Review of Mass Homicides of Intelligentsia as a Marker for Genocide

THE FORENSIC EXAMINER Fall 2007

Review of Mass Homicides of Intelligentsia as a Marker for Genocide

Abstract

This article reviews the mass homicide of 140 Turkish intellectuals of Armenian heritage to determine whether their mass execution was consistent with the selective mass extermination of intelligentsia observed in other genocides during the twentieth century. All the victims were arrested on April 24, 1915, in Istanbul and subsequently killed.

Review of data demonstrates a robust correlation between certain markers, social profiles, and the death rate of the 140 Turkish men. The data suggests that their religious and ethnic identity (all men were of Armenian heritage) was a preeminent factor in their demise.

The authors’ review suggests that the selective persecution and homicides of intelligentsia, which this article defines as cerebrogenocide, was similar to genocidal killings and selective persecution and extermination of distinct subgroups in the genocides of Jewish and Serbian citizens in 1940, Jewish intellectuals in Nazi Europe, Jewish doctors in the Soviet Union in 1953, the homicides of Nuba in Sudan from 1960–1972, and western-friendly or eyeglass-wearing Cambodians in the Cambodian Killings Fields from 1975–1978.

This article suggests recognition of early signs may help prevent genocide and that health-care professionals may play a key role in combating future genocides.

Fall 2007 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER - published by Dr. Robert O’Block

This article is approved by the following for continuing education credit:

(ACFEI) The American College of Forensic Examiners International provides this continuing education credit for Diplomates.

(CFC) The American College of Forensic Examiners International provides this continuing education credit for Certified Forensic Consultants.

(CBBS) The American College of Forensic Examiners International is an approved provider of the California Board of Behavioral Sciences, approval PCE 1896. Course meets the qualifications for 1 hour of continuing education credit for MFTs and/or LCSWs as required by the California Board of Behavioral Sciences.

By Alen J. Salerian, MD; Pars Tuglaci; Gregory Salerian, LGSW; Janice Berry Edwards, PhD; Antonia Baum, MD; and Barry Mendelsohn, MD

Key Words: genocide, United Nations, Armenian, Turkish, Ottoman

Background

According to United Nations Resolution 96, genocide is a crime with intent to destroy either in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group (Charny, 1999). In the twentieth century, genocide has been a common phenomenon, and scholarly descriptions of many crucial aspects of this uniquely human invention of menace have been described (Charny, 1999).

It has been suggested that genocide is a premeditated set of actions to eradicate partially or totally a particular group and to silence opponents (Lieberman, 2006). A common trait of genocide is the precise targeting of people with a particular shared group identity (i.e., professional or social status) or appearance, distinct from their religious, ethnic, racial, or political identity, for persecution and/or execution (Lieberman, 2006). Examples of such selective targeting include the following:

In 1933, special legislation enacted by the Nazi regime barred all German-Jewish physicians from government jobs and excluded German-Jewish students from medical school (Morse, 1967). The evidence of Nazi persecution of German Jewish professionals affecting 42% of lawyers, 50% of doctors, and 83% of government employees shows this persecution preceded the main extermination of Jews (Morse, 1967) (Table 1).

In 1942, the Ustasha pursued national purity by identifying Serbian, Gypsy, and Jewish individuals as national enemies of Croatia and then killing them systematically. The persecution of Serbs and Jews began before their mass homicides when they were excluded from work in the press, radio, theater, and other professions of cultural life (Lieberman, 2006).

In 1953, Soviet Jewish doctors and other professionals were targeted for persecution and death (Lieberman, 2006).

In 1962, during the genocide of Nuba, the Sudanese government took special measures to persecute and exterminate the educated Nuba (Charny, 1999).

In 1975, to cleanse Cambodia of the “impure,” the Khmer Rouge first persecuted, then liquidated, Cambodians with higher education and Western ties, those who were bilingual in English and French, and those who wore eyeglasses (Charny, 1999).

In 1915, during the first genocide of the 20th century, Armenian intellectuals became the early victims (Charny, 1999) (Table 2). Despite documentation that verifies the targeting of intellectuals or community leaders of a victimized minority, the genocide literature—with the exception of The Holocaust—lacks adequate statistical data of the selective mass persecutions and homicides of intelligentsia. The purpose of this article is to determine whether the mass homicides of the 140 Turkish intellectuals of Armenian heritage arrested in 1915 were a marker consistent with targeting intelligentsia before genocide or in the early phases of genocide and the implications such a discovery should have on today’s health-care professionals. This article defines the mass and premeditated extermination of intelligentsia as cerebrogenocide.

History

For almost 700 years, Armenians, as Christian subjects, lived under the Ottoman rule as a conquered people. As a minority, they were one of the millets (minority nationalities) and were given limited authority for self-government. But like other minorities, Turkish-Armenians had almost no legal rights in the Ottoman Empire. A Turkish-Armenian had no recourse in the Islamic court system, for in the religious court, non-Muslim testimony was either disallowed or accorded significantly less value. At least 1 million, and possibly more than half of the Turkish-Armenian population, was killed or death-marched by the orders of the ruling triumvirate of the Ottoman government between 1915 and 1918 (Balakian, 2003).

The ruling powers, Talat Pacha, Enver Pacha, and Djemal Pacha, viewed the Turkish-Armenian minority of approximately 2 million people as a potential threat to the survival of the empire and forced the “cleansing” of the republic of the Turkish-Armenian population.

Several strategies were used to cleanse the empire of the Turkish-Armenians:

• Massive deportations of civilian population via death marches without any regard for the safety or the survival of the deported
• Disarmament and execution of all Armenian males serving in the Turkish army
• Early arrests and executions of intelligentsia (cerebrogenocide)
• Voluntary or involuntary assimilation of a large number of Armenian survivors into the Turkish society with a new cultural religious identity (Muslim Turk) and the absolute severance of any cultural or ethnic bonds to their Armenian heritage (see the story of Sabiha Gokcen in Discussion section) (Akyol, 2004; Alpay, 2004)

Method

The authors of this article studied data from numerous sources including the official records of the U.S., British, German, and Ottoman-Turkish national archives. In addition, the Google Internet search engine (www.google.com) provided links to websites with articles and statistics about genocide such as www.genocidewatch.com and www.isg-iags.org (Institute for the Study of Genocide & International Association of Genocide Scholars).

There were four publications of paramount significance in gathering statistical data: The History of Western Armenians, The Encyclopedia of Genocide, While Six Million Died, and Ottoman Population 1830-1914: Demographic and Social Characteristics.

Review of the Killings

On April 24, 1915, in Istanbul, 140 men were taken into custody. Subsequently, without a trial or any other formal charges brought against them, they were killed. Their mass homicides occurred between April 24, 1915, and September 30, 1915, in the early phase of the genocide that lasted until the end of 1918 (Charny, 1999). None of the victims had a criminal history. All the victims were better educated than the average Turkish-Armenian of his community, with activities consistent with higher-than-average participation in civic and community affairs. Further, their psychosocial status crowned them as leaders of their subgroup.

Methods of homicides included death by hanging, gunshot, stabbing, and blunt trauma (Tuglaci, 2004). Of those 140, 62 were physicians, 10 poets, 16 congressmen, 7 pharmacists, 4 clergymen, 1 comedian, and 36 newspaper reporters.

Results

The review suggests that the homicides of the 140 men were premeditated. There seems to be a correlation between the death rate for a Turkish-Armenian in Istanbul and his or her occupation, gender, and age, with women and individuals younger than 17 having full immunity against death by homicide. Among the health-care professionals who were victimized, there was a striking difference of risk of homicide among physicians (45%), pharmacists (6%), and hospital executives (0%). It appeared that the risk of being a victim of homicide for any Turkish-Armenian in Istanbul in 1915 was 1.3%, whereas it was greater for Turkish-Armenian men (2.6%). The death rate from homicide increased to 100% for congressmen, newspaper reporters, poets, and comedians. Collectively, the data suggest that the victims’ potential leadership profile was of significance and indeed made them the preeminent targets for genocide.

The ethnic cleansing of Turkish-Armenians was nearly perfect. In 1915, the Turkish-Armenian population in Ottoman Turkey was estimated to be between 1,161,169 and 2,133,190, with a total population of 25 million people (Karpat, 1985; Balakian, 2003). In 2004, Turkey had a population of more than 70 million with a Turkish-Armenian population of 65,000 (Tuglaci, 2004). Before 1915, there were 2339 Armenian churches in Turkey. After the genocide, most had been destroyed or deserted. The most recent statistics suggest the presence of only 40 churches serving the Turkish-Armenian minority in Turkey (Tuglaci, 2005). In 1915, Turkish-Armenians represented 16% of the Ottoman population. After 1916, the percentage of Turkish-Armenians in Turkey dropped to 0.4%. The latest official census indicates the Turkish-Armenian population in Turkey is 65,000, or less than 0.01% of the overall population (Tuglaci, 2004).

Discussion

The Turkish-Armenian genocide, as the first genocide of the 20th century, is the template for most of the genocides that followed. Prevention of genocide poses a challenge, yet it is preventable. Passionate and unconditional commitment to defend and reinforce U.N. Resolution 96 and educational efforts to teach the history and effects of genocide are essential.

Physicians and other health-care professionals may play a key role in preventing or combating genocide with the knowledge gained from the past genocides.

Four general observations can be made about genocides of the twentieth century:

• Genocide requires secret, premeditated, methodical mass homicides of a victimized group, often followed by the premeditated destruction or alteration of evidence to cover-up the genocide.
• Genocidal killings are contrary to the Hippocratic Oath and the common ethical principles of the American Medical Association (AMA), American Psychological Association (APA), and American Psychiatric Association (APA).
• Cerebrogenocide is a common marker, not a defining one, identifiable by alert and well-informed health-care professionals.
• Many physicians, health-care professionals, and other scientists played crucial roles in the design and execution of genocides during the twentieth century.

Physicians and Genocide in the Twentieth Century

In the first genocide of the twentieth century, many physicians played key roles in exterminating Armenians. Dr. Mehmed Reshid, the governor of the Ottoman province of Diyarbekir, once raised a rhetorical question about Armenians: “Isn’t it the duty of a doctor to destroy microbes?” After the genocide, Dr. Reshid proclaimed, “My Turkishness prevailed over my medical calling.” Drs. Behaeddin Shakir and Mehmed Nazim, both Committee of Unity and Progress (CUP) party leaders, condemned Armenians as infidels (gavurs), like tubercular microbes infecting the state. During the official trials of the Armenian genocide from February 5 until April 7, 1919, a Turkish physician, Dr. Ziya Fuad, testified in writing that Dr. Ali Saib had caused the deaths of untold numbers of Armenian children with injections of morphine (Balakian, 2003).

The summer of 1915 witnessed the homicides of two Turkish-Armenian physicians by two of their Turkish colleagues. The homicide of Dr. Nerses Shabagliyan by Dr. Asaf and the homocide of Dr. Ormayan by Dr. Sani Yaver were the first documented homicides of physicians by physicians in the 20th century (Tuglaci, 2004).

In 1946 and 1947, 23 Nazi doctors stood trial in Nuremberg for crimes against humanity and were found guilty. Among them were the dean of faculty at Berlin University, Dr. Franz Six, responsible for the murder of more than 50,000 Jews; Dr. Josef Mengele, the director of the Institute of Hereditary Biology and Racial Hygiene; and Dr. August Hirt, director of the Strasburg Anatomical Institute in France, who in 1941 gassed 86 Auschwitz concentration camp victims to study their bones to prove Aryan superiority. The euthanasia program (code name T4 Unit) was the brainchild of Dr. Karl Brandt in his relentless drive to design the perfect machine for the mass extermination of the mentally ill and physically handicapped (Hogan, 2003).

From 1932 until 1945, in a quest to develop germ warfare capability, some 20,000 scientists, including doctors and nurses, participated in one of history’s most gruesome medical experiments on prisoners. Some 580,000 Chinese civilians and American, British, and Australian prisoners of war were killed under the medical leadership of Dr. Shiro Ishii, Japanese microbiologist and Lieutenant General of Unit 731, a biological warefare unit of the Imperial Japanese Amry during the Sino-Japanese War (Miller, Engelberg, & Broad, 2002).

Barriers to Education of the Public and Prevention of Genocide

For many complex psychological, social, economic, and political reasons, scholarly research and teaching of genocide have been difficult. Understandably, collective guilt or national shame may inhibit open discussion of tragic events even in the most advanced societies. After all, what American or British citizen would consider the hypothetical possibility that the terror bombings of German and Japanese civilians during the Second World War was a form of genocidal killing, particularly if financial compensation and demands may emerge as a result of such a discussion?

Perhaps similar dynamics also inhibit a country like China from studying the genocidal deaths of millions who perished under the rule of Mao in the 1950s. Politics may also influence educational efforts. If it is not for strict national interests, it is hard to explain why Israel today does not allow the education of young Israelis to include the history of Armenian genocide. Neither the United States nor the United Kingdom officially acknowledges the Armenian genocide. The Japanese government denies the atrocities of Unit 731.

The recent political storm prompted by media reports about Sabiha Gokcen, the adopted daughter of modern Turkey’s founder and first president, Kemal Ataturk, may illustrate the political obstacles that hinder educational and preventive efforts in combating genocide (Millyet, 2004; Alpay, 2004). Hatun Sebilciyan spent several years at an orphanage before her adoption at the age of 12 by Kemal Ataturk. The reality remains that her adoption helped her become an accomplished leader of the young Turkish republic, as she became the first female pilot of the country. Yet, the death of her parents and her adoption were genocidal acts according to United Nations Resolution of 96. However, public expression of this point is a crime punishable by imprisonment of up to 10 years according to current Turkish law, Article 301.

In essence, the challenges associated with any inquiry of Sabiha Gokcen’s life may represent the core challenges faced by all genocide scholars around the world. It is simply a sad reality that today the politics of power and national interests make scholarly discussions or dissemination of historically accurate information very difficult, if not impossible.

In summary, it appears that today the biggest obstacle both to educating the world about genocide and to preventing genocide is the political climate, which makes it very difficult for evidence-based teaching to investigate past genocidal acts.

Conclusion

Although genocide seems to be only a nightmare of the past, the unthinkable act has occurred in several countries throughout the twentieth century, and, considering the situation in Darfur, has extended into the present. In order to prevent future acts of genocide, it is imperative to let go of the belief that genocide is not a threat to or a concern for this era or “our” country. During the period in which genocides are born and grow, they never seem as heinous and barbaric to the people committing them as they do to other countries when remembered years later as distant historical events—if remembered by other countries at all. Genocide, with its history being such a stranger to today’s younger Western generations, could pose quite a future threat, as an unsuspected enemy is doubly dangerous.

Along with specific measures to prevent genocide described by Charny (1999), including the creation of an International Peace Army (IPA), teaching evidence-based history and promoting accurate dissemination of historical facts of all genocides may be the best weapon against genocide. Educating all future generations about the past genocides would be one logical first step. Another initial measure to be taken is to incorporate the genocide literature into the standard curriculum for all health-care professionals. As this article has demonstrated, in the event of a future genocide, health-care professionals would likely be targeted as either victims or perpetrators because of the valuable knowledge they possess. Given their influence, scientists and all health-care professionals may also play a key role in educating political forces. Health-care professionals can lead educational efforts to influence legislative initiatives to create and defend genocide research and scholars.

By informing the public and the media and by actively resisting the presumed governmental authority to override the ethical obligations of health-care professionals defined by the American Medical Association, American Psychological Association, and American Psychiatric Association, health-care professionals can play an active role in combating genocide.

References

Akyol, T. (2004, March 2). Sabiha Gokcen tartismasi [Debate about Sabika Gokcen]. Milliyet, 15.

Alpay, S. (2004, February 28). Sabiha Gokcen 80 yillik sirri [The 80-year-old secret of Sabiha Gokcen]. Zaman, 121.

Balakian, K. (1977). Hai golgotha [Armenian golgotha]. Beirut, Lebanon: Plenetta Printing.

Balakian, P. (2003). The burning tigris: The Armenian genocide and America’s response. New York: Harper Collins.

Boghosian, K. (n.d.). My arrest and exile on April 24, 1915: An eyewitness account of the start of the Armenian genocide. Retrieved October 12, 2005, from http://www.armenianreporteronline.com/old/21042001/c-hachig.htm.

Charny, I. (Ed.). (1999). Encyclopedia of genocide (vol. 1). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, Inc.

Hogan, D. (2003). The holocaust chronicle: A history in words and pictures. Lincolnwood, IL: Publications International Ltd.

Kansu, A. (2000). Politics in post-revolutionary Turkey, 1908–1913. Leiden, the Netherlands: Brill Academic Publishers.

Karpat, K. (2002). Ottoman population 1830-1914: Demographic and social characteristics. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

Lieberman, B. (2006). Terrible Fate: Ethnic cleansing in the making of modern Europe. Chicago, IL: Ivan R. Dee, Publisher.

Miller, J., Engelberg, S., & Broad, W. (2002). Germs: Biological weapons and America’s secret war. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Tuglaci, P. (2004). Bati ermenileri [Western Armenians]. Istanbul, Turkey: Pars Yayin Tc Ltd Sti.

Yarman, A. (2001). Osmanli saglik hizmetterinde ermeniler-ana-basime [Ottoman Health Professionals of Armenian Heritage]. Istanbul, Turkey: Sanayever.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to acknowledge and thank Mr. Ara Guler for his magical photos of old Istanbul.

About the Author

Alen J. Salerian, MD, is a psychiatrist and the medical director of Washington Center for Psychiatry in Washington, DC. He is also a former chief consultant for the FBI and a frequent contributor to national newspapers such as, the Los Angeles Times and USA Today. Dr. Salerian has co-authored several psychiatric articles in peer-reviewed journals. He has made more than 100 appearances on various news shows including CBS’s 60 Minutes and 48 Hours and the BBC’s Panorama. He is a regular analyst and commentator on the Washington, DC CBS television affiliate WUSA-TV. Dr. Salerian is a Diplomate of the American Board of Forensic Medicine and has been a member of the American College of Forensic Examiners since 1997.

Pars Tuglaci is an accomplished historian, linguist, and author of more than 20 scholarly books, who lives in Istanbul, Turkey. A graduate of Malconian Educational Institute in Cypress (1951) and Michigan University (1955), Professor Tuglaci published the first modern Turkish medical dictionary.

Professor Tuglaci’s most recent work, The History of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, has been the product of his lifetime research at numerous museums, libraries, and state archives in more than 30 countries dating back to the early 70’s.

Gregory H. Salerian, MSW, LGSW, holds a master’s degree in clinical social work from the Catholic University of America and a bachelor’s degree in psychology from the University of Delaware. He is in full-time private practice at Washington Center for Psychiatry in Washington, DC. He is a member of the National Association of Social Workers as well as the Greater Washington Society of Clinical Social Workers.

Janice Berry Edwards, PhD, is an assistant professor in the School of Social Work at Virginia Commonwealth University’s Northern Virginia campus in Alexandria. She maintains a private practice with the Washington Center or Psychiatry, in Washington, DC. She holds a doctorate in social work from Catholic University School of Social Work. Her teaching areas include micro practice (advanced clinical social work practice), social justice, and psychopharmacology. Her research and scholarship interests include African American women, multiple intelligences and social work education, relational/cultural theory applied to teaching social work education and field instruction, psychopharmacology and the elderly, as well as domestic violence in law enforcement.

Antonia L. Baum, MD, is on the clinical faculty at the George Washington University School of Medicine’s Department of Psychiatry. She is in private practice in Chevy Chase, Maryland, and specializes in the treatment of athletes and eating disorders. She is a graduate of the Brown University program in medicine (BA and MD).

Barry Mendelsohn, MD, a Board Certified Psychiatrist, currently serves as the medical director of an Assertive Community Treatment Team in Prince Georges County, MD. The program has as its charge the care and treatment of a segment of the population often overlooked or underserved. Dr. Mendelsohn maintains a private practice as well, focusing on the mental health needs of deaf children and their families. He is known in the musical community through his years of involvement in opera and musical theatre.

Dr. Mendelsohn completed his medical school training at Stanford University. His internship was at UCLA in pediatrics, and his psychiatric residency was completed at the University of San Francisco.

Table 1: Nazi Persecution of German Jewish Professionals

Profession

Lawyers

Doctors

Government Workers

Reference: Morse, 1967

Total Population

out of 500,000

2,800

7,000

6,000

Number

Persecuted

1,200

3,500

5,000

Percentage

Persecuted

42%

50%

83%

Table 2: The Selective Homicides of Turkish-Armenian Intellectuals in Istanbul in 1915

Reference: Balakian, 1977; Boghosian, 2005; Kansu, 2000; Tuglaci, 2004; Yarman, 2001

All Turkish-Armenian Residents

Men

Women

Children (under age 17)

Congressman

Newspaper Reporters

Comedians

Poets

Physicians

Bankers

Clergy

Pharmacists

Hospital Executives

Population

162,000

77,760

84,240

Unknown

16

36

1

11

135

12

40

120

16

Number of

Genocidal Deaths

2,345

2,345

0

None

16

36

1

10

62

4

4

7

0

Percentage of Genocidal Deaths

1.3%

2.6%

0%

0%

100%

100%

100%

91%

45%

25%

10%

6%

0%

Table 1: Nazi Persecution of German Jewish Professionals

Profession

Lawyers

Doctors

Government Workers

Reference: Morse, 1967

Total Population

out of 500,000

2,800

7,000

6,000

Number

Persecuted

1,200

3,500

5,000

Percentage

Persecuted

42%

50%

83%

Table 2: The Selective Homicides of Turkish-Armenian Intellectuals in Istanbul in 1915

Reference: Balakian, 1977; Boghosian, 2005; Kansu, 2000; Tuglaci, 2004; Yarman, 2001

All Turkish-Armenian Residents

Men

Women

Children (under age 17)

Congressman

Newspaper Reporters

Comedians

Poets

Physicians

Bankers

Clergy

Pharmacists

Hospital Executives

Population

162,000

77,760

84,240

Unknown

16

36

1

11

135

12

40

120

16

Number of

Genocidal Deaths

2,345

2,345

0

None

16

36

1

10

62

4

4

7

0

Percentage of Genocidal Deaths

1.3%

2.6%

0%

0%

100%

100%

100%

91%

45%

25%

10%

6%

0%

Ethnic Group Country Year Who Ruling Power

Armenians

Jews, Serbs, & Gypsies

German Jews

Soviet Jews

Nuba

Cambodians

Reference: Encyclopedia of Genocide, Charny, 1999.

Table 3: Early Signs of an Impending Genocide: Intellectual, Social, and Cultural Persecution and Liquidation of a Subgroup

Ottoman Turkey

Croatia

Germany

Soviet Union

Sudan

Cambodia

1915

1941

1945

1953

1966

1975

Doctors, poets & newspaper reporters

Jews, Serbs barred from professions of cultural life, the press and radio

Jewish doctors barred from government jobs, Jewish students barred from German medical schools

Jews barred from practicing medicine in the Soviet Union

Persecution and execution of Nuba intellectuals

Western-friendly Cambodians, Cambodians wearing eyeglasses, and Cambodians bilingual in English and French

Ruling triumvirate of Talat, Enver, & Jamal Pasha

Ustasha

Hitler

Stalin

Sudanese Government

Khmer Rouge, Pol Pot

Did it Precede or Occur in the First Half of the Genocidal Period

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

THE FORENSIC EXAMINER Fall 2007

Forensic Engineering Evaluation of Premises Maintenance

Forensic Engineering Evaluation of Premises Maintenance

Abstract

A premises (building and its site) consists of components to form a safe, usable facility. The components must be maintained in order to keep them functioning. Forensic engineers are often asked to render their opinions concerning a component’s performance and the maintenance it has received. Because the results are to be used in a forensic forum, the engineer must have a well-documented methodology and a firm basis for his or her opinions. One method of making such an evaluation is to employ a systems approach.

When a component and its maintenance are treated as a system, the engineer considers its various aspects and the interaction between those aspects. Furthermore, the examiner can test “what if” hypotheses using the same method. This article discusses a method to achieve that end while giving the forensic engineer a strong foundation for his or her opinion.

THE FORENSIC EXAMINER Fall 2007

Fall 2007 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER

This article is approved by the following for continuing education credit:

(ACFEI) The American College of Forensic Examiners International provides this continuing education credit for Diplomates.

By John A. D’Onofrio, MS, CE, PE, DABFE, DABFET, DNAFE

Key Words: buildings, premises, maintenance, systems evaluation

Introduction

A premises (buildings and its site) consists of a group of systems working together to form a facility. The components of these systems must be maintained in order to keep them functioning. Following an accident or system failure, a forensic engineer is often asked to make an examination and render an opinion concerning a component’s performance and the maintenance it received. Such requests are most common in civil litigation, but may be required in a criminal case as well. Because of the complexity of a premises (both the building and its site), such services may be requested from engineers in many disciplines and some examinations may require an interdisciplinary team. Because the result is to be used in a forensic forum, the engineer must have a well-documented methodology and a firm basis for his or her opinions.

One method to make such an evaluation is to employ a systems approach. System analysis, as defined in this article, is the critical examination of the technical and managerial skills used to maintain the premises. This approach recognizes that continued, acceptable operation of a component is dependent upon a system consisting of the component itself and the maintenance it receives. Systems, whether including human activity or not, are subject to limitations whose effects can best be understood through system analysis. Furthermore, the examiner can test “what if” hypotheses by assuming changes in the system and analyzing the results. The result of an analysis is a simple statement of opinion; however, time, work, and data are needed to posit an opinion with a strong foundation.

The remainder of this article discusses a method to achieve that end. Many of the principles discussed have their origin in health and safety engineering. Often, premises maintenance evaluations are required when an accident or injury has occurred. Therefore, the method described here is closely related to safety engineering practice.

The Flow Chart (Figure 1)

By applying the evaulation flow chart, the examiner covers a wide range of pertinent topics. Not only does this provide a guideline to the examination, but it also provides an excellent foundation for the engineer’s opinions. The flow chart has two flow paths, Component and Maintenance. Each path consists of decision points where the engineer finds the aspect under consideration either acceptable (yes) or unacceptable (no). A “no” evaluation leads to an Inadequate System rating. A series of “yes” evaluations leads to the And gate toward the bottom of the flow chart. Both paths of the flowchart must be evaluated and lead to the And gate in order for the system to receive a Good rating. If the first path leads to the And gate, then the second path must be evaluated to complete the process.

Once an Inadequate System rating is reached, theoretically, there is no need for further evaluation. However, an Inadequate System rating is often the beginning of the next phase of the investigation, an explanation of cause. Because a system may be inadequate for numerous causes, the engineer alone must decide whether he or she should continue the evaluation further.

An Example

The following example follows Figure 1 and includes a discussion of the evaluation process. The example is a request to evaluate the floor of a small mercantile establishment where a patron slipped and fell on a rainy day. There is an allegation that water was present on the floor at the time of this fall. The component to be evaluated is the flooring. The maintenance program is that which the proprietor uses for safety during inclement weather.

Operating Conditions

The first step in the evaluation process is to determine the operating conditions. These are the conditions under which the system is expected to operate and give the engineer insight to the system when working the evaluation paths.

The operating conditions are best determined by site inspection, document review, and testimony of various parties. A document review may include but is not limited to:

• Plans and specifications prepared by the building architect or design engineer
• Lease documents that may specify permitted activities within the building
• Building and maintenance codes
• Zoning ordinances and other regulatory documents
• Indoor environmental standards common to the industry

In this example, the site inspection revealed that the space was being used as a haberdashery. Flooring was a commercial grade vinyl tile. The slip location was approximately 7 feet from the entry. The document review has determined that, at the time of the fall, the building was approximately 25 years old. The architect’s plans indicate the space to be used for retail use. The use of the space for mercantile purposes is consistent with the permitted uses in the zoning ordinance. The lease between the owner and tenant indicates that the space is to be used for the legal, retail sale of goods, not to include food or personal services. Based on the site inspection and document review the engineer can reasonably conclude that the use of the space is “anticipated.”

Note from Figure 1 that the evaluation process does not depend upon the operating conditions; however, if unanticipated conditions are involved, the examiner must decide and note if the evaluation is made for the actual conditions encountered, the anticipated conditions, or both. The examiner must also recognize that a component may be exposed to an unanticipated condition and continue to function well.

Component

Component evaluation follows the right side of Figure 1. Here, the specific component under examination is scrutinized under the chosen operating conditions.

Component Specifications. The next step in component evaluation is to determine if it meets specification. This step implies that the engineer has determined the component’s specification and an appropriate test for compliance. The component specification may be either specific (specified by size, make, and model) or performance (i.e. 100 cfm fan, 230VA) oriented. Oftentimes, component specifications are not specific and must be derived from document review. These include, but are not limited to:

• Plans and specifications prepared by the building architect or design engineer
• Manufacturer’s specifications
• Building codes
• Typical architectural and engineering details (graphic standards)
• Engineering organization standards
• Authoritative consensus standards

In the example, the architectural plans were silent on the flooring material. According to testimony, the vinyl tile was selected by the owner and was in place when the tenant moved in. The manufacturer is unknown at this time. The tenant space was inspected by the construction official before opening to the public and received a certificate of occupancy. The local building code requires that all walking surfaces be slip-resistant.

A literature search revealed an ASTM standard that relates slip resistance to the floor’s static coefficient of friction with a shoe-leather test surface and a threshold level. On-site testing of the floor material was conducted and determined it to be slip-resistant.

Based on the site inspection, document review, and testing, the engineer can reasonably conclude that the material used to construct the floor surface meets specification.

Component Installation. The next step in Figure 1 is to examine the component installation. Poor workmanship should be noted and described. The manufacturer’s installation guide for the component should be consulted, if possible, whenever installation is drawn into question. In the example, the vinyl tile was examined and found to be tight, stable, and planar. Based on the site inspection, the engineer was able to reasonably conclude that the installation was not an issue and probably followed the manufacturer’s specification.

Maintenance

The maintenance flow path follows the left side of Figure 1. Here, the maintenance program under examination is scrutinized under the chosen operating conditions. This flow path incorporates work on safety done in the United States and the United Kingdom. The U.S. recommendations were developed and promulgated for workplace safety. The U.S. Department of Labor, through the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), publishes a document entitled Keeping Your Workplace Safe (1999). This document describes four elements that every effective program should have:

• Management, leadership, and employee involvement
• Workplace analysis
• Hazard prevention and control
• Training and education

Similarly, the Health and Safety Executive of the United Kingdom publishes a document entitled Managing Health and Safety – Five Steps to Success (1998). The document states: “This leaflet contains notes on good practice which are not compulsory, but which you may find helpful in considering what you need to do.” The five steps are

• set up your policy;
• organize your staff;
• plan and set standards;
• measure your performance;
• learn from experience.

Figure 1 incorporates these into the four aspects of the maintenance procedure flow path.

Maintenance Procedure

Maintenance procedures may be written and formalized. This is commonly found at locations that have a maintenance department or are part of a nationally operated or franchised establishment. Managers responsible for large buildings or multiple premises may have routine and preventative maintenance scheduled and noted by computer. On the other side of the spectrum, other business or industrial locations may not have a written plan, and the examiner must determine the maintenance procedure through investigation, interview, or testimony.

The second aspect of the maintenance procedure is to determine if it conforms to or follows a standard. The examiner must keep an open mind and not judge the book by its cover. Policies and procedures that are extensive, written, and neatly bound are not necessarily more compliant with standards than those that are less organized. A lack of organization and record-keeping may be a regulatory violation, but is insufficient by itself to consider the system inadequate. However, policies and procedures that are unclear may be considered outside the standards because of ambiguity. Further, loosely stated maintenance procedures can have an effect on other aspects of the maintenance program.

The engineer must determine the appropriate standard by which to measure the subject procedure. The manufacturer’s specification on how to maintain the component should be investigated and may specify a performance standard for maintenance. For example, certain filters may need to be checked at a maximum time interval and cleaned following a specified process. Property maintenance regulation may specify the maximum time that snow or ice may be allowed to remain untreated or the length of time that rainwater may accumulate before it is considered stagnant.

In cases where the standard is not straightforward, the engineer must be prepared to ascertain industry standards for maintenance based on authoritative and circulated industry publications. Standards organizations such as the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) publish a wealth of information. The insurance industry has a long history of underwriting standards for buildings and sites. They pioneered sprinkler system standards for fire control, and many insurance companies sponsor safety research to this day. Over time, these findings become industry standards and find their way into loss-control and underwriting literature. The National Safety Council (NSC) and the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASEE) are another source of information. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Air Force have extensive procedures for maintaining buildings and sites with a wealth of information available on their websites (Secretary, 2004; U.S. Army, 2003).

When deciding on an appropriate standard, the examiner must be sure that the standard is widely circulated and does not conflict with jurisdictional building codes, maintenance regulations, or site improvement standards. The challenge is to determine reasonable industry standards for a given situation, especially in view of critics that are always present around any issue. Cutting-edge academic and scientific papers should be used with caution. They may be useful to explain or substantiate a principle, but most are not widely circulated amongst maintenance practitioners, and the author’s view may not be widely accepted or adopted as a standard.

When researching standards, remember that a maintenance procedure in practice must include a method of discovering conditions that need to be maintained. Discovery of a condition that has developed relative to a component is an essential part of maintenance. The time required to correct such conditions (correction time) includes both the amount of time the condition exists before it is discovered (discovery time) and the amount of time required to do the work using reasonable dispatch (work time). Hence, there will always be a time interval between the instant a component develops a condition requiring work and when the work is completed. Often a condition that develops will not be obvious and the maintenance procedure must be proactive to minimize the discovery time. For example, mechanical equipment should be checked on a periodic basis to assure it is either functioning properly or exhibiting telltale signs of impending failure.

Published standards must also be read with this principle in mind. They will often indicate that certain actions must be taken “immediately.” This should be interpreted as acting “without delay upon discovery” because instantaneous discovery (zero discovery time) and correction (zero work time) is, in most cases, impossible.

The procedure and standard examination may require some iteration. The examiner should have the standard in mind when examining the procedure and the procedure in mind when examining the standard. After interviewing the various parties or reviewing their deposition testimony, review both the procedure and the standard for modifications afterward. This will help assure that nothing out of the ordinary is missed.

In the example, the engineer researched Best’s Loss Control Manual (2000), a loss-control engineering guide and authoritative publication for insurance underwriting. After selecting the appropriate use, he reviewed the various items of concern and selected those that were appropriate to floor maintenance and the conditions at hand. This subset of conditions became the performance standard for the evaluation. Also, it was determined that local building and maintenance codes provided no performance standard for floor maintenance. Further review of a NSC publication concerning falls on floors revealed similar recommendations therein. The engineer felt confident that the items selected represented good practice and industry standard.

The maintenance procedures for floor maintenance were written and posted on the bulletin board in the employee area of the store along with emergency phone numbers. While not detailed, they covered the items in the standard and were straightforward and easy to understand. They included employee assignments and response measures to inclement weather conditions. The engineer determined that the maintenance procedure did follow standard.

Education

Education refers to the training that maintenance personnel receive. Depending upon the maintenance tasks, the education may require specialized training or schooling. Most commonly, however, maintenance personnel receive on-the-job training, especially if the maintenance tasks are more janitorial than repair in nature. Management must be involved to assure that education is not a one-time experience. New equipment or changes in business operations may require re-training of maintenance personnel. Further, it must also be determined that the specific personnel responsible for the maintenance had received the training and understood their duty. Maintenance personnel must be taught and encouraged to trust their judgment and report their opinions concerning the component or the maintenance procedure to management without fear of reprisal.

In the example, it was determined that all employees are instructed as to the safety procedures for inclement weather. The maintenance was basically a janitorial function. Safety posters were on the employee bulletin board, and the owner discussed safety at all employee meetings, instructing them to place mats on the floors and warning cones at the entrance when it starts to rain. Employees were instructed how to properly clean water and spills from the floor and to watch for such conditions as they move about the store. The specific employee at the store when the incident occurred had 3 years of experience with the company and was thoroughly familiar with the procedures. The engineer concluded that the personnel were sufficiently trained to properly maintain the floor.

Management

Management works hand-in-hand with education and is a critical component in resources. Management must consider maintenance a priority aspect of their business and be committed to keeping the system working. The attitude of management influences the personnel; if the boss does not care, neither will the staff. Management should

• have a system of reporting and tracking maintenance functions. This data can point to problems and the need for improvement in the system;
• check to assure that adequate resources in the form of manpower and equipment are available to keep the system running;
• reinforce education amongst the workers;
• create a climate where maintenance is a priority.

Sometimes an evaluation of management can be simple and straightforward. In other situations, it can be complex and difficult. A proprietor of a space that ships and receives merchandise from one or two loading docks may have no problem both scheduling and managing his truck traffic. The traffic manager for an industrial or warehouse operation may have traffic engineering and safety problems to be solved while, at the same time, keeping the system running. It is important that the examiner keep his own house in order and recognize when a consultant or team approach is required.

The proprietor of the establishment in the example had two locations to manage. He visited both of them more than five times a week and had constant cell-phone contact whenever the stores were open for business. He met with employees and conversed with each one every 2 weeks. Premises maintenance was always discussed. Furthermore, he rotated and replaced the signs, posters, and instructions posted in the employee areas. Based on this testimony, the engineer concluded that the management of the system is adequate.

Resources

Resources are the manpower, equipment, and material required to keep the maintenance program working. It is tied to management because management allocates the funds, hires the people, and sets the work schedules. Management also determines how and when the resources are allocated. Personnel view resources as a management statement, equating adequate allocation of resources to a top management priority. Conversely, management that is perceived as “doing-it-on-the-cheap” is considered to have maintenance as a low priority.

Although budgets are an important factor in any business, resources are best measured by what takes place at the premises. It is one thing to budget for an adequate number of filters and another thing to have them in the supply room when they are needed. It is one thing to budget for a snow removal contractor and another thing to have sufficient manpower to do the job properly. Therefore, resources are a topic of investigation with both management and the personnel at the site.

At many small premises, maintenance responsibilities are shared amongst the general staff. Workers in a machine shop may also do regular maintenance on the machines and pitch in for janitorial work. At large premises, there will be a maintenance department. Each can be satisfactory, and each presents challenges to the examiner. Staffing levels will vary from place to place, and the examiner will often rely on management testimony concerning overall staffing levels. However, the examiner needs to assure him or herself that there is adequate manpower to maintain the component under consideration. In any examination, testimony from the personnel specifically assigned to the component’s maintenance will be valuable. This is another area where the examiner may need input from a consultant.

Communication is another resource. At small premises, a few employees can respond quickly when a condition arises based on verbal communications. Larger premises may require radio or telephone communication systems to report a condition when it is discovered and to dispatch personnel to do the work.

The engineer must keep in mind that a maintenance evaluation of a particular building component is not an examination of the entire building. If the examiner fails to properly limit his investigation, he runs the risk of following many irrelevant paths at a cost of much time and effort. He also exposes himself to irrelevant information that clouds his judgment. This leaves the engineer open to charges of bias or “witch-hunting.”

In the example, the proprietor scheduled a minimum of two employees on each shift, one for general operations and one at the cash register. The retail space is not large and the operations employee were easily able to make half-hour inspection rounds. Furthermore, he observed the store while moving about and assisting customers and responded to instructions from the cash register station by a hand-held radio. Floor mats, warning signs, mops, and buckets were kept in the maintenance closet. Floor mats were serviced by an outside contractor every 2 months. Three mops and buckets were available—one for each employee and a spare.

Based on the site inspection and testimony from the various parties, the engineer concluded that the system was supported by sufficient resources to properly maintain the floor during wet weather. This results in a “yes” for resources.

However, during his examination the engineer discovered that one employee was sick the day of the incident, leaving only one person to man both the cash register station and cover general operations. There was no one else available to cover the shift. When the rain started he placed the mats and warning signs at the entrance. However, he was unable to make regular rounds of the store looking for water and spills on the floor. The water on the floor was brought to his attention when the patron fell.

Opinions and Conclusions

According to the flow chart, when there are two “yes” results at the And gate, the engineer can feel confident that the component is adequate and the maintenance system can keep it functioning properly under the expected operating conditions. Therefore, a Good System rating is in order.

The fact that a component has failed does not affect this rating; it is the system being evaluated and not a single event. Components and maintenance can fail, even in a good system, because all systems have limitations; they are subject to randomly occurring and unpredictable events.

In the floor accident example, the system recieved a Good rating. However, insight into the event under consideration was gained by analyzing the conditions at the time of the failure. A re-analysis using the staffing conditions on the day of the component failure resulted in a “no” (not adequate) classification for resources because staffing fell below management’s recommended levels, and proper inspections were not taking place because of the short-staffing condition. Under these conditions, the flow chart leads to an Inadequate System rating for that particular circumstance. The forensic engineer must clearly make the distinction between the system’s rating overall and its rating as operating at a particular time. This distinction can be important in a forensic forum.

The use of systems analysis, as presented here, offers the forensic engineer a methodology of evaluation that is both comprehensive and flexible. The example presented shows that the method has application to simple as well as complex systems. The engineer must remember that the analysis is only as good as the input data, the end result is the opinion of an engineer who may have to defend it, and this analysis and opinion are seldom the end of the questions to be answered.

References

A. M. Best Company, Inc. (2000). Best’s loss control manual (version 2006). Oldwick, NJ: Author.

Brauer, R. L. (1990). Safety and health for engineers. New York: VanNostrand Reinhold.

Health and Safety Executive Books. (1998). Managing health and safety—Five steps to success. United Kingdom: Author.

Secretary of the Air Force. (2004). Safety and health standards. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (2003). Safety and health requirements manual. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Labor. (1999). Keeping your workplace safe. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Wausau Insurance Company. (1990). Hazard survey guide. Wausea, MN: Author.

About the Author

John A. D’Onofrio, MS, CE, PE, is a professional engineer in private practice with more than 30 years experience in the engineering design and forensic evaluation of buildings and premises. He holds a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree in civil engineering from the New Jersey Institute of Technology. D’Onofrio is a licensed professional engineer in New York, New Jersey, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and has been recognized as an expert in federal court and in the courts of all three states. He has taught at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, New Jersey, and at the Community College of Morris in Randolph, New Jersey. He has been a guest lecturer before the New Jersey Municipal Engineer’s Foundation and the New Jersey Society of Professional Land Surveyors.

This article published by Dr. O’Block

Inside the Mind of the Mind Hunter: an Interview With Legendary Fbi Agent John Douglas

You are well known for your exceptional career in criminal profiling. Please tell our readers about your background and how you became a famous FBI profiler.


As a child I watched a popular television show called The FBI starring Efrem Zimbalist Jr. who played the part of Inspector Erskine. This show was on television for 9 years (1965–74) and had 240 episodes based on the work of the Inspector Erskine, who was all business. He didn’t laugh, didn’t love, and didn’t play. He worked every type of case and flew in a private jet to wherever the action was. In truth, this position was non-existent. A FBI agent was, and still is, assigned to 1 of 59 field offices and generally remains in that office unless transferred. Little did I know in 1970 when I joined the FBI, that one day I would actually create a position within the FBI based on Inspector Erskine that would have me traveling throughout the United States and abroad providing on-site consultations in the form of crime analysis and criminal profiling.


As a young FBI agent I enjoyed investigations that included interpersonal violence, cases where the subjects were attempting to avoid prosecution or confinement, and cases where the subjects were fugitives from justice. While the investigations and arrests were fun, I was really interested in learning something about who they were and why they perpetrated their crimes, particularly violent crimes, against innocent people.


Along the way I obtained graduate degrees in educational psychology, guidance and counseling, and adult education. I enrolled in many abnormal and clinical psychology courses, but while I found the classes interesting, they never really addressed the question of motive. Perhaps because the professors teaching those courses had little, if any, experience with the criminal element.


In 1977 when I was promoted and transferred to the Behavioral Science Unit at the FBI Academy, I hoped I would learn more about the motives behind criminal behavior. The students (law enforcement officers enrolled in the criminal psychology classes taught at the FBI Academy) and I found the classes entertaining and sometimes humorous, and the instructors received the highest praises each semester from their students. Yet, I still felt there was something missing. None of these instructors had actually gone into prisons and personally asked violent offenders about the specifics of their crimes. I wanted to know about pre-offense behavior, victim selection, the offender’s personal background, their motivation, their post offense behavior, and how they were identified and apply that information to present-day cases.


By the early 1980s, another colleague and I received a federal grant to conduct research on serial murderers. It seemed obvious to me that to learn from the “experts,” it is necessary to speak with them. My personal mantra in all of my books has always been the following:


“To understand the artist, look at the art work.”


“Behavior reflects personality.”


“The crime is a reflection of the offender.”


The above seemed so obvious that I was surprised and somewhat amused when some people and organizations began praising this enlightenment into the criminal mind. However, not everyone praised my ideas. Individuals in mental health, probation and parole, and corrections did not like what I was advocating. In sum, all I said was that anyone in such positions of responsibility must not base their findings and conclusions on an offender’s self-reporting. The interview is only one piece of the puzzle. The criminal case, which includes analyzing the complete crime scene and autopsy photos (in the case of a homicide); the autopsy protocol; and law enforcement preliminary reports must all be reviewed, and how the offenders were apprehended must be determined. Relying on self-reporting alone is a disservice to the criminal justice system and threatens those who want to live and work in a safe community.


A few years ago on a book tour in New Zealand, I spoke before a group of psychologists and psychiatrists at their institution for the criminally insane. Before I began my lecture I could tell by their body language that they had a problem with me. Apparently, they had read some of my books where I criticized making evaluations of an inmate without ever looking at the facts of the case. Their response to me was that by looking at the crime scene photos or reading preliminary police reports they would unfairly pre-judge the patient/inmate. I responded by saying that if you don’t take time to look at those types of case information then they, as mental health professionals, would have no idea to whom they were talking. I told them they cannot and should not rely on self-reporting alone because the bad guys lie. They may not have liked what I said, but that is the truth based on my own experiences.


During the span of your career, the progression of criminal profiling made vast advancements. Can you describe your position as an FBI profiler and your role in implementing the expansion of this field?


In 1977, when I was transferred to the FBI Academy as a criminal psychology instructor, the criminal profiler position did not exist. After first conducting the research and then passing on what I learned in classes, we began to receive cases for analysis. Starting in 1981 I began creating a criminal profiling program within the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit. During the first year we received approximately 54 cases and every subsequent year the caseload expanded. By the time I retired from the FBI in 1995, we were analyzing over 1,000 cases a year. When I retired I had 43 employees in my unit. Only 12 of those employees profiled, so it was very stressful for all of us. We had to deal with life and death situations with very short deadlines.


Even today, there are many people who think the FBI only profiles serial murder cases. In reality, the majority of cases are single homicides, and every type of violent crime has been researched and analyzed by profilers.


Profiling is not the only investigative tool available. For example, there are some cases where profiling an unknown offender would not be suitable because of the high risk-level of the victim. What could possibly still be provided are proactive techniques, research-based probable cause for search warrants, interview and interrogation techniques, prosecution and defense counseling, and possibly expert testimony.


Criminal profiling is a rough line of work. Please describe some of the more difficult aspects of the job.


The very nature of profiling violent crimes makes for a highly stressful job. One must be able to identify with both the subject and victim in order to answer the investigative formula of why + how = who.


It has been my experience that if a profiler uses the defense mechanism of “isolation of affect” they will not be successful. When I train profilers I tell them they must walk in the shoes of both the subject and victim. You have to experience the feelings and emotions of both.


There is danger in this technique. In 1983 I nearly died in Seattle, Washington, while working on the Green River murder case. I was found in my hotel room in a coma caused by a body temperature btween 104 and 107 degrees. After 5 days in a coma I woke up and found myself paralyzed on my left side. I had viral encephalitis and doctors attributed my weakened immune system to the amount of stress I was under. I was later treated for post-traumatic stress disorder.


Please describe the most fascinating case of which you have been a part.


There have been many interesting and personally rewarding cases in my career. Most recently I was able to interview Dennis Rader, the “BTK Strangler” whose murders resurfaced after 30 years. I did the original profile in 1979 and later updated it with my colleagues. I briefly wrote and profiled the BTK Strangler in my book Obsession. When I interviewed Rader he told me he read Obsession and personally critiqued my analysis. He said my analysis was very good, but his identification, arrest, and conviction were not attributed to it. In August 2007, Jossey-Bass will be publishing my book on the BTK and during the 2007 ACFEI National Conference I will be presenting this case along with many others.


What else can be learned from your seminars with ACFEI?


Profiling, in the right hands and with good training, can be a viable investigative tool. Those attending the seminar will have a better appreciation and understanding of the overall profiling process. Criminal profiling is not accurately portrayed in the movies and on television. Attendees will learn the process of criminal profiling, and I will demonstrate that criminal investigative analysis is very similar to a physician’s act of diagnosing a patient with an unknown illness or disease. Both the medical doctor and criminal profiler can be wrong at times. We are only as good as the information provided to us for analysis. Unfortunately, not every case investigated is a perfect one, but it is important to recognize the imperfections and consider them in the overall analysis.


ACFEI is made up of members from a wide array of forensic backgrounds. How does your presentation relate to all attendees’ professions?


In the past I’ve spoken to college students, physicians, lawyers, school teachers, nurses, stock brokers, sales personnel, and many other persons from a variety of occupations. At the very least the audience will be entertained in a forensic area with which most are not intimately familiar. Others will find that the seminar will have direct application to their forensic specialty. I hope that everyone attending the seminar will take the information provided, digest it, and then apply it, not only to their work, but also to their lives.

ACFEI Launches New Website

Our web-team is finally finished with our new website!
ACFEI is proud to announce that the NEW redesign is up and running.
Be sure to check back often for the latest in forensics news, forensics education, and forensics career networking!

ACFEI Member Testimonial: Lieutenant Colonel CHS ...

Lieutenant Colonel CHS Certified Alicia Tate-Nadeau talks about why she joined ACFEI and became Certified in Homeland Security

Testimonial from Dana Hunt about how ACFEI has helped ...

ACFEI member Dr. Dana Hunt Unruh talks about how membership with the American College of Forensic Examiners has helped her career.