vehicle to fire the shots that killed 7 year-old Brad, and his 5 year-old sister, Jill, who was still seat belted inside the vehicle.

Earlier, a judge had lowered David's bond. He was released to what remained of his family. His uncle, Sam Lockhart, who had been playing basketball that night with David, bonded him out of jail.

But now Boney was given a choice. He could be charged with the death penalty, or he could cooperate and assist prosecutors with their theory that Boney provided the gun to David Camm that he allegedly used to kill his family. Boney initially denied knowing David when he was interviewed in February. A month later, with this new and compelling evidence of his palm print, Boney's life depended on which choice he made. Despite his previous series of proven lies, Boney changed his story, and now said he met David playing basketball and after this first meeting arranged to sell him a gun that he wrapped in his sweatshirt. However, this does not explain why David's wife's DNA is on the left sleeve of the sweatshirt. The autopsy revealed that David's wife had struggled with the assailant and had injuries suggesting she had been choked.

Nevertheless, David was re-indicted for conspiracy to commit murder and has been confined to a prison cell ever since. Although Boney was convicted of conspiracy to commit murder and remains in prison, he recently said he has every expectation of being a free man someday.

EXONERATING THE INNOCENT
The highlight of my BPA training was the arrival of Tom Bevel. He had been on the road most of that week testifying in court. During the noon break after his presentation, he told me about his work on a case in North Carolina where he had provided testimony of his interpretation of bloodstain evidence that had helped to exonerate an innocent man

On Feb. 10, 2010, he provided testimony for the North Carolina Innocence Project before an independent panel of three judges. This special commission was created by the state's Supreme Court to establish an independent review of inmate claims of actual innocence called North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission, the first of its kind in the nation. Bevel's testimony persuaded the three judges that there was clear and convincing evidence demonstrating the innocence of Greg Taylor. Taylor was granted a full pardon on May 21, 2010, and was released from prison. He had been wrongfully convicted in 1993 of first degree murder based on erroneous testimony concerning bloodstain evidence. He spent nearly two decades in prison for a crime he did not commit.

A few years before that, Bevel had also assisted with the release of Tim Masters, an innocent man who had been convicted of murder in Colorado. In that case, Bevel reversed the previous opinion he had given that originally helped to convict Masters, after he had been provided additional evidence that had been concealed from him by the police detective who was later indicted for his alleged misconduct in the case.

Some of the real heroes in cases like this are guys like Tom Bevel, who dare to reveal their humanity by admitting when they get it wrong, but are willing to work to make it right.

( On October 24, 2013, David Camm, walked free after 13-years in prison after a jury in Lebanon, Indiana found him not guilty in a third re-trial. His case was the first exoneration for Investigating Innocence, which was started earlier that year. Bill Clutter, who started the project, was a member of Camm's defense team and suggested conducting an animated crime scene reconstruction, which helped persuade the jury that David Camm is innocent. Students at the University of Indiana assisted Clutter and the Camm defense team in reviewing the case and provided a fresh set of eyes. ( Read more about the exoneration here. )

Bill Clutter is a board certified member of the Criminal Defense Investigation Training Council. He started the Illinois Innocence Project in 2001, and is the Director of Investigations for a national innocence project called Investigating Innocence that he started in January 2013.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: The Case of David Camm

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By: Bill Clutter The first use of blood stain analysis in an American courtroom occurred in 1966, in the re-trial of Sam Sheppard, an Ohio physician who spent over 10 years in prison before being freed. Sheppard had been convicted in 1954 of bludgeoning his wife to death in her bed, but maintained his innocence,...