The development in all kinds of technologies changed the methods used by the forensic science too. It is enough to look back in the history to the Sherlock Holmes times described in the crime literature of that time in order to witness the enormous progress done in the way of processing the evidences found on the crime scene.
Nowadays when there is a burglary crime scene investigating and the assigned police officer finds some blood drops, fingerprints, shoeprints and a hammer he has to be sure that these evidences belong indeed to the crime scene and are not additionally dropped by some of the people who happen to be there. For the purpose he has to follow the special procedure for securing and isolating the place. The police officers have to follow special rules of behavior in order not to leave additional objects and traces. The police offices has to act very carefully with the blood drops transferring them to a sterile glass surface and to prepare them for the Blood Stain Pattern Analysis that is performed in the laboratories by high technology methods investigating for matches and DNA. (Fisher, B., 2003, p. 199) As far as for the fingerprints the evidence found should be located, photographed and replaced to a special surface, ready to be processed for matches according to the new technologies. (Fisher, B., 2003, p. 93) The footprints should be well cleaned in order to be maximum available for processing, photographed and the police officer should go around and investigate for other shoeprints and eventually find the paths for entrance and exit from the crime scene. (Fisher, B., 2003, p. 225) According to Barry Fisher the hammer should be investigated for blood, semen, saliva, hair, cells evidences using the modern technologies and materials for processing evidence. (Fisher, B., 2003, p. 149)
In the correctional facilities, along with drugs, the cell phones and the belonging to them electric chargers are the latest trendy items of contraband that correctional institutions face daily.
In order to fight smuggling contraband in the prisons and jails and to make them safer places the correctional officers install Airport scanners. A pilot program, sponsored by NIJ that has success installed a millimeter wave imaging system for scanning visitors. It was applied in Graterford, Pennsylvania at the local State Correctional Institution. Along with scanners, the Weapons and Non-Permitted Devices Detector (WANDD) are also used to scans fully clothed people. (Bulman, 2009, n. p.) Many other devices using recent technologies are implemented almost every day for prevention.
The activity of the probation officer is technologically supported by electronic monitoring or as it is more popular as electronic supervision that is very helpful and much more effective than the constant personal contact between the probation officer and the individual under probation. (BJA, 2009, n. p.)
The court case of Kyllo v. United States (2001) is one of the cases that are reshaping the role of the law enforcement practitioner facing additional challenges as not only gathering good evidences from the crime scene but the way of gathering, observing warrants, etc., that make them fit for presenting in court and the most important, to be included as court evidences. The case represents the outcome when a warrant is processed in violation of its order for time and place. (Kyllo v. United States, 2001)
Considering all above written I can conclude that my preferences for further education and profession involvement are attracted by the law enforcement career that will help me develop my knowledge and skills.
References
Bureau of Justice Assistance, Offender Supervision with Electronic technology: Community Correction Resource, (n. d.) U. S. Department of Justice, 2nd edition, Retrieved March 2, 2016 from www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/APPA/pubs/OSET_2.pgf
Bulman, P., Using Technology to Make Prisons and Jails safer, (2009), National Institute of Justice Journal No. 262, Print
Fisher, B., Techniques of Crime Scenes Investigation, 7th ed., 2003, CRC Press, ISBN-13: 978-0849316913, Print
Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27 (2001) Retrieved March 1, 2016 from www.supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/533/27/case.html
