1

CRIMINALISTICS DIVISION 2012 Annual Report

The Criminalistics Division consists of several units, each of which is responsible for the scientific evaluation, analysis and interpretation of physical evidence. The laboratory is structured into three areas: Latent Prints Development and Comparison, Drug Analysis, and Major Criminalistics. Major Criminalistics includes the Forensic Biology/DNA Unit, the Firearms Unit, General Criminalistics, and specialized crime scene response. In some cases, technical staff is assigned to more than one unit depending on individual skills and unit caseloads. 1. Staffing Total authorized staff in the Division at the beginning of 2012 was 23 FTE and 1 PT, which included 22 technical positions. The Division began the year with 2 vacancies:

• 1 Criminalist III position (in Drug/Latent Prints Units) • 1 Criminalist II position in the Firearms Unit.

A grant funded Criminalist I position was added during the year and the grant funded Forensic Technician position became a full time position, bringing authorized staffing to 25 FTE. Both grant funded positions are in the Forensic Biology Unit. A vacant Criminalist III position that previously supervised the Drug Analysis and Latent Print Units—and which has been frozen since September 2009—was finally filled in June 2012 from within. This individual is now assigned to supervise the Drug Analysis Unit. A Latent Print Examiner II is currently serving in an acting capacity as supervisor of the Latent Print Unit in order to provide much needed technical oversight and case management. The two grant funded positions were filled in December 2012. A Criminalist I in the Drug Analysis Unit was promoted to Criminalist II by flexible staffing. Crime Laboratory Staffing as of December 31, 2012

Classification Authorized Vacancies Affected Units Forensic Technician 1 0 Grant funded

Latent Print Examiners 3 0

Criminalist I 4 1 (1 underfills a Crim II in FAU)

Criminalist II 12 4

Firearms (1) Biology (2) Drugs (1)

Criminalist III 3 0

Office Assistant II 1 0 Crime Lab Manager 1 0

Total 25 5

2

The Division ended the year with five vacancies: • 4 Criminalist II • 1 Criminalist I

Again this year, the Division received no assistance in the IBIS Program from a police officer trained for this task. There were three resignations and no retirements during the year. 2. Fiscal Management Report The data below is based on Period 13 of FY 11-12 budget data for all accounts under Organization Code 102610. The Laboratory receives funding from the General Purpose Fund (GPF), a revenue fund restricted to DNA-related activities, and from various grants. To fully understand the contribution of each source to the overall budget, funds are apportioned in the table below. Org 102610

Appropriation Categories

FY 11-12 Budget Appropriation

FY11-12 Actual Expenditures Difference

GPF Salaries & Benefits $2,810,087.70 $2,768,457.43 $41,630.27Overtime $27,700.00 $31,178.70 ($3,478.70)O&M (materials, supplies, services) $126,783.41 $88,760.98 $5,794.41*

GPF Total (1010) $2,964,571.11 $2,888,397.11 $43,945.98

Non-GPF /Grants Salaries & Benefits $818,435.21 $84,594.83 $733,840.38Overtime $171,183.67 $100,050.54 $71,133.13O & M (materials, supplies, services) $958,112.47 $260,608.86 $658,250.52Capital Equipment $391,313.35 $213,662.69 $175,765.61Non-GPF/ Grants $2,339,044.70 $658,916.92 $1,638,989.64 Grand Total $5,303,615.81 $3,547,314.03 $1,682,935.62

* Encumbrances of $32,228.02 not reflected in table above.

• 44% of our total funding is derived from grants and non GPF sources, up 3% from last year.

• GPF O&M allocation declined by 18.6% over the previous period and the previous period was down 40% compared to the year before.

• The GPF budget declined by 8.7% overall. • This will not be sustainable when full staffing is achieved as we expect in FY 13-

14.

3

• There were cost overruns in overtime due to crime scene callout and rush casework.

3. Training Number of Staff Forensic Science

Training Events Departmental/City Training Events

Total Events

19 35 426 461 Departmental/city mandated training includes training associated with the NSA and OPD policy. Event counts are taken from IPAS. Forensic Science training includes all training across all disciplines and subject matter areas in which laboratory staff is involved and accounts for roughly 8% of training events. The training ranges from subject matter-specific courses, such as Y-STR training, to multidisciplinary training such as the American Academy of Forensic Sciences Annual Conference. Management training is largely related to laboratory management topics, such as the annual conference of the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors, but also includes management topics of broader application or management topics chosen by the Department. All forensic science/technical training was paid for by grant funds. Specific hour counts are not recorded consistently in IPAS, if at all, and thus are not included in this report. 4. Significant Accomplishments Completed Goals from the 2011 Annual Report

• Filled the Criminalist III Golden Handshake position that was frozen since September 2009.

• Filled one of two positions in the Forensic Biology Unit. • We exceeded the goal of having 75% of technical staff achieve external

certification. 77.7% are now certified. • We implemented a new automated process for one of the most laborious steps in

the examination of sexual assault evidence. The process will significantly increase the number of sexual assault evidence collection kits that can be processed at one time.

• Completed validation and implemented the DNA interpretation expert system called Armed Expert in casework.

• Revised the Laboratory Operations and Quality Assurance Manual in August 2012.

• Submitted our application for accreditation under the ASCLD LAB-International Program within deadline in August 2012.

• Issued ISO compliant Firearms Unit, Forensic Biology Unit, and Drug Analysis Unit standard operating procedures and training manuals.

• Established uncertainty of measurement estimates for use in firearms related examinations.

4

Forensic Biology/ DNA Unit Accomplishments (not included above) • Awarded $408,295 in the NIJ DNA Backlog 2012 grant which includes funding

for one Criminalist and one Forensic Technician for 18 months. This funding will augment the DNA Backlog 2011 funding for these positions. Thus we will have grant funding for 36 months for each position.

• The LIMS coordinator, funded under DNA Backlog 2012 grant, is in the final stages of preparing an RFP for a commercial LIMS. He will also assist in the implementation of the system.

• We underwent a successful internal FBI DNA Quality Assurance Standards (FBI DNA QAS) audit in which there were no findings.

• As an authorized user of CODIS we are subject undergo external audits over and above the annual FBI DNA QAS audit. We underwent an external FBI National DNA Index System (NDIS) audit. We remedied all findings in a timely fashion and audit was finalized in July 2012.

• We have had challenges in use of the case management plan (POD) in Forensic Biology Unit due to the resignation of two experienced scientist. Nevertheless, we are still showing a significant decrease in turnaround time for case requests.

Firearms Analysis Unit Accomplishments (not included above)

• Requests completed (230) is unchanged from last year. Requests received have doubled since 2010 and are up 33% in 2012 alone.

Drug Analysis Unit Accomplishments (not included above)

• Despite a long standing vacancy at the supervisory level, filled mid-year, and a separation by a unit staff member, the Unit managed to maintain 24 hour turnaround on at least 95% of cases averaged over the entire year.

• The Unit provided weekly Drug Evidence Gap Reports to the Deputy Chief as required by policy.

Latent Print Unit Accomplishments (not included above)

• The Latent Print Examiner I trainee progressed to supervised comparison casework as of May 2012 and is expected to advance to independent casework status early in January 2013.

• LPE II Debra Galaviz-Flores was assigned as the acting unit supervisor. Awards, Appointment, Professional Activities:

• 14 of 18 (77.7%) eligible technical staff are now certified. Our goal for the year was 75%. Our ultimate goal is 100%.

• LP Examiner Herman Bergman continues to serve as a member of SWGFAST—a national advisory group organized by the FBI to development of best practices in the latent print analysis field.

• Herman Bergman also serves on the CSD-IAI Latent Print Certification committee.

• LPE II Debra Galaviz-Flores was re-elected to serve as the Editor of the “California Identification Digest”—the official publication of the California State Division of the International Association for Identification. She is also serves on two CSD-IAI committees.

5

• Patrick Paton, Laura Silva, Bonnie Cheng, and Shannon Cavness obtained certification in Molecular Biology from the American Board of Criminalist.

• Criminalist I Helena Wong received her Master of Forensic Science degree from U.C. Davis -“Automating the Differential Digestion Method in the Analysis of Sexual Assault Cases using Selective Degradation.”

• Jennifer Mihalovich served on the Standards, Practices, and Protocols (SPP) Interagency Working Group (IWG) assisting the Subcommittee on Forensic Science reporting to National Science policy branch of the White House.

• She is also serving as the Criminalistics Section Secretary for the American Academy of Forensic Sciences Criminalistics Section and will advance to Section Chairman at the 2013 meeting.

• She served as a technical reviewer of the “Latent Print Examination and Human Factors: Improving the Practice through a Systems Approach”, The Report of the Expert Working Group on Human Factors in Latent Print Analysis, February 2012, NIJ.

• Several staff served on the Board of Directors of the California Association of Criminalists or on committees: Todd Weller as President, Laura Silva as Treasurer, and Patrick Paton as a member of the Ethics Committee.

• Todd Weller published his thesis project research: Weller TJ, Zheng A, Thompson R, Tulleners F. “Confocal microscopy analysis of breech face marks on fired cartridge cases from 10 consecutively manufactured pistol slides.” J Forensic Sci 2012 July; 57(4): pp 912-917.

• Mark Bennett’s submission on trajectory reconstruction was accepted for publication and will appear in the Winter 2013 AFTE Journal: “Measurement of Bullet Hole Locations and Trajectories in Vehicles Using a Planar Projection Method”

• Criminalist Waliana Dieu is pursuing a Masters degree in Forensic Science at U.C. Davis.

• Criminalist Sandra Sachs taught a California Department of Justice CCI course on Mass Spectra Interpretation in March 2012.

• Mary Gibbons continued to serve on the Major Cities Chiefs Association’s Forensic Science Committee which advises the MCCA Executive Board on forensic technology matters, including pending federal legislation.

Please see Productivity and Performance Data for additional accomplishments. 5. Productivity and Performance Data 5.1 Latent Print Unit Casework Activities The Unit received latent prints recovered in 943 offenses during 2012. This level of field collection represents

• a 10% increase compared to 2011 • a 32% decrease since 2005, and • a 43% decrease since 2000 (1,655).

6

The number of incidents resulting in the collection of prints does not correspond to the crime rate and the reasons for the downturn should be reviewed and understood. Collection and analysis of latent prints both need to increase. Latent Print Casework Received-2012

Description

2009

2010 2011 2012

% Change

Total # Offenses with Latent Prints

911 819 857 943 10%

Offenses with Computer Quality Latent Prints

496 531 515 523 2%

Latent Print Processing Requests Received

77 82 49 53 8%

Comparison Cases Received 406 240 206 192 -7%

“Named” Comparisons 68 55 62 79 27%

Computer Comparisons 338 185 144 113 -22%

Latent Print Casework Reported - 2012

Description

2009

2010 2011 2012

% Change

Latent Print Processing Requests Completed

14

15 15 13 -13%

# Exhibits Processed 191 172 140 111 -21%

Comparison Cases Completed*

102 67 73 133 82%

“Named” Comparisons 44 35 39 63 62%

Computer Comparisons 58 32 34 69 103%

Named Suspect Examined 82 62 51 86 69%

Total Suspects Identified 47 32 54 75 39%

“Named” Suspects Identified (Hit Rate)

21 (48%)

17 (49%)

23 (59%)

*(41%)

23 (36%)

*(36%)

0%

Suspects Identified By Computer (Hit Rate)

26 (45%)

15 (47%)

31 (91%)

*(65%)

52 (75%)

*(57%)

68%

*This figure is derived from the number of requests that yielded at least one identification. Multiple suspects can be identified in one request. Latent Print Processing: A small increase of 8% in processing requests received was noted over last year’s requests. Completed requests for latent print processing declined

7

over the same period. Processing cases completed have dropped 83% since 2007—the last year in which we had 1 FTE technician assigned to processing casework full time. The loss of this technician position continues to hobble our ability to meet the demand for processing and other latent print services. Processing was conducted primarily on priority homicides cases. Named Cases: Demand for “named” comparison cases requested in 2012 increased by 27% over 2011. Of the 86 named suspects provided in 63 completed requests, examiners were able to identify 36% of those suspects to the investigator’s case. For the amount of crime that occurs in metropolitan cities of our size, overall numbers for comparison work remain low. Properly staffing this vital unit to provide much needed information to investigators in a timely manner and reduce the backlog is essential. Computer Cases: Computer searchable latent prints were recovered in 523 incidents. We received 113 requests to search latent prints, a decline of 22% from the previous year. From the 69 completed requests searched in the computer, 52 subjects were identified as a result of this powerful and relatively inexpensive tool at our disposal. Hit rate in 2012 was 57%, meaning almost 6 of 10 cases searched resulted in an identification of an individual in the database. If we searched the 593 incidents with searchable quality prints received in 2012 alone, we would expect to identify at least one person of interest in 338 incidents. This aspect of latent print work has produced a high hit rate year after year with similar lost opportunities to solve crime that total in the thousands, including homicides, due to chronic understaffing. Additional personnel could result in a quick turnaround time and far-reaching impact, yielding names that were previously unknown to the case thus saving valuable investigative resources that can be utilized elsewhere. The mandatory and floating furlough days equate to an entire month of lost productivity per person (3 months total for the unit per year). This burden only adds to the missed opportunities and delays in service. We have identified a need for five additional staff in this unit to meet service demands. Additional staff would reduce/eliminate backlogs, make full, systematic use of the local, state and national computer search systems to provide investigative leads, and provide information in a timeframe that meets investigative needs. Latent Print Unit Request Backlog

Request Type Backlog Latent print development 205 Named Comparison 128 AFIS 461 Uncategorized 101 Total

895

8

We will review backlogged requests for those that have been in the laboratory for longer than three years and appear to be past their statutes of limitation. These will be canceled and returned to the units for review and resubmission where indicated. Homicides, sexual assault and kidnapping requests will be vetted individually. 5.2 Drug Analysis Unit Casework Activities The laboratory attempts to provide 24-hour turnaround time on all drug analysis cases. This effort supports the Department’s and the District Attorney’s Office interest in charging suspects prior to release. Historically, the Unit has required a minimum of 3 FTE analysts devoted to casework and a Unit Supervisor to maintain 24-hour turnaround on case requests. Since the retirement of the Unit Supervisor in September 2009 and the subsequent freezing of the position, senior analysts shared supervisorial duties, dropping FTE’s to an estimated 2.50 FTE. With the promotion of one analyst to the supervisor position and the loss of a second analyst, the unit is currently officially staffed with 1 FTE analyst and has two vacancies. As the Unit Supervisor conducted casework in 2012, the estimated caseload analytical output was performed by an estimated 1.50 FTE.

Drug Analysis Unit Statistics

The Drug Analysis Unit Supervisor has ancillary duties in addition to supervisory tasks. The Unit Supervisor acts as the program coordinator for the laboratory’s safety program. As the city and the department are increasing emphasis on safety, this position has accrued more departmental and city-wide floor warden activities. There are also ISO accreditation duties related to safety falling to the Unit Supervisor. Additionally, ISO accreditation requires that the uncertainty of measurement be established for drug analysis activities and this task is also assigned to the Unit Supervisor. The burden of chain of custody duties for the laboratory is somewhat reduced due in part to the drop in alertable incidents of incomplete documentation using the new Drug Evidence Release Receipt form (TF 3356). Additionally, due to the decline in sworn ranks and de-emphasis of drug related special projects, drug evidence submissions and casework is down. Fewer drug evidence transfers are occurring. However, with an

Description 2009 2010 2011 2012 % Change

Cases Received 5,623 4,424 2,864 2,208 -23%

Cases Analyzed 2,810 2,473 1,419 948 -33%

Exhibits Analyzed (Casework)

3,683 3,485 1,938 1,382 -29%

Exhibits Analyzed per Case 1.31 1.41 1.37 1.46 +7%

Random reanalysis of Exhibits for Quality

Control Purposes

258 284 151 115 -24%

9

academy class graduating in the spring 2013, and at least two more to follow, this duty will in all likelihood increase. We maintained 24-hour turnaround on over 95% of cases with difficulty despite the reduction in the number of cases analyzed. One staff was on maternity leave until February. A second analyst separated in May. For significant portions of the last quarter of the year, the supervisor was detailed to revising/updating of the Drug Analysis Unit SOP, leaving one examiner to conduct casework and related activities.

Random reanalysis of 62 previously tested exhibits confirmed the accuracy of the original results. Another 53 samples are currently undergoing QC tests.

Use of the Drug Evidence Release Receipt form (TF 3356) and production of a Gap Report were launched in January 2012. These measures were in response to a 2011 OIG audit focusing on drug check out procedures and confirmation of the location of drug evidence not returned to the lab. The laboratory enhanced the check-out procedure to include checking identification of officers seeking release of drug evidence; establishing a procedure whereby officers document on TF 3356 releases of drug evidence to second parties, such as court; and developing a reporting mechanism to alert unit commanders of unaccounted for drug evidence (Gap Report). After a learning curve for all parties, alertable incidents have dropped dramatically.

In 2011, the unit received badly needed analytical equipment during the year from a Coverdell 2010 Discretionary Grant to replace aging instruments. The most outdated instrument, the UV-Visible spectrophotometer, was validated and placed into service in 2011. The new FT-IR and GC/MS spectrometers which duplicate current capabilities will be validated and placed into operation as soon as possible. Staffing shortfalls have prevented this from occurring sooner. 5.3 Major Criminalistics Unit Casework Activities Major criminalistics cases consist of firearms examinations, biological material identification and genetic typing using DNA directed methods, recovery of trace evidence, and field investigations. Major Criminalistics Casework Received

Description

2009

2010

2011

2012

%

Change

Cumulative Backlog

Cases Received 1230 672 699 953 +43% NA Requests Received

1479 806 1035 1359 +31% 2050 (2409)

Firearms 434 400 609 794 +30% 1500 (1871) IBIS Only 22 34 +54.5% 43 (23) Biology/DNA 1036 399 394 524 +33% 506 (515) Gen’l Crim * 0 0 1 0 NA 0 (1) Crime Scenes 9 7 9 7 -22% 1 (1)

* trace recovery, impressions, physical match, serial number restoration, toolmarks ( ) = backlog year end 2011

10

Major Criminalistics Casework Reported

Description

2009

2010

2011

2012

% Change

Cases Reported 348 557 578 342 41% Requests Reported 493 656 915 627 -31%%

Firearms 66 149 230 230 No change

IBIS Only 9 25 177%

Biology/DNA 415 450 666 362 -46% Gen’l Crim * 0 0 0 1 NA Crime Scenes 12 7 10 9 -10%

* trace, impression evidence, physical matches, serial number restoration, toolmarks. Main points:

• The Laboratory received 1,359 requests criminalistics requests in 953 cases in 2012, a 31% increase over 2011 submissions. Backlogged requests decreased by 15% to 2,050.

• Firearms requests (794) are up significantly (30%) compared to 2011 and have

doubled since 2010. This steep rise is due in part to the increase in gun related crime generally. But, it is compounded by CID’s practice of putting in firearms requests on apparently all investigations that involve firearms related evidence before they close the case pending further information (disposition code 13). There is no way for current firearms staff the address this number of requests.

• Firearms requests completed (230) is unchanged from the previous year.

• The number of Biology/DNA requests received (524) increased by 33%.

However, requests completed declined by 46% due, in part, to the loss of two senior analyst and the subsequent vacancies that were still unfilled as of the end of 2012. These two staff vacancies represent a loss of 16 months—and counting—of analytical productivity during which we estimate an additional 100 requests would have been completed.

• The downturn in completed requests is also due to the assignment of staff to validation of new, high throughput technology which will pay dividends going forward, projects required to ready the unit and the laboratory for ISO accreditation, and expansion and support of the LIMS.

5.3.1 Forensic Biology Unit Casework Activities

• The Unit started the year with 9 authorized casework positions. Two Criminalist II’s resigned their positions, one in March and the other in June 2012. One grant funded Forensic Technician position and one Criminalist I were filled in December. The Forensic Technician assists the Criminalists in non-interpretation casework support activities.

11

• Although in prior years the Forensic Biology Unit realized significant increase in request throughput, this was not demonstrated this year. Four major factors contributed to this decrease in productivity. Two journey level criminalists resigned in the first half of the year, staff time to prepare the Forensic Biology Unit Operations Manuals to meet new laboratory accreditation standards, a staff member devoted to 90% of time to preparation of LIMS to meet the new accreditation standards, and mandatory furlough days (20). Thus, the Biology Unit had the equivalent of six FTE available to conduct casework. Nevertheless, on average the staff exceeded previous years case completion averages (prior to 2011).

• 76% of Forensic Biology/DNA requests resulted in a DNA analysis.

CODIS Activity: CODIS is the acronym for the Combined DNA Index System and refers to the state and national DNA identification databases. In 2011, the FBI issued new directives for characterizing associations (hits). The purpose was to distinguish true cold hits which the FBI refers to as “offender hits” from other types of associations. An “offender hit” is the first association made in CODIS between an evidence DNA profile in which the source is unknown and a convicted offender at the state or national level. Subsequent associations between this DNA profile and additional convicted offender samples are referred to as “conviction matches”. Conviction matches may also be associations between an evidence DNA profile for which the source is known (having been confirmed through the processing of a reference sample) and a convicted offender at the state or national level. “Forensic Hits” are associations between casework evidence samples. The source of the DNA profiles involved with forensic hits may or may not be known. The Laboratory scrubbed the associations in CODIS, re-characterizing them to conform to FBI directives. As a consequence, we are now able to distinguish and report true cold hits distinctly from other types of associations. In addition, we reconciled metric data between the CODIS and LIMS databases. The result is a more accurate count of cases, profiles and associations. Activity is shown in the table below. Profiles Uploaded to CODIS

2011 YTD 2012 YTD Case Type Cases Profiles* Cases Profiles Cases Profiles

Homicide 173 287 29 49 202 336 Sexual Assaults 730 815 50 58 780 873 Other 141 174 34 43 175 217 Total 1044 1276 113 150 1157 1426

12

CODIS Associations: 2011 Cumulative *

CODIS Associations: 2012 2012 Case Type

Known Unknown Total Cases Hits Cases Hits Cases HitsHomicides 3 3 17 17 20 20Sexual Assaults 7 7 34 39 41 46Other 1 1 31 32 32 33Total 11 11 82 88 93 99Hit Rate 10% 7% 73% 59% 82% 66%

CODIS Associations: 2012 Cumulative

YTD Case Type Known Unknown Total

Number of Cases Confirmed YTD

Cases Hits Cases Hits Cases HitsHomicides 19 28 98 126 117 154 44 Sexual Assaults 89 136 402 427 491 563

170

Other 17 26 113 124 130 150 36 Total 125 190 613 677 738 867 250 Hit Rate 11% 13% 53% 47% 64% 61%

CODIS Associations: OPD Case to Case Linkages

Case to Case Linkages Case Type 2011 YTD 2012 YTD

Homicides 6 0 6104Sexual Assaults 52 1 53Other 4 0 4Total 62 1 63Hit Rate 5% 1% 4%Hit Rate Calculation 62/1276 1/150 63/1426

• A total of 1,426 profiles from 1,157 cases have been entered into CODIS since

the inception of the program in 2000. In 2012, 150 new DNA profiles associated with 113 cases were submitted to CODIS.

• The laboratory has obtained 867 named individual matches in 738 cases since the

inception of the program. Of these, 677 hits in 613 cases involved a match to a

2011 YTDCase Type Known* Unknown* Total

Cases Hits Cases Hits Cases HitsHomicides 16 25 85 109 101 134Sexual Assaults 85 129 370 388 455 517Other 16 25 82 92 98 117Total 117 179 537 589 654 768Hit Rate 11% 14% 51% 46% 63% 60%

13

previously unknown offender (i.e. a true cold hit). In 2012, 99 matches in 93 cases were achieved of which 88 matches in 82 cases were true cold hits

• We added 1 case-to-case matches during 2012 bringing the total to 63 since the

inception of the program.

“Hit rate” is defined as the number of cases having at least one database association compared to the total number of cases entered into the database by this laboratory. The data below are for unknown (cold) hits only. Cumulative Data: • Overall hit rate

(Offender hits and case-to case matches): 64% (738 cases / 1157 cases entered) • Offender hit rate (all cases): 53% (613 cases / 1157 cases entered) • Offender hit rate in homicide cases: 58% (117 cases / 202 cases entered) • Offender hit rate in sexual assault cases: 56% (491 cases / 873 cases entered) For the year 2012 • Overall hit rate

(Offender hits and case-to case matches): 82% (93 cases / 113 cases entered) • Offender hit rate (all cases): 72% (82 cases / 113 cases entered) • Offender hit rate in homicide cases: 338% (98 cases / 29 cases entered) • Offender hit rate in sexual assault cases: 68% (34 cases / 50 cases entered) 5.3.2 Forensic Firearms Unit Casework Activities: The Firearms Unit consists of 3 fully trained examiners (1 Criminalist III, 1 Criminalist II and 1 Criminalist I). There is one vacancy for a fourth firearms examiner. We have identified a need for two additional examiners and two Forensic Technicians to meet service demands at the current rate. Firearms unit received 794 firearms requests.

A total of 230 firearms requests were completed in 2012—the same as in 2011. Many of the requests involve the examination of large numbers of evidence items (cartridge cases, fired bullets and firearms). In 2012 Firearms Unit staff examined a total of 2,217 fired casings, 636 bullets and fragments and 102 firearms for a total of 2955 objects.

The current number of uncompleted requests in firearms is 1500.

The Firearms unit implemented a “top ten” priority casework system in 2012 in which the highest priority cases as determined by CID/Homicide were assigned and given priority over other requested work. The Firearms Unit has been able to meet the demands of this system and provide quick results on these cases.

14

The Firearms Unit has implemented a streamlined protocol for quicker entry of backlogged evidence casings into IBIS in an effort to address the large number of casings that could potentially be linked through the database. Due to the number of priority cases and scenes worked, few cases have been worked under this protocol as yet and it remains to be determined if it will be effective.

Firearms Unit staff provided expert testimony 17 times in the year

We have identified a need for two additional Criminalist II firearms examiners and two Forensic Technicians to work IBIS only gun cases to meet demand for service. IBIS Casework The number of weapons evaluated for IBIS database entry (102) decreased by 28% over last year (142). Most firearms entered into IBIS this year were part of homicide investigations and not felony possession only type cases. We received 34 IBIS gun only requests to examine firearms and completed 25. The backlog of IBIS only gun requests is 43. Twenty-two IBIS cold hits were made in 2012, bringing the total to 310 since the start of the program in 1995. Of these hits, 1 homicide was linked to a recovered firearm, 1 ADW was linked to a recovered firearm, 5 homicide to homicide links, 14 ADW to homicide links and one 1 ADW to ADW link. Eight of the hits were with outside agencies including San Francisco PD, Richmond PD, Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office, Alameda County Sheriff’s Office, BATFE Laboratory SF, Fresno PD, Fremont PD, and Stockton PD. IBIS Activity

* The hit rate is defined as the number of IBIS linkages versus the number of primary evidence cases entered into the system. ** Total is total for the program since its inception in 1995.

Description 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total**

% Change 2011-2012

Weapons evaluated 172 181 142 102 5958 -28% Weapons test fired and databased

141 168 73 70 5544 -4%

Primary Evidence # Shooting incidents involved

34 76 131 141 1799 +8%

# Evidence items databased

49 94 235 192 2622 -18%

# Hits 2 10 19 22 310 +15% Hit Rate* 6% 13% 15% 16% 17%

15

A strategy for dealing with the large number of firearms recovered each year has to be developed and supported in order to best utilize resources. Examination of recovered firearms has to be complemented by the examination of other firearms related evidence (casings and bullets from scenes) to have any potential of linking guns to crimes. The two Forensic Technicians referenced above would be responsible for test firing weapons for routine IBIS entry, freeing criminalists to examine and direct the entry of crime scene evidence. The Forensic Technicians would provide casework support for these entries, as well. The Firearms Unit responded to 7 crime scenes including 3 OIS cases (Oakland Public School OIS vehicle trajectory, trajectory analysis on a CHP vehicle, and an OPD officer shooting reconstruction), and 3 high profile scenes (double homicide of parents by their son, Oikos University mass shooting, and a shooting at 7th & Willow shooting.) 5.3.3 Field Examination Casework Activities Laboratory staff reported on 9 crime scene requests in 2012—down 10% from last year. The Firearms Unit responded to 7 of the 9 crime scenes including 3 officer involved shooting incidents (Oakland Public School OIS involving vehicle trajectory, trajectory analysis on a CHP vehicle, and the OPD officer shooting reconstruction), and 3 high profile scenes- a double homicide of parents by their son, the Oikos University mass shooting which killed seven people, and a shooting at 7th & Willow.

5.3.4 Division Court Activity The Criminalistics Division made 64 court appearances in 2012, down 9% from last year. The numbers reflect and a 112% increase in court appearances over 2010 activity. Most of the subpoenas arise from drug cases, however most court appearances involve major crimes against persons. A subpoena count is not available due to the switch to an electronic distribution system to each individual. Other Productivity Performance Data That Do Not Apply to the Division This is an entirely civilian operation. Therefore, the following productivity data do not apply to us: citations issued, arrests, cases investigated/cleared, community meetings attended, policies completed, projects closed, vehicles towed, warrants cleared, written or served.

6. Other Performance Data There was no need for corrective action in the Division during 2012 pertaining to applicable indicators listed in DGO A-7 Annual and Departmental Reports. There were no complaints and no vehicle collisions during the year involving Division personnel. The following performance data do not apply to this Division: uses of force and vehicle pursuits.

16

7. The State of the Division, Plans and Goals 2012 was yet another challenging year for the Division. Adequate technical and supervisory oversight of operations remained a critical issue. However, that was somewhat eased when the Drug Unit supervisor position was filled in late June after a nearly three year forced vacancy. Three high casework producers resigned for other employment during the year: Tana Langley, Chani Sentiwany and Brad Dixon. Each is missed. These positions are still vacant. Two grant funded positions were filled: Criminalist I and Forensic Technician. Both are assigned to the Forensic Biology Unit. The Grand Jury reported on backlog conditions in the Division and recommended consolidation with the county laboratory. There were many inaccuracies in this report. These inaccuracies continue to be widely reported in the press. The manager contributed data to the first report in response to the Grand Jury Report. A follow up report will be presented to City Council in April 2013. This is the fourth year of furloughs and mandatory business shutdown days ranging from 12 to 20 days per year per staff of lost productivity. By the end of 2012-13 we estimate we will have lost the equivalent of five work years as a result of these measures. They have contributed to the high rise of backlogs and other delays in service and project completion. Laboratory staff should be exempted from these measures going forward to maximize the amount of time available for casework.

• We do not have adequate staff to support the forensic database functions—particularly IBIS and AFIS—that are available to us and should be employed routinely to solve crime. We have identified the need for four forensic technician positions to make full use of these databases to provide important investigative leads and solve crime.

• We do not have adequate support staff for administrative functions related to

custodial evidence duties and procurement of supplies, which have become increasingly onerous undertakings. Custodial duties of drug evidence has become more complex and time consuming since the 2011 Drug Unit audit conducted by the OIG.

• Our O&M budget was again reduced.

• We are overly reliant on grant funding for basic supplies. This condition has

been cited as a contributing factor to major misadventures and scandals at other crime laboratories (e.g. Houston Police Department).

17

• Portions of the budget are inadequate (e.g. funding for equipment service contracts, accreditation, proficiency testing, technical supplies) especially in light of the increase in case throughput.

• We have no budget for mandatory training and continuing education of staff

apart from a small federal grant. We have received no support during 2012 in the way of department training funds.

• The laboratory facility is inadequate for a staff of our size and complexity and

seriously impairs productivity and expansion of staff. Acquisition of the 6th floor space on the county side of the PAB would help to ease overcrowding.

Despite the challenges they face, Division staff continue to provide high quality forensic work and maintain remarkably good morale. Case throughput did not reach the levels desired due to many factors already addressed in this report. Staff work contributed to the successful outcomes of many investigations. They are a great team and a valuable resource to the Department and City. They thrive on being of service to the criminal justice system in which they play a critical role. Our plans and goals for the coming year are as follows.

• Successfully complete all requirements for accreditation under ISO standards by the end of 2013.

• Improve through put in all case work units.

• Recruit and fill remaining vacancies.

• Complete validation of latent print imaging systems.

• Complete the latent print comparison training of a Latent Print Examiner early

in 2013.

• Complete latent print processing training of two LPE’s by end of 2013.

• Re-establish connectivity to the national and state AFIS databases.

• Make significant progress at identifying requests that can be cancelled so as to refine backlog figures.

• Maintain or improve percentage of staff that are certified, currently at 77.7%

• Develop uncertainty measurement estimates in Drug Unit applications required

for ASCLD-LAB for re-accreditation.

• Identify a LIMS vendor, obtain council approval and begin implementation.

18

• Implement a new Drug Unit LIMS system.

• Complete validation of new Drug Unit instrumentation. Respectfully submitted, Mary M. Gibbons, Manager Criminalistics Division