An innovative and shared methodology for event reconstruction using images in forensic science. (September 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Milliet, Quentin; Jendly, Manon; Delémont, Olivier
• Is Part Of: Forensic science international. Volume 254(2015)
• Page Start: 172
• Page End: 179
• Publication Date: 2015-09
• Subjects: Grounded theory -- Photographs -- Video recordings -- Guidelines -- Standard operating procedures -- Quality assurance; Medical jurisprudence -- Periodicals; Chemistry, Forensic -- Periodicals; Forensic Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine légale -- Périodiques; Chimie légale -- Périodiques; Gerechtelijke geneeskunde; Gerechtelijke chemie; Gerechtelijke psychiatrie; Chemistry, Forensic; Medical jurisprudence; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 614.1
• DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.07.028
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0379-0738

Abstract

Highlights: We present an innovative forensic methodology for event reconstruction from images. We formalise shared know-how with a strong and transparent practical anchor. Our solution complements technical guidelines such as standard operating procedures. We apply a qualitative research strategy inspired from a grounded theory approach. The practitioners' workflows and experiences are used to co-construct a methodology. Abstract: This study presents an innovative methodology for forensic science image analysis for event reconstruction. The methodology is based on experiences from real cases. It provides real added value to technical guidelines such as standard operating procedures (SOPs) and enriches the community of practices at stake in this field. This bottom-up solution outlines the many facets of analysis and the complexity of the decision-making process. Additionally, the methodology provides a backbone for articulating more detailed and technical procedures and SOPs. It emerged from a grounded theory approach; data from individual and collective interviews with eight Swiss and nine European forensic image analysis experts were collected and interpreted in a continuous, circular and reflexive manner. Throughout the process of conducting interviews and panel discussions, similarities and discrepancies were discussed in detail to provide a comprehensive picture of practices and points of view and to ultimately formalise shared know-how. Our contribution sheds light on the complexity of the choices, actions and interactions along the path of data collection and analysis, enhancing both the researchers' and participants' reflexivity.