PUBLIC Forums => Public Forums => Forensics => Topic started by: Steven Pavlovich on July 19, 2019, 11:54:54 AM
-
Hello to all,
An understanding of the methods used by criminals to procure and distribute firearms extends well beyond the information required for the courts, known as 'evidential focus' which treats each case individually. (Bruenisholz, E. et al. 2015).
The use of undefined terms such as ?homemade? or ?improvised? within forensic reports and papers published in the AFTE Journals to describe firearms or firearm components introduces a level of unacceptable ?subjective? interpretation, which if accepted in court proceedings or by intelligence analysts in the preparation of their reports will compromise the effectiveness of firearms evidence and analysis. Homemade and improvised firearms may in the absence of a clear definition be seen as a harmless indulgence of an individual with a simple interest in weapons, and regardless of the nature of the police investigation and the rigour of the forensic firearm examination, the subjective interpretation of terminology by lay persons can only result in poor outcomes. There can never be a definition for every possible eventuality or circumstance however further analysis of forensic intelligence data beyond the initial examination will require precise definitions.
Perhaps there is a need to extend the AFTE glossary significantly sooner rather than later to recognise the wider implications of firearms examination and reporting together with significant changes in manufacturing processes and materials by defining such terms as;
Forensic intelligence, Additive manufacturing,3D printing, Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF),Selective Laser Melting (SLM),Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), Electron beam melting (EBM), Polymer, Aftermarket part, Generic part, Workshop manufactured, Home made, Improvised, Craft produced, Producibility...
I would be pleased to hear any comments or additions to the list above.
Best regards,
Steve
[/size][/font]