CLPEX Chat Board

Someone just sent this to me to remind me of the past. I thought I would share it further.

This is my favorite quote:

“Wherever he steps, whatever he touches, whatever he leaves, even unconsciously, will serve as silent evidence against him . . . a silent witness. Not only his fingerprints or his footprints, but his hair, the fibers from his clothes, the glass he breaks, the tool mark he leaves, the paint he scratches, the blood or semen that he deposits or collects - all these and more bear mute witness against him. This is evidence that does not forget. It is not confused by the excitement of the moment. It is not absent because human witnesses are. It is actual evidence. Physical evidence cannot be wrong; it cannot perjure itself; it cannot be wholly absent. Only its interpretation can err. Only human failure to find it, study and understand it, can diminish its value."


Dr. Paul L. Kirk

Ah, "The Quote"!! An outstanding tribute to forensics.

The 'quote' is derived from "Crime Investigation" by Paul L. Kirk. There are slightly varying words used in the 'Introduction' of the 1st Edition (1953) and of the 2nd Edition (1974). The wording from both editions has been interchanged in some adapted versions of "The Quote". This one is closer to the 1953 version. The only difference is that neither version in "Crime Investigation" uses the expression "...silent witness" and they both use "factual evidence", not "actual evidence".

This quote has also been erroneously attributed to a legal ruling of "Harris vs. United States, 331 U.S. 145, 1947".

It is always nice to have this excellent statement make an appearance.

And it is far more often incorrectly attributed to the old point counter himself, Professor Locard, than correctly to Dr. Kirk. Locard had not the lyric turn of phrase to produce the most quotable passage in forensic science. His typical version appeared as:

"The principle is this one. Any action by an individual, and obviously, the violent action constituting a crime, cannot occur without leaving a mark. What is admirable is the variety of these marks. Sometimes they will be prints, sometimes simple traces, and sometimes stains." (1934 Police and Scientific Methods)

But I must admit that among all the great forensic scientists, my greatest admiration goes to Dr. Joseph Bell. Not for his great scientific works. Not for his striking prose. But because he was the first known to play the finger switch gag on his students. You've seen it in a couple of medical themed comedies. It's the one where the professor challenges his students to use all their senses and demonstrates by dipping a finger into a jar of bodily fluids and tasting it and then passes the jar around for his students to make their own assessments - and then laments that their powers of perception are so poor that they failed to notice he dipped one finger and tasted another. (Related by his student, Dr. Harold Emery Jones.)

Gerald,

I do think that the 1934 translation of Locards words don"t do him justice.

In "L'enquête criminelle et les méthodes scientifiques" (1920), page 139 Chapitre IV "Traces et Taches" he writes : "... La vérité est que nul ne peut agir avec l'intensité que suppose l'action criminelle sans laisser des marques multiples de son passage. .... Les indices dont je veux montrer ici l'emploi sont de deux ordres : tantôt le malfaiteur a laissé sur les lieux le marques de son passage, tantôt, par une action inverse, il a emporté sur son corps ou sur ses vêtements les indices de son séjour ou de son geste. ..."

Translation : "The truth is that no one can act with the intensity that is needed to commit a crime without leaving numerous marks of his passing by. ... The marks of which I want to show the use, are of two different kinds : Or the criminal has left marks of his passing by on the crime scene, or through an inverse action, he has taken away marks from his whereabouts or his actions onto his body or his clothes. ..."

In "Manuel de Technique policière" (1923), page 79 Chapitre III "Les Traces" he writes : "Il est impossible au malfaiteur d'agir, et surtout d'agir avec l'intensité que suppose l'action criminelle sans laisser des traces de son passage. ..."

Translation : "It's impossible for the criminal to act, and especially to act with the intensity that is needed to commit a crime without leaving traces (marks) of his passing by."

I found the same idea in similar wordings in a third book by Locard (one of his more narrative ones), but I can’t locate the quote for the moment.

Another nice quote, which in a certain way is closer to Kirk's - dates back from 1854 : Dr. Sév. Caussé wrote an article “Des empreintes sanglantes de pieds et de leur mode de mensuration” (on bloody footprints and the way to measure them) in « Annales d’hygiène publique et de médecine légale » (page 177) : « …Qui ne voit tout de suite le parti que l’instruction peut tirer de ce fait, que là, sur le carreau ou sur un parquet, où git aussi un cadavre, est la représentation exacte, fidèle, du pied du meurtrier ? N’est-ce pas la preuve la plus forte, la plus évidente de la présence du coupable sur le lieu du crime ? N’est-ce pas le témoignage accusateur le plus foudroyant ? Quel témoin vaut celui-là, muet, sévère, incorruptible ? Reste à la science à démontrer que l’empreinte sanglante est bien la signature, si l’on peut ainsi dire, du pied de la personne incriminée. »

(Who doesn’t immediately see the use that the investigation can make of the fact, that there, on a tile or a wooden floor, where also lies a corpse, is the exact and precise image of the murderer’s foot ? Isn’t this the most powerful evidence, the most evident one of the presence of the culprit on the crime scene ? Isn’t this the most crushing incriminating evidence ? Which witness is worth as much as that one, silent, severe, incorruptible ? It’s up to science to prove that the bloody print is the signature, if one can say so, of the foot of the suspect.)

It must be said that in French courtrooms in that era, marks were more than once called “silent”, “severe” and things like that.

All the best,

Gerrit

Gerrit,

Deja vu!!!

Ernie

Ernie Hamm wrote:Gerrit,

Deja vu!!!

Ernie

I know, but I don't believe it was on this forum. (And I'm too lazy to retype things in different wording)

Gerrit