91172.pdf

16 1 Police and Law Enforcement—-Adult Forcnsics

TABLE i Alaska Statute Title 11, Chapter 56, Article 4, Section 610-AS 1 1.56.610

(1997)—Tampering with Physical Evidence

(a) A person commits the crime of tampering with physical evidence if the person

(1) Destroys, mutilates, alters, suppresses, conceals, or removes physical evidence with intent to

impair its verity or availability in an official proceeding or a criminal investigation

(2) Makes, presents, or uses physical evidence, knowing it to be false, with intent to mislead a juror

who is engaged in an official proceeding or a public servant who is engaged in an official

proceeding of a criminal investigation

(3) Prevents the production of physical evidence in an official proceeding or a criminal investigation

by the use of force, threat, or deception against anyone

(4) Does any act described by (I), (2), or (3) of this subsection with intent

to prevent the institution of an official proceeding.

(b) Tampering with physical evidence is a class C felony.

much more difficult to remove evidence already in storage and replicate it or move

it at a later time to the crime scene.

Some states regulate tampering as a crime in itself rather than as a substatute of

another law such as perjury. Alaska, for example, has outlined specific guidelines

used to determine whether a law enforcement agent has manipulated or otherwise

distorted evidence (see Table I).

The statute described in Table I gives a sobering example of exactly how serious

evidence tampering can be. Were it not deemed an extremely important portion

of policing, felony charges would certainly not result from its use.

Suggestions for Future Research

While many different aspects of evidence tampering have been discussed within
this section, the amount of dedicated research on this topic is indeed scanty. Some
police departments have implemented antitampering policies with the intent of
reducing both the temptation and actuality of evidence tampering. These policies,
however, are simple and in need of research in order to determine their efficacy.
Some departments now require at least two investigators to examine a given crime
scene and photographs to be taken of fingerprints prior to their collection (Hansen,
1994a). Research examining the increase, decrease, or equal rates of tampering
associated with these policies needs to be studied.
Psychologically oriented research is also needed in order to determine the pos-
sible causes of an officer's decision to tamper with evidence and what steps can be
taken to reduce such mental states. Perhaps tampering is related solely to an offi-
cer's mistrust or distrust of the "system," feeling that additional "help" is necessary
in order to bring criminals to the justice they deserve. This same feeling may be