The Digital Evidence Conundrum: Let’s Fix It Before It Breaks Us

By Daniel Dvorak, NICE Public Safety

It’s probably safe to say that police departments won’t be getting authorization to hire more personnel to handle the massive amount of digital evidence they’re ingesting anytime soon. Departments are also reluctant to change investigative processes they’ve been using for decades. This is creating a quandary – how to do more with less. The solution is to work ‘smarter.’ To do this, departments will need to leverage Digital Evidence Management (DEM) software to transform the investigative process and free up investigators to focus on what they do best – solving crimes.

Forcing new technology to adapt to old processes: a recipe for failure

Over the past two years, I’ve had the distinct pleasure of traveling across the country and visiting many police departments to examine their current workflow and processes. Some departments are slightly more technologically advanced than others, but they all have one thing in common: they’ve been conducting investigations in the same manner for decades. That wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing except that technology is evolving at a very fast pace. Body worn cameras (rare a decade ago) are now the norm, not to mention all the other new sources of digital evidence that need to be collected, managed and shared.

The investigative process is in dire need of transformation.

By modifying our investigative processes to align with new technology, we can achieve many efficiencies. But this can’t happen if we continue to stick with old ways of doing things, even as technology evolves.

I’ll give you a couple of examples. In my former department, when a detective needed crime scene photos, we would locate the roll of film, send it to the photo lab, drive to pick the photos up and hand them to the investigator. In 2001, our state crime lab purchased digital cameras for each police department. It was a step forward because the crime scene photos could be accessed on the network, but it also presented new challenges. Now we had to purchase color printers and photo paper because even though the photos were digital, investigators still had to add them to the physical (hard copy) case folder for the prosecutor.

Old processes got in the way of other investigative tasks too. When investigators needed 911 recordings, they’d request them from the state communications center and then drive 40 minutes each way to pick up the audio cassette tapes. As time passed and call recording technology in the 911 center was updated, 911 calls would be copied onto CDs instead of cassette tapes, but the investigators would invariably still have to drive miles to pick them up.

The same holds true for CCTV. CCTV video is playing an increasingly important role in investigations every year, but in spite of many technological advancements, investigators still need to manually canvas areas where crimes occur to look for cameras, copy video onto CDs and manually transport the video back to the station.

The bottom line was that no matter how much technology changes, we always try to adapt the technology to a current process rather than adapting the process to the technology.

Aligning technology to updated processes will save time

While recently visiting one agency, the chief asked me for help because his evidence room was bursting at the seams. I interviewed his property room staff and learned it takes 16 hours each week to receive and store all the CDs that are logged into evidence, and they always had a two to three-week backlog. I told the chief that by leveraging technology to eliminate the need for his officers to burn, store and log CDs, his evidence techs could use that 16 hours per week disposing of evidence from expunged cases and greatly reduce overflowing evidence room shelves.

Let’s fix it before it breaks us

Agencies have two choices: either transform their investigative processes or continue to allow themselves to be inundated with digital evidence.

It’s ironic that agencies invest vast sums of money in systems that create digital evidence, but far less in systems to manage it. They invest heavily in CAD and RMS systems because those are critical systems. Add to that body worn video, gunshot detection systems, drones, 911 recording systems, interview room recording systems, and forensic smartphone extractions.

Departments also waste vast amounts of time and resources manually collecting CCTV video. Making it playable often demands still more time due to the many different proprietary codecs involved.

At some point in the investigative and prosecutorial process, usually multiple points, all of this digital evidence is manually copied onto CDs, sometimes even copied onto more CDs, physically mailed, couriered, driven or otherwise transported, or uploaded from system to system – all adding to the department’s time delays, inefficiencies and costs.

A smarter way

We can’t keep doing the same things over and over and expecting different results. Our investigative processes need to keep up with technology. There must be a smarter way.

The number one goal for investigative transformation should be to reduce these inefficient processes, keeping digital evidence in its original digital form, rather than propagating it across multiple systems and copying it onto endless removable media.

Today’s Digital Evidence Management software (DEM) offers a better way.

For example, NICE Investigate provides a way for private businesses, even citizens, to register their cameras, and directly upload evidence through a secure portal so detectives can bring that video evidence into cases – all without having to travel to the crime location and copy video onto CDs.

NICE Investigate also provides a secure, auditable electronic method for sharing digital evidence and case files. Investigators no longer need to copy and hand deliver CDs to prosecutors. Instead they can share digital evidence electronically. Investigators can also spend more time solving cases when they’re not driving to the 911 center to pick up audio recordings, waiting for evidence to arrive, copying case evidence onto CDs, or shuttling CDs and folders to the DA’s office. And DAs also benefit by receiving digital evidence digitally, and in a more meaningful format. They’re able to visualize how the evidence comes together on maps and timelines, the exact same way investigators see it.

Isn’t it time we put technology to work for investigators, instead of the other way around?

Request a Demo of NICE Investigate

About the author:

Chief Daniel A. Dvorak (Ret.) has 25 years of law enforcement experience with the Newport, RI and Cambridge, MD police departments. He is currently a Law Enforcement and Public Safety Subject Matter Consultant for NICE Public Safety. Chief Dvorak holds a Master’s Degree in Administration of Justice and a Bachelor’s Degree in Criminal Justice/Political Science. He is a strong advocate for using technology in the police profession to enhance effectiveness and efficiency. Dvorak always enjoyed advancing forensic sciences in his departments and was an adjunct professor in Cybersecurity and Digital Forensics at Salve Regina University, Bristol Community College, and the Community College of Rhode Island.