Trace Evidence

Much of the criminal officer's work consists in providing evidence which links a person (the suspect or defendant) with a place (the scene of the crime) or an object. The link may be direct or indirect. The guiding principle in criminalistics is «Every contact leaves a trace». Identification of the trace may provide evidence of the contact. The ex­amination of contact traces is most frequently necessary in such crimes as theft and burglaries. In this case, the following items are to be exam­ined:

1) footprints;

2) fingerprints;

3) impressions reproducing the shape of the objects which made them;

4) pieces of wood, metal, glass, etc., which are broken off in com­mitting the crime;

5) pieces of clothing, hairs, etc.;

6) stains and traces of materials, such as paint, oil, etc... The transfer of traces is often a two-way process. Traces from the crime scene may be carried away on the person, clothing, etc., and at the same time, traces may be left at the crime scene by the criminal.

However, the help which the expert can give is limited if no one in particular is suspected or if no arrest has been made, i.e. if only the scene of the crime is arable for the examination. But even in this case the detective must make a thorough examination which may help him discover what size and type of footwear, or what colour and material of clothing the criminal was wearing.

Вариант 2.

Task I. Read the text . THE NEED FOR LAW, find the sentences with Subjunctive Mood and Modal Verbs; translate them in writing.

The need for law

Mr. Jones, having murdered his wife, was burying her in the garden one night, when his neighbour, hearing the noise, asked him what he was doing.

"Just burying the cat," said Mr. Jones.

"Funny sort of time to bury a cat," said the neighbour.

"Funny sort of cat," said Mr. Jones.

Now it is obvious to everyone that, in a community such as the one in which we live, some kind of law is necessary to try to prevent people like Mr. Jones from killing their wives. When the world was at a very primitive stage, there was no such law, and, if a man chose to kill his wife or if a woman succeeded in killing her husband, that was their own business and no one interfered officially.

But, for a very long time now, members of every community have made laws for themselves in self-protection. Otherwise it would have meant that the stronger man could have done what he liked with the weaker, and bad men being kidnapped, robbed or murdered. There are far, far more good people in the world than could have joined together and terrorized the whole neighbourhood.

If it were not for the law, you could not go out in broad daylight without the fear of bad, but there are enough of the bad to make law necessary in the interests of everyone.

There is no difficulty in understanding this but it is just as important to understand that law is not necessary just because there are bad people in the world. If we were all as good as we ought to be, laws would still be necessary. If we never told lies, never took anything that didn't belong to us, never omitted to do anything that we ought to do and never did anything that we ought not to do, we should still require a set of rules of behaviour, in other words laws, to enable us to live in any kind of satisfactory state.

How is one good man in a motor-car to pass another good man also in a motor-car coming in the opposite direction, unless there is some rule of the road? People sometimes hover in front of one another when they are walking on the pavement before they can pass, and they may even collide. Not much harm is done then, but, if two good men in motor­cars going in opposite directions hover in front of one another, not knowing which side to pass, the result will probably be that there will be two good men less in the world.

So you can see that there must be laws, however good we may be. Unfortunately, however, we are none of us always good and some of us are bad, or at any rate have our bad moments, and so the law has to provide for all kinds of possibilities. Suppose you went to a greengrocer and bought some potatoes and found on your return home that they were moldy or even that some of them were stones, what could you do if there were no laws on the subject? In the absence of law you could only rely upon the law of the jungle. You could go back to the shop, demand proper potatoes and hit the shopkeeper on the nose if he refused to give them to you. You might then look round the shop to try to find some decent potatoes. While you were doing this, the shopkeeper might hit you on the back of the neck with a pound weight. Altogether not a very satisfactory morning's shopping.

Or you might pay your money to go to see a film at a cinema. You might go inside, sit down and wait. When the cinema was full, there might be flashed on the screen; "You've had it, Chums". And that might be the whole of the entertainment. If there were no law, the manager could safely remain on the premises and, as you went out, smile at you and say: "Hope you've enjoyed the show, sir." That is to say, he could do this safely if he were bigger than you or had a well-armed bodyguard.

Every country tries, therefore, to provide laws which will help its people to live safely and as comfortable as possible. This is not at all an easy thing to do, and no country has been successful in producing laws which are entirely satisfactory. But we are far better off with the imperfect laws which we have, than if we had none at all.

Task 2. Answer the questions to the text:

1. Why are laws necessary in our life?

2. Is it possible to live in crimeless society?

3. Is there any difference between laws and rules?

4. What does every country try to do?

5. Why are laws always imperfect?

Task 3. Find opposites:

Safely, to collide, at night, front, strong, demand, refuse, difficult, dangerous, ill-armed, succeed, well-armed, provide, agree, easy, in broad daylight, fail, back, weak, to pass.

Task 4. Find the equivalents in the text:

Очевидно, общество, предотвращать, убивать, преуспевать, самозащита, иначе, грабить, похищать людей, поведение, закон, удовлетворительный, правило, обеспечить, полагаться на что-либо, отказаться, осмотреться, полностью, несовершенный, другими словами., официaльно вмешаться.

Task 5: Explain what it is:

Law, a law, a rule, neighbourhood, community.

Task 6. Translate the sentences:

1. He is suspected of being involved in treason.

2. It is difficult for me to study mathematics.

3. We expected the judge to start the trial.

4. They insist the issue should be excluded from the agenda.

5. It is necessary that you should search the scene of the crime.

6. 1 wish the policeman had apprehended the criminal.

7. If the reform of a person is possible without criminal punishment, educational measures may be applied.

8. There would be a reduction in juvenile delinquency if the parents took more care of their children's education.

9. If this man had not violated the law he would not have been sentenced to imprisonment. 2. If the investigation had been conducted with greater thoroughness, the case would have been solved much sooner.

10. If the investigation had been conducted with greater thoroughness, the case would have been solved much sooner.

Task 7. Use the proper form of Subjunctive Mood.

1. Corroborative evidence (to help) to prove the case.

2. If fingerprints (to be found) at the scene of the crime, the per­petrator (to be identified).

3. It is necessary, that all objects (to be examined) for latent prints.

4. The law requires that the investigator (to use) only lawful in­vestigation methods.

Task 8. Translate into English:

1. Дело, возможно, будет раскрыто.

2. Не может быть, что следователь уже ушел.

3. Этот приговор не может быть изменен.

4. Полицейскому следует быть очень внимательным.

5. Вы не должны заниматься этим расследованием.

Task 9. Read the following text and render it answering the questions:

1. What are contact traces?

2. Why is the transfer of traces a two-way process?

3. Why is the help which the expert can give in the case of contact traces limited?