In the 14th century there was simply no doubt: the world was flat. It was not open to debate because it was a ‘fact’. In the 1960s it was a fact that if South Vietnam fell to the communists it would cause a domino effect, and all of Southeast Asia would become communist. It was not open to debate, it was a ‘fact’.

At the start of the millennium it was stated that the import of British police would fix Jamaica’s homicide problem. This because of the greatness of Scotland Yard detectives vs the perceived lack of ability of the Jamaican detectives and the High Command. It was not up for debate, it was a ‘fact’.

The belief currently is that the cure-all for the Jamaican homicide crisis, at least in respect of solving more murders, lies in the use of forensic sciences. It is not up for debate, it is a ‘fact’.

Well, the world is not flat, the fall of South Vietnam did not herald the fall of Asia to communism, and the British police did not cure our murder crisis (this is not to say they were not very helpful with modernising the force and doing some other pretty good things).

So, the question: “Is forensic science really that relevant to solving Jamaican murders? Let’s debate this, not quarrel!

The typical description of a Jamaican murder is that a man on a corner is attacked by men on foot, who shoot him several times. The offenders are typically covering their faces and wearing hoodies. In another familiar setting, the door of a board house is kicked in and the occupants shot by men, who entered or fired from the door. There are exceptions, but the bulk is like this, or similar.

So let us look at forensics in five areas: fingerprints, ballistics, blood spatter, trace evidence and everybody’s cure all — DNA. There are, of course, other things like footprints, tyre prints, etc, but we are looking at majors, not minors, and evidence that can almost stand alone.

Before we look at the relevance to our typical murder, let us understand that forensics rely on the offender to leave something behind that assists with linking him to the crime, or does something that allows for the crime to be reconstructed.

So, thugs from Jones Avenue go to Shelter Rock and kill other thugs. The shooting is a walk-by. Fingerprint analysis is not that relevant, because it is not likely that they are entering a house where they are touching stuff. Ballistics is likely to be left behind and indeed, the spent shells may have a piece of a fingerprint, if you are lucky. But really, it is the ability to trace the shells to a firearm; that is the primary purpose of ballistics. However, these guys do not use registered guns, so there is no registered owner.

There is the benefit of knowing what gun did what crime, but under our law you cannot introduce into evidence other crimes done by the gun that is said to have been used in a particular murder during a trial.

Added to that, if you catch a man with a gun a day after it was used in a murder you cannot charge him for that murder, as that does not meet the standard of recent possession.

Also, get this: the Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF) is already doing ballistic examinations to world standards, not because of their inflated budgets, but because it is an area of science that has not improved significantly in the last three decades.

Trace evidence speaks to fibres and other non-biological items such as rope, carpets and the like. This area of science was very popular before DNA arrived. However, DNA was discovered and started to free persons whom trace evidence had convicted of crimes. Trace evidence, to a large degree, is now being referred to as ‘junk science’.

Furthermore, trace evidence’s relevance to our typical street murders is minimal, at best.

Trace evidence was used to convict Wayne Williams in 1982 for the Atlanta Child Murders between 1979 and 1981, and many feel that as a black man he was railroaded for those murders. I do not necessarily agree, but the evidence really looked weak.

Blood spatter speaks to blood in flight and the pattern it makes when it comes into contact with a surface. This assists in determining the exact position of the offender when the blood was put into flight. This is not a major factor in a drive-by or walk-by. This is more relevant in domestic murders, where it disproves a lie by a spouse, etc.

This science, in fact, came to the public in a big way in a case in Florida involving police officers who admitted to having had contact ballistically at a distance, but who ended up with high-impact spatter on their jeans by the ankles. So, in cases where someone places himself at a scene, it is useful to compare facts with claims. But, murders by a gun on a street corner do not assist an investigation for this type of science.

DNA as an investigative tool is probably the best gift rape investigators have got in the last century, because sex leaves signs. DNA as an identifying tool is almost perfect science. This, of course, flows over to murder committed with rape. It is used by Jamaican law enforcement in rape crimes as a procedural policy, and when relevant in murder cases.

DNA can be extracted from blood, semen, hair and a variety of other biological sources. However, murder committed in the course of a rape does not account for a major percentage of our homicides. This probably goes against all you see on Law and Order and CSI, but the variable here is that our murders are primarily not like the ones made popular by Hollywood, and thus, are less relevant to DNA analysis.

Our murders involve a bunch of gang members slaughtering other gang members to include their friends, family members and neighbours. This happens with very minimal body contact between offenders and victims.

So, science in relation to Jamaican crime is relevant to robberies, sex crimes and certain types of murders. However, where our crisis lies is with murders, most of which are committed by a small number of men, relatively speaking, and largely on the street.

Therefore, an American solution introduced through television is not our solution because our problems are not the same. After all, cough medicine is pretty useless against gall stones.

If you want to copy the USA, try these things:

The ability to electronically access information on a person’s phone and use it as evidence against them;

The ability to use other crimes committed by offenders in the past as evidence during current cases could help;

The right to use ballistic data in a case that shows similar crimes the weapon was involved in could assist;

The removal of the condition that a lawyer must be present for a suspect to give a caution statement against himself could be examined;

Entrapment and the conspiracy law, similar to what was used against Mark Myrie, otherwise called ‘Buju Banton’, could be modified for use in Jamaica.

All the above are used by the Americans to control gang murder.

Jason McKay is a criminologist