Even though forensic evidence is collected at virtually every homicide scene, only a few studies have examined its role in investigation and prosecution. This article adds to the literature by providing the results of a study of 294 homicide cases (315 victims) occurring in Cleveland, Ohio, between 2008 and 2011. Through a logistic regression on open versus closed cases, the collection of knives, administration of gunshot residue (GSR) kits, and clothing at the scene were positively and significantly related to case closures, while collection of ballistics evidence and DNA evidence were statistically significant in the opposite direction. With regard to analysis, the clearance rate for cases with probative results (i.e., matches or exclusions) was 63.1% compared to a closure rate of 56.3% for cases without probative results. However, only 23 cases had probative results prior to arrest compared to 128 cases with probative results after arrest.

Achieving a more complete understanding of the behavioral aspects of homicide has great potential for developing more targeted intervention and prevention strategies. One avenue to increased understanding is through the study of the spatial behavior of the parties involved. Mobility triangles have been used to describe the spatial relationships and develop a spatial typology of crime events. Mobility triangles enable the classification of crimes into types based on the relative locations of offender home address, victim home address, and homicide location. This work focuses on the crime of homicide and examines the 2,773 mobility triangles developed from homicide events in Washington, D.C. The research extends the traditional mobility triangle by defining and analyzing the explanatory power of a new type of mobility triangles based on distances. The analysis compares the output of the area-based traditional mobility triangle typology with that of a distance-based mobility triangle typology.

Analyzes policies from 96 law enforcement agencies on their use of less‐than‐lethal force. Includes a review of several topics: policy purpose, definitions of lethal and less‐than‐lethal force, provisions for authorized and unauthorized weapons, training requirements, avoiding excessive force, medical aid and report requirements. Concludes that most policies are deficient in one or more topic areas. Provides recommendations on how to improve these policies.

No abstract

No abstract

Institute's policy-relevant research results and initiatives. The Attorney General has determined that publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public business required by law of the Department of Justice.

No abstract

No abstract