Title: TechBeat Fall 1998
Series: n/a
Author: National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center
Published: October 1998
Subject: law enforcement technology
pages: 34
bytes: 69

Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not
included in this ASCII plain-text file. To view
this document in its entirety, download the Adobe
Acrobat graphic file available from this Web site
or order a print copy from NLECTC at 800-248-2742.

------------------------------

National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center
TECHbeat
Fall 1998
Dedicated to Reporting Developments in Technology
for Law Enforcement, Corrections, and Forensics

------------------------------

Putting the Fire Out in Utica

At times it looked like the city of Utica, New
York, was going up in smoke. Its arson rate was
twice that of the national average and three times
that of the State average. Its closure rate was
not good; its conviction rate even worse.

Utica's arson problems could be traced to several
sources. The city had lost more than 30 percent of
its population due to the closing of Griffiss Air
Force Base and a number of defense-related
businesses. With the local economy spiraling
downward and home sales plummeting, some property
owners started burning their homes for the
insurance money. Others just boarded them up and
walked away. In turn, these areas became prey to
drug dealers who set up drug fiefdoms and often
burned the property of their competitors in drug
deals gone bad or in an effort to take over
additional turf. At the same time, New York City
cracked down on criminal activities, significantly
lowering its crime rate but sending many of its
resident criminals scurrying for new and more
lucrative areas. In addition, profiteers appeared
on the scene who bought abandoned houses at
fire-sale prices, insured them for $100,000, and
torched them.

At its worst, Utica firefighters battled two to
three fires a night. The city's arson rate was
twice that of the national average, with 45
percent of all structure fires ruled arson. The
national average for arson case closures was 15
percent, but Utica only closed 2 percent of its
cases. Structure fires numbered more than 250 in
1997--far too high for this town of 65,000 people
living in 9 square miles.

Although many Utica neighborhoods remained strong
during the city's economic downturn, its inner
city bore the brunt of the arson-related crimes.
But it was here, right in the middle of what
looked like a war zone, that hope was born. With
$10,000 in funding from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), the city of Utica,
several surrounding local agencies, and a number
of Federal agencies formed the Utica Arson Strike
Force in April 1997. From each participating
agency, the strike force tapped experts in all
facets of arson investigation and housed them in
an abandoned firehouse in the heart of the most
fire-ravaged section of the city.

Although in existence a relatively short time, the
strike force has turned around what had become a
serious and dangerous trend. Since its inception,
arson has dropped by 50 percent, closure rates now
stand at 52 percent, and the conviction rate is
100 percent, according to Utica Police Department
Capt. Claude DeMetri, who heads the strike force.
Not only did the strike force investigate current
fires, DeMetri says, it opened more than 120 old
cases dating back to 1991. Nineteen of those have
since been closed by arrest.

DeMetri believes this success lies in the
cooperation that exists among the participating
agencies. The strike force, he says, consists of a
commander, a deputy commander, a technical
resource coordinator, an operations officer, three
fire marshals, an arson detection K-9 and handler,
a forensic technician, a special agent from the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), an
assistant district attorney on call 24 hours a
day, and six investigators. Participating agencies
include the Utica Police Department, Oneida County
Sheriff's Department, Utica Fire Department, New
York State Office of Fire Prevention and Control,
and New York State Police. Part-time members come
from the U.S. Marshals Service, the New York State
Insurance Fraud Bureau, and the National Institute
of Justices's (NIJ's) National Law Enforcement and
Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC)-Northeast.

NLECTC-Northeast got involved in the strike force
at the request of FEMA, which was responding to an
appeal by U.S. Representative Sherwood Boehlert
(R-NY), for help with the growing problem of
arson. Utica was designated as the fourth pilot
city in FEMA's National Arson Prevention
Initiative. FEMA asked NLECTC-Northeast, located
in Rome, New York, to assess and provide for the
team's technology requirements.

"They needed a digital camera, a color scanner,
printers, and funding to build a custom database,
which we provided," says John Ritz, director of
NLECTC-Northeast. "They also needed a local area
network, which we designed, built, and
implemented. This network gives them the
capability to send and receive information over
the Internet and to share information with other
agencies."

Through the U.S. Air Force's Law Enforcement
Analysis Facility, also located in Rome, NLECTC-
Northeast also cleaned up audiotapes taken from
body wires and enhanced the quality of
surveillance audio and videotapes.

"The actual number of dollars invested has not
been that much," Ritz says. "The task force had
substantial manpower and expertise in every area
of arson investigation. We provided the technology
that supports what they do. With the digital
camera, they can develop high-quality
investigative documents, which increases their
conviction rate. It also lets them e-mail suspect
photos to other agencies, which has helped them
arrest arsonists in New York City, North Carolina,
Nevada, and Florida."

In addition to accessing state-of-the-art
technologies and expertise, the arson strike force
changed the basic structure of the typical arson
investigation. Instead of waiting for the fire
marshal to investigate and rule on a particular
blaze, the strike force assumed every fire was
arson and treated the area as a crime scene.
Investigators and fire marshals rolled alongside
the fire department at the moment the fire alarm
sounded. They watched how the structure burned,
canvassed the crowd for suspects and witnesses,
conducted on-scene interviews, and took
photographs of the crowd and fire scene. If the
fire marshal decided it was arson after the fire
was out, the strike force simply continued their
investigation.

The strike force also took advantage of
cooperation, donations, and funding from the
community: A local communications company provided
intercoms for the strike force offices; a cell
phone company supplied cell phones to
investigators free for 6 months; local businesses,
agencies, and colleges donated office furniture,
computers, and supplies; area insurance companies
donated money and camera equipment; the Utica Fire
Department donated pagers with group paging
capabilities; ATF provided a radio base station,
portable radios, surveillance equipment, and a
van; the sheriff's department provided two
computers and three vehicles seized from drug
investigations, while its offender work program
supplied manpower for construction, remodeling,
and cleanup of the strike force offices; and the
U.S. Marshals Service provided prisoner transport
services.

The strike force has been such a success that it
is expanding to cover the entire county and is
being used as a model for an area drug task force.
And, even more important to the city's economic
welfare is that downtown business owners are
starting to rebuild, remodel, and restore their
properties. Utica is truly rising from the ashes.

For more information about the Utica Arson Strike
Force and its operations, contact John Ritz or
Dave Hallett at NLECTC-Northeast, 888-338-0584; or
Capt. Claude DeMetri, 315-732-7260. You can also
access the strike force's World Wide Web site at
www.borg.com/~uticapba/arson.

------------------------------

Taking the Fight Out in Lakewood

The Lakewood Police Department is proving that
when it comes to domestic violence, technology not
only saves lives, it also simplifies and speeds
the handling of cases. This Colorado agency used
computer technology to take a closer look at how
it handles domestic violence calls. By
implementing a program that uses "process
mapping," it has dramatically changed the
structure of its domestic violence response
system--so much so that it became one of the
reasons Good Housekeeping magazine named the
Lakewood Police Department one of the top eight
law enforcement agencies in the country.

Lakewood's program started in 1995 as a spinoff of
a project that involved the city of Chicago and
Motorola, Inc. Motorola had used a process mapping
program to improve its overall performance, and
offered the program to the Chicago Police
Department for the same purpose. The project
paired the Performance Learning Corporation, which
had expertise in process mapping, with the Police
Executive Research Forum. With sponsorship from
Motorola, the project expanded to include six
other U.S. cities: Lakewood, Colorado; Phoenix,
Arizona; Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina;
West Palm Beach, Florida; Arlington, Texas; and
Naperville, Illinois, as well as the Thames Valley
Constabulary in the United Kingdom.

Process mapping is an alternative to traditional,
top-down methods of analysis. It takes a more
horizontal view of the system and involves
personnel at all levels. Process mapping visually
depicts how information and materials flow in an
organization and how work is handed off from one
unit to another. In addition, it identifies
breakdowns and barriers in the process. The end
product is a series of flowcharts, or maps. The
first map is an "as is" map that shows the current
process. The second map is a "should be" map that
shows the process if interim changes were made to
reduce waste and error. The third map is the
"could be" map that depicts the process if it were
permanently and significantly altered.

Interestingly, process mapping can be used with
almost any police investigation function, from
burglary to homicide. The Lakewood department
decided to employ process mapping in its domestic
violence cases to better understand them and to
streamline their handling, from the initial call
to final disposition. According to Lakewood Police
Department Capt. Al Youngs, it was the perfect way
to separate fact from fiction.

"It examines what is really happening," Youngs
says, "not what everyone thinks is happening. We
mapped the process from the time the 911 call came
in, all the way to the end, which is at the
municipal or county court level. From the
detective to the D.A., we found out how we respond
to domestic violence calls."

Lakewood looked at the 12 components of a typical
domestic violence case--suspect, victim, citizen,
communication, patrol, victim advocates,
investigations, criminalistics, records, property,
prosecution, and courts--and then mapped the route
of each through the criminal justice system. The
mapping project involved everyone who had any
connection with handling a domestic violence call.

"It forced all of the components of the system to
sit down together and examine, criticize,
critique, and hypothesize how the system could be
made better," Youngs says. "We were then asked to
go beyond that, with the idea that if we had all
kinds of technology, money, and all kinds of
people power, what would we do and how would we do
it?"

Although Colorado has some of the toughest
domestic violence laws in the country, it does not
mean there are not weaknesses in the systems of
its police agencies, Youngs says. Lakewood
identified several of its weaknesses and changed
the system to better accommodate the needs of
victims and families, as well as the department.
Youngs adds that as part of this new system, the
department now has a "fast track" program, which
means judicial proceedings occur more swiftly.
Unless the incident occurs on a weekend, when
there is no provision for bond, batterers
generally appear before a judge within 24 hours,
he says. Such rapid processing often means a
guilty plea the next day.

In addition, more information than ever before is
now fed into the department's database, which in
turn provides a thorough history via laptop
computer to the patrol officer at the scene.
Officers now know the history of the location, how
many calls have been made from there and why, who
made the call, and the disposition of previous
cases.

The Lakewood domestic violence program includes a
cadre of victim/witness advocates who provide
support to the officer at the scene. Five
full-time civilian employees and a group of
trained volunteers respond to each domestic
violence call. After the officer stabilizes the
scene, they step in, providing immediate crisis
intervention and freeing the officer to return to
the street. Victim/witness advocates use a mobile
unit that is available for calls around the clock.
It provides a safe place to interview victims and
witnesses, and can be used to transport victims to
safe locations.

The Lakewood Police Department advocates provide
continuing support as the case proceeds through
the judicial system. They follow up with children
who have witnessed violence to ensure that the
children's needs are met. They are also the
conduit through which the family can take
advantage of the State's victim compensation
program, which pays for mental health counseling,
medical expenses, and the repair of property
damaged during a violent incident. If long-term
protection for the victim is necessary, the
advocates can arrange for assistance through the
State's victim protection program.

"Our process mapping program identified areas
where we could improve our delivery of services.
We've also hired another victim advocate, which
gives us increased coverage on the street. Also,
citizen satisfaction is rising, based on the
feedback we've received," Youngs says.

Through the program, the police department has
benefited almost as much as have victims of
domestic violence. Handling cases is more
efficient and the process clearly defined. Even
better, though, is that the program has resulted
in a cooperative effort between sworn officers and
civilian employees, who have successfully
completed the project through teamwork. 

Lakewood has used the same mapping process on sex
offender registration, burglary, and its county
juvenile assessment center. The department also
has been asked to share its experience with other
departments. It was one of the cities highlighted
in a 2-hour training telecourse on community
policing and domestic violence produced by the
California and Arizona P.O.S.T. (Police Officer
Standards and Training). The film is currently
being beamed via satellite to officers in both
States.

For additional information about the Lakewood
Police Department's program for domestic violence,
contact Capt. Al Youngs, 303-987-7201.

------------------------------

New Position on Positional Asphyxia

The practice of applying restraining devices to
individuals once they are subdued is common
throughout the country. However, with
extraordinarily violent or delirious individuals,
the procedure of connecting the handcuffs to
secured ankles--frequently referred to as
"hogtying"--may be the only way to physically
immobilize them so they are no longer a threat.

But due to the potential risk of an "in-custody
sudden death" and its association with a
contributing factor that has come to be known as
"positional asphyxia," the option of applying a
maximum or Total Appendage Restraint Procedure
(TARP) has been eliminated by many law enforcement
and corrections agencies. So the issue police and
corrections agencies need to confront and resolve
when formulating policies and procedures for
restraining violent persons is, "Will this
procedure be considered excessive or unreasonable
force because it is considered by some as
potentially lethal?" It will come as a surprise to
learn that the experts are not unanimous.

A correlation between an "incustody sudden death"
and "positional asphyxia" was hypothesized by Dr.
Donald T. Reay, the Chief Medical Examiner for
King County, Washington, in 1988 based on a study
he conducted to determine the oxygen recovery rate
of the body when influenced by extreme exertion.
After exercise (such as a violent struggle with
law enforcement or corrections officers), does the
blood oxygen level decrease? More significantly,
what effect might body position, specifically
weight on the chest and stomach, have on one's
ability to recover to a normal heart rate and
blood oxygen level? Furthermore, could the
physical restraint and the position of the body
impair the mechanical respiratory process of
inhaling and exhaling? 

Contemporary policies and procedures adopted by
law enforcement and corrections agencies across
the country have been based on these findings. In
fact, most court-recognized experts refer to
Reay's study as the acknowledged standard.
However, Reay's methodology and logic were never
critically examined by scientists until they were
challenged in a recent San Diego, California,
case.

The U.S. District Court case Price v. County of
San Diego subjected these issues to a careful
examination in response to a plaintiff's claim
that an unlawful death occurred after a subject's
confrontation with deputies and was the result of
positional asphyxiation associated with the hogtie
restraint. The argument in this case was that
hogtying caused positional asphyxia, which is
equivalent to deadly force and therefore excessive
under the circumstances. During the trial, Reay
testified about his previous findings.

The defense questioned the validity of Reay's
original work and his testimony, in particular the
overall methodology of his study and the
relationship of body position to heart recovery
rate and blood oxygen level. At the request of the
defense counsel, a new study was conducted at the
University of California, San Diego (UCSD) by Dr.
Thomas Neuman to "determine whether the 'hobble'
or 'hogtie' restraint position results in
clinically relevant respiratory dysfunction."

Neuman identified several weaknesses in the
methodology of Reay's study and concluded that the
results were invalid. The UCSD study refuted
Reay's underlying premise--that blood oxygen
levels decrease after exercise--as well as his
ultimate conclusion: that the hogtie restraint
prevents the lungs from replenishing the blood's
oxygen supply. The UCSD study determined that the
blood needs no replenishment after exercise
because it already has adequate oxygen. It should
be noted that the studies conducted to date were
completed using reasonably healthy individuals who
were not under conditions of stress.

When presented with this new information, Reay
reversed himself and testified that he concurred
with the findings and agreed that the UCSD
methodology was valid. He further agreed that his
study appeared to be flawed. As a result of this
information, the U.S. District Court, Southern
District of California, ruled that the "hogtie
restraint was not considered deadly force" under
the circumstances present in this particular case.

Additionally, there have been at least three other
recent cases to date that have challenged the use
of a full body restraint procedure as excessive
force by peace officers in response to violently
aggressive individuals. Highlights of some of
these decisions follow.

The first is that the "hogtie" or prone restraint
is not considered deadly force. "Restraining a
person in a prone position is not, in and of
itself, excessive force when the person restrained
is resisting arrest" (Phillips v. Milwaukee). And
even though the prone method of restraint has the
potential to cause death under certain
circumstances, "There is no evidence that the
probability of death is so high as to be
considered 'likely' when such restraint is used."

The second affects the standard by which the
actions of the officers involved in these cases
are judged. "All claims that law enforcement
officers have used excessive force--deadly or not-
-in the course of an arrest, investigative stop,
or other 'seizure' of a free citizen should be
analyzed under the Fourth Amendment and its
'reasonableness' standard, rather than under a
'substantive due process' approach" (Graham v.
Conner).

What impact will these recent cases have on the
law enforcement and corrections community's
options to safely and effectively control and
restrain these violent and threatening offenders?
It is an opportune time for agencies to review
their policies and procedures in light of these
developments.

A point to remember is that control refers to the
force necessary to "stop the fight" (as in gain
control), as opposed to restraint, which is the
method by which the individual is immobilized
using some type of device, such as handcuffs
and/or hobbles. Stopping the threat should be the
first concern, then the method or device used for
restraining the individual and preventing the need
for more vigorous control can be considered. Once
the person is "adequately" restrained, the
physical condition of the person should be
carefully monitored and any medical concerns
immediately addressed. Departments should consider
all factors (including alternatives if any exist)
when determining revisions for methods of
effectively restraining violent individuals.

The National Institute of Justice reported in the
Winter 1998 edition of TechBeat that an
informational videotape would soon be released to
address this critical issue for law enforcement
and corrections. It has since been delayed in
order to accurately include the latest information
about positional asphyxia. The videotape is being
revised and edited and will be released in the
near future. For more information, please contact
the National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center-National at 800-248-2742, or
visit the center's World Wide Web site, JUSTNET,
at www.nlectc.org for updated information.

This article was written by Michael Grossman,
Director, Technology Assistance Division, Office
of Science and Technology, National Institute of
Justice, and Sgt. Gilbert Aguilar, Los Angeles
County Sheriff's Department.

------------------------------

We Got You Covered

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ),
responding to recommendations by the law
enforcement and corrections community, converted
its Technology Assessment Program Information
Center (TAPIC) into the National Law Enforcement
and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) system.
Created in 1994 as a component of NIJ's Office of
Science and Technology, NLECTC's goal, like that
of NIJ, is to offer support, research findings,
and technological expertise to help State and
local law enforcement and corrections personnel
safely and more efficiently do their jobs.

NIJ's NLECTC system consists of facilities located
across the country that are colocated with an
organization or agency that specializes in one or
more specific areas of research and development.
Although each of the NLECTC facilities has a
different technology focus, they work together to
form a seamless web of support, technology
development, and information to help the law
enforcement and corrections communities do their
jobs more safely and efficiently.

NLECTC-National
2277 Research Boulevard 
Rockville, MD 20850
Phone: 800-248-2742
Fax: 301-519-5149
E-mail: asknlectc@nlectc.org

The National Center, located just 30 minutes north
of Washington, D.C., is the hub of the NLECTC
system. It provides information and referral
services to anyone with a question about law
enforcement and corrections equipment or
technology. Its staff manages the voluntary
equipment standards and testing program that tests
and verifies the performance of body armor,
metallic handcuffs, shotguns, and police vehicles
and tires. This office produces consumer product
lists of equipment meeting a specific set of
performance standards and also operates JUSTNET
(Justice Technology Information Network), an
Internet World Wide Web site that provides links
to the entire NLECTC system and other appropriate
sites, as well as assistance to those seeking
information about equipment, technology, or
research findings.

NLECTC-Northeast
26 Electronic Parkway
Rome, NY 13441
Phone: 888-338-0584
Fax: 315-330-4315
E-mail: nlectc_ne@rl.af.mil

NLECTC-Northeast is located at the Air Force
Research Laboratory, Rome Research Site (formerly
Rome Laboratory), on the grounds of the Griffiss
Business and Technology Park. The center sponsors
research and development efforts into technologies
that address command, control, communications,
computers, and intelligence. This center draws on
the expertise of Air Force scientists and
engineers in its development of technologies that
can be used to detect concealed weapons on
individuals, an effort that is expected to yield
stationary equipment for use in buildings and
handheld devices for field and patrol officers.
Other areas of research and development include
through-the-wall sensors, audio processing, image
processing, timeline analysis, computer forensics,
secure communications, and command/control.

NLECTC-Southeast
7325 Peppermill Parkway
North Charleston, SC 29418-7404

Phone: 800-292-438
Fax: 843-207-7776
E-mail: nlectc-se@nlectc-se.org

Two of the focus areas of NLECTC-Southeast are
corrections technologies and surplus property
acquisition and distribution for law enforcement
and corrections. The center facilitates the
acquisition and redistribution of Federal
surplus/excess property to State and local law
enforcement and corrections agencies. The
equipment must be used for law enforcement
purposes only. Utilizing the JUSTNET Web site, the
center educates law enforcement and corrections
professionals about Federal surplus and purchasing
programs. The efforts of NLECTC-Southeast have
resulted in agencies receiving equipment they
would not ordinarily have access to or might not
have been able to afford due to budgetary
constraints. This facility also studies the needs
of corrections agencies. It is guided in this
mission by a committee of criminal justice, law
enforcement, and corrections practitioners that
identifies requirements and sets priorities for
research and development. NLECTC-Southeast is
allied with the South Carolina Research Authority
(SCRA) and the Naval Command, Control and Ocean
Surveillance Center In-Service Engineering, East
Coast Division (NISE East). NLECTC-Southeast's
other areas of focus include information
management and technologies, simulation training,
and designated special projects. 

NLECTC-Rocky Mountain
2050 East Iliff Avenue
Denver, CO 80208
Phone: 800-416-8086 or 303-871-2522 in the Denver
area
Fax: 303-871-2500
E-mail: nlectc@du.edu

Located at the University of Denver, NLECTC-Rocky
Mountain focuses on communications
interoperability and the difficulties that often
occur when different agencies and jurisdictions
try to communicate with one another. This facility
works with law enforcement agencies, private
industry, and national organizations to implement
projects that will identify and field test new
technologies to help solve the problem of
interoperability. NLECTC-Rocky Mountain also
houses the newly created Crime Mapping Technology
Center, the training and practical application arm
of NIJ's Crime Mapping Research Center, which is
staffed by NIJ social scientists and scholars who
utilize crime analysis research to improve police
field operations and develop crime-mapping
software for small, medium, and large departments.
The Rocky Mountain facility also conducts research
into ballistics and weapons technology, as well as
information systems. Sandia National Laboratory
has been designated as a satellite of NLECTC-Rocky
Mountain. The laboratory works in partnership with
NLECTC-Rocky Mountain and focuses on technology
for detecting and neutralizing explosive devices
(Operation Albuquerque). 

NLECTC-West
c/o The Aerospace Corporation
2350 East El Segundo Boulevard
El Segundo, CA 90245-4691
Phone: 888-548-1618
Fax: 310-336-2227
E-mail: nlectc@law-west.org

NLECTC-West is housed on the grounds of The
Aerospace Corporation, a nonprofit corporation
that provides technical oversight and engineering
expertise to the Air Force and the U.S. Government
on space technology and space security systems.
NLECTC-West draws on The Aerospace Corporation's
depth of knowledge and scientific expertise to
offer law enforcement and corrections the ability
to analyze and enhance audio, video, and
photographic evidence. In cooperation with The
Aerospace Corporation, this NLECTC facility also
has available an extensive array of analytic
instrumentation to aid in criminal investigations,
such as a scanning electron microscope, an x-ray
microscope, and a mass spectrometer, all of which
are used to process trace evidence. Its other
areas of expertise include computer architecture,
data processing, communications systems, and a
recent effort to identify technologies to stop
fleeing vehicles.

Border Research and Technology Center (BRTC)
225 Broadway, Suite 740
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: 888-656-BRTC (2782)
Fax: 888-660-BRTC (2782)
E-mail: brtcchrisa@aol.com

The Border Research and Technology Center works
with the Immigration and Naturalization Service,
the U.S. Border Patrol, the U.S. Customs Service,
the Office of National Drug Control Policy, and
the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of
California to develop strategies and technologies
that will facilitate control of the Southwest
border. One of its most recognized accomplishments
has been the implementation of SENTRI (Secured
Electronic Network for Travelers' Rapid
Inspection). BRTC also works on joint ventures to
identify technologies that will stop fleeing
vehicles and is currently participating in a
project to detect the heartbeats of people
concealed in vehicles or other containers.

Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES)
National Institute of Standards and Technology,
Building 225, Room A323
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Phone: 301-975-2757
Fax: 301-948-0978
E-mail: oles@nist.gov

Supported by NIJ, the Office of Law Enforcement
Standards applies science and technology to the
needs of the criminal justice community. While its
major objective is to develop minimum performance
standards for equipment and technology, which NIJ
promulgates as voluntary national standards, OLES
also undertakes studies leading to the publication
of technical reports and user guides. Its areas of
research include clothing, communications systems,
emergency equipment, investigative aids,
protective equipment, security systems, vehicles,
and weapons. It also develops measurement methods
for analytical techniques and standard reference
materials for forensic scientists and crime labs.
Since the program began in 1971, OLES has
coordinated the development of nearly 200
standards, user guides, and advisory reports.
Housed at the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, OLES works closely with NLECTC-
National to conduct tests and to guarantee the
performance and quality of equipment used by
police and corrections.

Office of Law Enforcement Technology
Commercialization (OLETC)
Wheeling Jesuit University
316 Washington Avenue
Wheeling, WV 26003
Phone: 888-306-5382
Fax: 304-243-2131
E-mail: oletc@nttc.edu

Housed at Wheeling Jesuit University, the Office
of Law Enforcement Technology Commercialization
provides one of the NLECTC system's most important
services, that of bringing research and private
industry together to put new technologies into the
hands of law enforcement and corrections. OLETC
actively solicits manufacturers to commercialize
technologies based on requirements identified by
law enforcement and corrections practitioners. For
example, it is currently seeking companies
interested in commercializing technologies already
developed by the U.S. Department of Energy's Los
Alamos National Laboratory, such as a device that
lets police officers detect crack houses from a
distance, microwave and acoustic sensors that
detect the motion of people behind walls or doors,
and a nondetectable, nonscannable transmitter for
use in undercover situations. OLETC works with
private industry to support its efforts and help
companies streamline the commercialization
process.

National Center for Forensic Science
University of Central Florida
P.O. Box 162367
Orlando, FL 32816-2367
Phone: 407-823-6469
Fax: 407-823-3162
E-mail: natlctr@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu

The newest addition to the NLECTC system, this
facility is housed in the University of Central
Florida and initially will focus on arson and
explosives research. Its mission is to conduct
fundamental research into the basic nature of fire
and explosion reactions, provide the support for
developing standard protocols for analyzing arson
and explosion debris, promote the use of
electronic media to access and exchange
information about the forensic sciences, and
provide education opportunities to practicing
professionals and full-time students. This new
facility will draw on the experience and expertise
of the university, which houses a forensic science
program with an active research program, as well
as the Institute of Simulation and Training, which
is currently exploring ways to simulate explosive
reactions to study various chemical processes.

------------------------------

From the Street. . . to the Street

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has long
believed that one of the most vital aspects of its
program is the solicitation of ideas and
suggestions of criminal justice practitioners. It
is this information that helps form the framework
of NIJ's work. NIJ's Office of Science and
Technology and its National Law Enforcement and
Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) system get
this information through conferences, regional
workshops, and most especially through a series of
advisory groups. These groups are composed of
representatives from all areas of law enforcement,
corrections, and the forensic sciences, and focus
on everything from operational technological needs
to liability issues and public acceptance of these
new technologies.

One such group, the Law Enforcement and
Corrections Technology Advisory Council (LECTAC),
is a group of law enforcement, corrections, and
forensics practitioners who serve as advisers to
the NLECTC system and recommend program
priorities. Because LECTAC's members are also the
end users of new technologies, they keep the
NLECTC system in touch with the realities of the
street by bringing the immediate needs of police
and corrections officers to the attention of
staff, who then pass them on to researchers,
scientists, and engineers.

LECTAC's current research priorities include the
development of technologies in the areas of
concealed weapons and contraband detection,
vehicle stopping, enhanced DNA testing, officer
protection, less-than-lethal tools, information
management, counterterrorism, location and
tracking, secure communications, and noninvasive
drug detection. Following are updates on several
sample projects that fall under these headings,
many having both law enforcement and corrections
applications.

o National Guidelines for Death Investigation. The
purpose of this project was to identify,
delineate, and assemble a set of investigative
tasks that should and could be performed at every
death scene. These guidelines are designed to
provide those responsible for death investigations
with the steps and tools to identify, collect,
preserve, and present evidence crucial to death
scene investigation. In addition, the guidelines
are designed to offer the courts a way to assess
whether or not evidence in question was collected
and preserved in a thorough and systematic fashion
to maintain the chain of custody and prevent
contamination. The National Guidelines for Death
Investigation were developed and approved by the
National Medicolegal Review Panel, a
multidisciplinary group of nationally recognized
experts from the medical, forensic, law
enforcement, and legal communities. The 144-member
Technical Working Group for Death Investigation
also contributed to the project by providing a
national perspective in its review of the report.
Copies can be obtained through the National
Criminal Justice Reference Service's World Wide
Web site at www.ncjrs.org or by calling 800-851-
3420.

o Rapid DNA Identification Using Microchip-Based
Genetic Detectors. This project is expected to
result in a field-ready, laptop analysis unit
capable of receiving and analyzing a biological
sample at the crime scene. DNA profiles can be
displayed onsite or electronically transferred to
a database. The technology comes from the
diagnostic field where microchips are used to help
identify certain genetic diseases. Modified for
forensic use, the chips will contain an array of
microelectrodes that are individually
electronically controlled to transport,
concentrate, and hybridize DNA through
manipulation of electric fields. Separation of the
DNA molecule to reveal individually discriminating
markers is controlled by a programmable power
supply. This system is so sensitive that it can
identify several genetic markers at once,
resolving each of them to their most basic units
by fluorescent signal. Present efforts include
increasing the number of genetic markers to
include all DNA sites identified for inclusion in
the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) and further
development of a field-ready portable unit. 

o Electric Stun Projectile. The electric stun
projectile is a wireless less-than-lethal weapon
that uses stun gun technology to temporarily
incapacitate a person at a standoff range of 30
feet. It is fired from compressed gas or powder
launchers. It sticks to the target with a
glue-like substance or with short,
clothing-attachment barbs. On impact, the device
will impart a short burst of high-voltage pulses
capable of penetrating several layers of clothing.
It will instantly and temporarily disable
individuals or cause extreme discomfort. The
projectile can be used in any stand-off encounter
where an individual needs to be temporarily
incapacitated without exposing law enforcement or
corrections officers to unnecessary risk. A
prototype has been developed and demonstrated; the
next step is to complete a safety certification
and a limited bioeffects study.

o Pepper Spray Projectile/Disperser. This project
will yield an improved, less-than-lethal
projectile capable of dispersing oleoresin
capsicum (pepper spray) launched from a stand-off
position. It can be used in hostage, barricade,
and tactical assault situations. The projectile
specifications include a 100-foot minimum launch
range with delivery through a plate glass or
household window having a screen or blind in
place. It will deliver a fine, atomized spray of
OC (oleoresin capsicum) sufficient to fill a room
at least 10 feet by 10 feet by 9 feet within 1
second of penetrating the glass targets, or on
striking an internal wall or ceiling if entry is
achieved through an open door or window. The end
product for this project will be a preproduction
device, detailed drawings and specifications, and
a final report describing the in-house testing
results and field evaluation trials. A
proof-of-concept device for carrying the pepper
spray has been developed.

o Weapons Team Engagement Trainer. The Weapons
Team Engagement Trainer (WTET) is an interactive
team trainer that simulates hostage rescue, use of
force, and room-clearing scenarios. Scenarios are
played on large screens with trainees providing
realistic aggressor response, branching, and
shootback. The WTET simulation was originally
developed by the military for use by special
forces teams. Through its Technology Transfer
Division, the Naval Air Warfare Center Training
Systems Division saw that this technology could
also apply to law enforcement. NIJ is
participating in the commercialization of the WTET
by supporting the prototype installation and
evaluation at the Naval Training Center in
Orlando, Florida. NIJ is also supporting the
installation and testing of the first production
version of the system at the Los Angeles County
Sheriff's Department Laser Village training site.

o General Revision of Ballistic Resistance of
Police Body Armor, NIJ Standard-0101.03. NIJ is
currently revising its 0101.03 body armor
standard. As part of this effort, the agency is
undertaking tests to determine if newer
combinations of ammunition and weapons present
threat levels outside the range of values
currently used in its Ballistic Resistance of
Police Body Armor, NIJ Standard-0101.03. NIJ also
will assess the existing and candidate ammunition
for its effect on armor; perform validation and
comparison tests; develop a formal test procedure,
including a performance-assurance program; survey
armor manufacturers on the subject of service
life; evaluate a modified form of V50 testing as a
means of determining the service life of soft body
armor; and survey agencies to determine what
threat levels are commonly used and how the users
would respond to a simplified level designation
system. The projected date of completion for this
project is late 1998.

o Development of a Standard for Stab- and
Puncture-Resistant Body Armor. While the most
common type of threat faced by a police officer is
a ballistic threat, the most common threat faced
by correctional officers is from sharp-edged and
pointed weapons. In response to the needs of the
corrections community, NIJ is working to develop a
test standard for stab- and puncture-resistant
body armor. NIJ, through the Office of Law
Enforcement Standards (OLES), has partnered with
the U.S. Secret Service and the Police Scientific
Development Branch (PSDB) in the United Kingdom to
conduct research that will ultimately lead to the
development of an NIJ standard. The research being
conducted by PSDB is anticipated to be completed
in early 1999 and the new NIJ standard completed
by the fall of 1999.

o Development of a Testing Program for Protective
Gloves. In response to a LECTAC request to assist
the law enforcement and corrections community in
acquiring better pathogen-, cut-, and
puncture-resistant protective gloves, NIJ is
currently developing a comparative evaluation test
protocol and a testing program for protective
gloves. After reviewing input from police and
correctional officers and consulting with leading
companies in the protective garment materials
industry, it was determined that pathogenic
protection, cut and puncture resistance,
tactility, dexterity, and affordability were the
primary criteria for evaluation and comparison.
Through this new testing program, protective
gloves will be evaluated and data will be provided
for each of the priority requirements in a
comparative report that will enable law
enforcement and corrections professionals to make
better choices for the best combination of
characteristics versus price for all gloves
tested. It is currently anticipated that the final
report will be available by July 1999.

------------------------------

Clearing the DNA Logjam

It's ironic that a computer search--so simple it
can be accomplished by the average second grader--
could almost instantly solve some of the Nation's
most heinous crimes. Yet this computer search,
which involves the analysis and matching of DNA
(deoxyribonucleic acid) samples, is rarely used in
those cases having no suspects. Why? Because
currently waiting to be tested are an estimated
500,000 blood samples that have been drawn from
prisoners, probationers, and parolees, as well as
samples taken in cases where there are no
suspects. Add to that another 500,000 samples that
need to be drawn. Ironically, if all these million
samples were analyzed and entered into a database,
police could take DNA evidence from a crime in
which there is no suspect, run it through the
database, and stand a good chance of coming up
with a match.

"DNA analysis is the most efficient way to narrow
down the list of suspects," says Chris Asplen,
Executive Director of the National Institute of
Justice's (NIJ's) National Commission on the
Future of DNA Evidence. "Imagine--if you get a
hit, your investigative search is significantly
narrowed."

But as popular and as widely accepted as the use
of DNA analysis is for cases where there is a
suspect, Asplen says, it is not typically used in
cases in which there is no suspect (nonsuspect
cases). One reason is because the Nation's crime
laboratories are already overwhelmed with the task
of analyzing evidence in cases having suspects. To
engage in the lengthy and expensive process of
analyzing samples from felons, convicts, and jail
inmates, just to build a database for future
reference, is beyond current capabilities of most
jurisdictions. And although some States have
started sending database samples to outside labs,
it becomes an expensive proposition and one whose
importance is often eclipsed by current cases,
especially those that involve violent crime.

The DNA commission, however, sees it differently,
according to Asplen. The commission has made
addressing the DNA backlog one of its highest
priorities. Created by Attorney General Janet Reno
in August 1997 and made up of scientists,
policymakers, and representatives of the criminal
justice system, the commission looks at ways to
maximize the value of DNA evidence. Its five
committees focus on postconviction release,
laboratory funding, crime scene investigation and
evidence collection, legal issues, and science and
technology. To help alleviate the DNA backlog, the
committee examining laboratory funding has
proposed that the U.S. Department of Justice set
up a grant program that would provide funding to
help States send DNA database samples to private
laboratories. That proposal is now under
consideration by the full commission.

"This backlog is a crisis, especially when you
consider the fact that we're drawing blood
primarily for sex-related crimes, which are highly
recidivistic in nature," Asplen says. "If we
arrest a serial rapist after crime number four, we
can probably look back and see we have a sample
from a previous attack that was never tested. If
that DNA profile had been put in the system, we
would have caught him after the earlier offense
and prevented the subsequent rapes."

Police in the United States will certainly look to
the British as an example of law enforcement
taking an aggressive stance on DNA analysis,
Asplen notes. In the United Kingdom, police take
samples on arrest and for a wide range of
offenses, including nonviolent crimes. The United
Kingdom's database includes almost 200,000
samples; authorities say they expect to add 5
million more in the next few years.

According to Asplen, the British have switched to
a fully automated analysis system--short tandem
repeats, or STR--which is faster and a more
discriminatory identifier. The British also have a
different attitude toward DNA analysis, treating
it as a primary investigative tool and using it to
do mass screening in specific geographic areas or
among certain groups of suspects.

In comparison, Asplen says, American police
agencies are bound by State laws, many of which
limit sampling to those who commit sex-related
offenses. Also, American agencies tend to take
samples on conviction or release. With the current
backlog, it could be 2 to 4 years before the
sample is analyzed, which potentially gives an
offender 2 years or more of freedom to commit more
crimes.

The difference between the two countries is
evidenced by the number of "cold hits" for each
system. A cold hit is one in which a sample in a
case with no suspect is run through the system and
produces a match. U.S. authorities have scored a
little more than 200 cold hits on the FBI's CODIS
(Combined DNA Index System) database since it came
online. In the United Kingdom, cold hits number
into the thousands.

Although the numbers for the United States are
comparatively low, some individual States fare
much better. States having extensive databases
average about 1 hit to every 250 to 500 attempts.
Virginia, for example, has one of the country's
largest databases. Although it is still behind on
its testing--gathering 160,000 samples but having
tested only about 10,000--more than half of
Virginia's cold hits on violent crimes have come
from its DNA database. Paul Ferrara, of the
Virginia Division of Forensic Science, makes the
point that those hits frequently identified people
previously convicted of nonviolent crimes, such as
burglary or breaking and entering.

Asplen estimates that with Federal funding and
outsourcing of DNA samples, it will take 2 years
to unclog the system, instead of the currently
estimated 6 years. "That's a lot of people who may
be victimized unnecessarily. In my mind there is
no more important issue in criminal justice right
now," he says.

The DNA commission, he says, is also addressing
the legal issues that are integral to DNA database
sampling, including questions about privacy, civil
liberties, and allegations that taking blood
samples from prison inmates, probationers, and/or
parolees is an illegal search and seizure. Most
States to date have successfully dealt with such
challenges.

"Ironically, not only does DNA testing and
analysis have the power to convict, it has the
power to exonerate--a very important aspect of the
commission's studies," Asplen says. More than 50
people have been set free as a result of analyzing
old evidence, and he expects that trend to
continue. "We have innocent people in jail and we
need to get them out," he says. "The commission is
drafting a set of guidelines that will help
prosecutors handle these cases."

For more information about any of the DNA
commission's areas of study, contact Chris Asplen,
202-616-8123; Dr. Richard Rau, 202-307-0648; Dr.
Lisa Forman, 202-307-6608; or access the DNA
commission's World Wide Web site at
www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/dna/welcome.html to obtain
the minutes of the commission's meetings.

------------------------------

New Publications/Videos

The following publications/videos are available
from the National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center-National:

TechBeat, Summer 1998. This issue of TechBeat
examines communications interoperability among law
enforcement and other public safety agencies,
smart card technology being used in corrections
facilities, and vehicle-stopping technology.

TechBeat, Spring 1998. This issue of TechBeat
features the use of telemedicine in corrections
facilities, facial recognition technology, and
thermal-imaging night vision devices.

Selection and Application Guide to Police Body
Armor. While body armor is a household word in the
law enforcement community, questions about its
selection and use are frequently asked. This guide
responds to commonly expressed concerns and
provides information to help determine the level
of protection required by officers. Excellent
companion publication to Police Body Armor
Consumer Product List Update Fall 1997.

Pursuit Management Task Force Report. In August
1996, the National Institute of Justice's Office
of Science and Technology created the Pursuit
Management Task Force (PMTF) to conduct a
multidisciplinary effort to define police
practices and the role of technology in high-speed
police pursuits. This report assesses current
technologies and techniques related to pursuits
and provides recommendations on technology
development and commercialization, an overview of
legal issues related to pursuits and related
technologies, and information obtained from
surveys completed by agencies, line officers, and
the public related to pursuits and technology.

Michigan State Police Tests 1999 Patrol Vehicles.
Every year, the Michigan State Police tests new
patrol vehicles as part of their procurement
policy. This bulletin summarizes test results of
the 1999 patrol vehicles.

"Why Can't We Talk?" When Lives Are at Stake. This
videotape examines the issues and problems
surrounding interoperability and public safety
radio communications. Learn why planning,
designing, and funding public safety wireless
communications systems are critical activities for
ensuring the public welfare.

The following publications/videos will be
available soon:

Survey of Commercially Available Explosives
Detection Technologies and Equipment. This
document provides a comprehensive overview of
currently available explosives detection methods
and technologies. It is intended to inform law
enforcement agencies about relevant aspects of
explosives detection and provide them with a basis
for making procurement decisions.

Federal Property and Equipment Manual. In a time
of tight budgets, State and local law enforcement
agencies are sometimes hard pressed to outfit
their personnel with the equipment they need to do
their jobs safely and effectively. This manual
describes Federal sources of personal property for
law enforcement. Through these programs, agencies
can obtain high-quality, high-value, excess
property at little or no cost.

Positional Asphyxia Videotape. This informational
videotape, targeted to the many smaller county and
municipal jail facilities throughout the United
States, details actions to prevent in-custody
deaths related to positional asphyxia. The video
highlights the correct procedures to use when
restraining a violent prisoner and safety
precautions to follow to help jail personnel
prevent medical problems.

To obtain any of the above publications or
videotapes or to receive additional copies of the
TechBeat newsletter, write NLECTC, P.O. Box 1160,
Rockville, MD 20849-1160; telephone 800-248-2742.
Publications can also be downloaded from JUSTNET
at http://www.nlectc.org.

------------------------------

Have Internet access?

NLECTC Is Online
www.nlectc.org

Try our Web site, JUSTNET, for:

o Information on new technologies, equipment, and
other products and services available to law
enforcement, corrections, and the criminal justice
communities, including access to a database of
over 4,000 available products and technologies.

o Breaking News from printed media, the Internet,
individual facilities of the NLECTC system, and
the Nation's Capital.

o Publications from NIJ and NLECTC that you can
view or download to your system.

o Interactive Topic Boards that allow you to post
questions and exchange information with hundreds
of professionals in their specialty areas.

o Frequently Asked Questions that offer detailed
information based on thousands of calls to our
information specialists.

o Calendar of Events that lists the latest
upcoming meetings, seminars, and training.

o Links to other important law enforcement and
corrections Web sites.

For help in establishing an Internet connection,
linking to JUSTNET, or finding needed technology
and product information, call the NLECTC
Information Hotline at 800-248-2742.

To receive future issues of the TechBeat
newsletter at no charge, call 800-248-2742 or
e-mail asknlectc@nlectc.org.

------------------------------

Sign Up To Receive Free Reports From the National
Criminal Justice Reference Service

In addition to funding the National Law
Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, NIJ
also supports the National Criminal Justice
Reference Service (NCJRS), an international
clearinghouse on crime and justice information.
NCJRS staff respond to reference questions,
provide referrals to other resources, distribute
NIJ and other Office of Justice Programs (OJP)
documents, and maintain a mailing list of over
45,000 registered users. If you are interested in
signing up for the NCJRS mailing list, you may
request a registration form using any of the
following methods:

Fax-on-Demand. Dial 800-851-3420, select option 1,
then option 2. The registration form is #1 on the
document index. The form will be faxed to you
immediately.

Fax. You may fax your request for a registration
form to 410-792-4358. You will receive a form
promptly in the mail.

E-mail. Send an e-mail to askncjrs@ncjrs.org and
request a registration form. It will be sent to
you in the mail.

Write.--Send a written request to NCJRS, Box 6000,
Rockville, MD 20849-6000.

Call. You may call an NCJRS information specialist
and request a registration form. The number is
800-851-3420.

As a registered user, you will receive the
bimonthly NCJRS Catalog, the quarterly NIJ
Journal, and selected reports based on your
criminal justice interests. For more information
about NIJ and NCJRS, visit their Web sites:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij and
http://www.ncjrs.org.

------------------------------

From the Director

Law enforcement, courts, and corrections officials
and officers working in the field know how crucial
technology is to their day-to-day operations. In
some circumstances, having the right tool can even
mean the difference between life and death. 

The technological revolution that has swept
society as a whole in recent years has also
affected the criminal justice system. Some
technologies that not long ago seemed advanced--
vests that can stop bullets and electronic
monitoring of probationers--today seem
commonplace. But the revolution continues apace,
with ever more spectacular advances now being
made, or in the testing stages, or on the drawing
board.

As the research arm of the U.S. Department of
Justice, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
has, since its founding 30 years ago, been in the
forefront in sponsoring the development, testing,
and demonstration of technology to improve the
justice system. The development of DNA testing
standards, soft body armor, and improved
fingerprint evidence are some of the many areas in
which NIJ has played a leading role. 

More recently, with strong support from the
Administration and the Congress, NIJ has
accelerated the pace of its efforts.
Less-than-lethal technologies to minimize the use
of force, computerized mapping to pinpoint and
analyze crime patterns, concealed weapons
detection to prevent violence, methods of stopping
fleeing vehicles to apprehend suspects, and
improvements in DNA laboratories to aid in
evidence testing--all these capabilities, and
others, are now being explored by NIJ. Their
application can mean even greater transformations
in law enforcement operations. 

TechBeat plays an important role as an essential
link communicating the latest information about
these developing technologies from the National
Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center.
By keeping law enforcement, courts, and
corrections personnel current about the tools they
can use, the newsletter makes a difference in
controlling crime and ensuring justice.

Jeremy Travis
Director
National Institute of Justice 

------------------------------

The National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center is supported by Cooperative
Agreement #96-MU-MU-K011 awarded by the U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice. Analyses of test results do not represent
product approval or endorsement by the National
Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice;
the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce; or Aspen
Systems Corporation. Points of view or opinions
contained within this document are those of the
authors and do not necessarily represent the
official position or policies of the U.S.
Department of Justice.

The National Institute of Justice is a component
of the Office of Justice Programs, which also
includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bureau
of Justice Statistics, Office of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention, and Office for Victims
of Crime.

------------------------------

TechBeat is the flagship publication of the
National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center system. Our goal is to keep you
up to date on technologies that are currently
being developed by the NLECTC system, as well as
other research and development efforts within the
Federal Government and private industry. 

Your questions, comments, and story ideas are
always welcome. Contact: Rick Neimiller, managing
editor, through NLECTC-National, 800-248-2742, or
e-mail to asknlectc@nlectc.org. Writer and
contributing editor, Lois Pilant. Reproduction of
any part of this publication is encouraged by
NLECTC unless otherwise indicated.