Abstract
Crime has become an issue with many people on their way of life. Crime has been identified as the only way in which people are affected by there on the way of life. It’s through crime that people change their way of living on a daily basis. Crime changes the actions of people and movements of ordinary citizens besides the operations of the criminals. The issues of crime are so severe that the people of the world are supposed to be alert in case of anything or bring exposed to a new environment so as not to be affected by any matter. This has been the trend in the neighborhood with community policing having been put into use at some places (Berg, 2007).
All the citizens of a country do value the concept of safety and hence crime should be a way in which these issues are seriously fought and eliminated. It’s through the peaceful coexistence that all the people who make the society are able to live in harmony such as the ordinary citizens, the police, and the politicians among others. Elimination of the offenders from the normal way of life of the various members of society is a means by which the criminal investigation enhances safety in society (Gilbert, 2007).
This is the only way in which the criminals are being separated from the ordinary good citizens. The criminals are confined and subjected to the due process of the law. There is full adherence to the law in which the police officers are supposed to get in detail the root of the case and be able to have supportive evidence to the accused person. The law should be followed and the techniques also of the investigations should be used to convict someone for an offense. Complex matters of the investigations should be handled diligently so as to get the details of the crime. Crime is very stressful to the people who have never been exposed to a fearful kind of life hence they are always in dilemma over the occurrence (Hess & Orthman, 2009).
Body
A criminal investigation is an effort by state agencies to study any information about a crime in order to uncover it. In general, there are three major ways that a criminal can be brought to justice for an act to be considered a crime. First, the criminal may be compelled by his own conscience to make a confession. Second, a law enforcing officer may arrest him while in the act and thirdly a criminal investigation can point him out as the suspect and he may later confess or be convicted through trial.
It is noted however that some investigations make use of techniques that require specialized knowledge than others. This report analyzes the disappearance of Brianna Denison on 19th January 2008, the subsequent discovery of her body and the long path taken to apprehend the suspect. She was a student at Santa Barbara City College and she hailed from Reno in Nevada. A person in Nevada was got on the wrong side of the law on matters related to kidnapping, killings and sex abuse. This was in the case of Brianna Denison. His name is James Michael Biela. This report tries to analyze the series of the unfolding events leading to the arrest of the suspect and the prosecution.
During the winter break and precisely on Saturday night the 19th January 2008, Denison and her friends went out partying. They came back at around midnight then she spent the night on the couch which was not far from the door and she used the teddy bear in resemblances of the pillow. The friend of Denison when it reached morning found out that she was not around but her belongings were there. This was quite unusual. The items left included the cell, the purse, and other personal items.
Sunday 20th January was the day she was seen. The police investigators did a door-to-door search in the neighborhood. All the machinery was used in the search of the traces or leads of the teenage Denison. They had a conclusion that she might have been abducted. Denison’s friends were also interrogated to get to the root of the cause of the disappearance and also kill the prime suspect. The police also never found any clue like footprints that could have led them to where the abductor had taken her. The FBI participated in the search of the teenagers. There were also other personnel from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children who participated in the search for Denison with her family offering a reward of $100,000.
After a few searches for over a week, her body was found around the college. The DNA evidence found at the scene was been linked to the sex abuse of another Reno student who resided in the neighboring building on the 16th of December the previous year. The police then had an idea that it was a white male in his early 30’s who was involved in Brianna Denison’s disappearance and the earlier attack. The victim of this early attack was a University of Nevada-Reno Student. She was interviewed to get a more detailed description of her attacker. He was also linked to a possible third attack during which at gunpoint, he raped a lady (Smith, 2009).
The report also confirmed that the teenager had been strangled and abused by a rapist whom the police have been pursuing. It was a sexually motivated crime. On 14th March 2008, after a DNA samples backlog clearance, Sheriff Haley announced that the DNA matching the serial rapist in the backlog of 3,000 DNA samples that the county had collected from known defendants, no match was found. On 24th March, The Reno Police Department gave the public an updated full description and other information regarding the supposed killing of the teenager and 2 sexual abusers area.
The detectives hoped that the information will guide friends or family members of the suspect in identifying him. Eight months later a man was arrested on suspicion that he might have committed the murder and sexually assaulted the two women. The police said the breakthrough on the case came by courtesy of a tip in the Secret Witness program. Biela had a DNA sample taken from him. Denison’s family members said that Biela’s DNA matched those found at the scene where Denison’s body was discovered. It was also learned that Biela worked as a pipefitter on construction projects at the University of Nevada Reno during the time of the sexual assaults. Further reports also indicated that Biela was dismissed from the forces (Weston & Lushbaugh, 2008).
In the course of the investigation, the investigators ascertained DNA confirmation to be linked to the people who killed her and those who had been sexual. Biela faced the death penalty if he was found guilty. Attorney Dick Gammick wanted to follow the root cause of the problem by requesting the death penalty against 27-year-old James Michael Biela at his trial. The trial was to determine in a way that Biela would not escape severe punishment.
There was a lot of evidence which were required to be presented in the court so as to establish or convince the jury that Biela is guilty as per the law. The Gammick was also expected to show proof of the killing which has been shown as violent and deserves capital punishment. Biela is expected to be subjected to the full application of the law irrespective of the effects which are expected in the judgment. Biela was also likely to be convicted of a lesser crime if the prosecution would not present its case as required. Gammick told reporters that his decision was made despite the objection that he knows will come from anti-death punishment groups (Behan, 2009).
Conclusion
Biela’s attorneys said they had requested separate trials for the three cases. The attorney’s point was that the examination of the case would be applied in a manner that is not equitable to their clients over the matters pending the rape. However, Judge Robert Perry refused their request for 3 nonidentical trials convinced by the prosecutors who disputed with a view that the cases had not been tackled in a nice manner for all the 3cases they were defending. The defense attorneys disregarded this opinion. Perry disagreed that it was considered unjust for the defendant to boost the likelihood of discrimination, and then use it to his benefit to alter location irrespective of the expected pressure on the systems’ abilities from the economic point of view. In his ruling, Perry said that the court trusted that a distinct trial could in reality lessen the likelihood of exposure and chauvinism.
References
Behan, N. (2009). How to Run Your Own Court Case: A Practical Guide to Representing Yourself in Non-criminal Cases. New South Wales: UNSW Press
Berg, B.L. (2007). Criminal Investigation. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education
Gilbert, J.N. (2007). Criminal investigation. 7th ed. New York: Pearson/Prentice Hall
Hess, K.M. & Orthman, C.H. (2009). Criminal Investigation. 9th ed. Cengage Learning
Smith, H. (2009). Roscoe’s Digest of the Law of Evidence in Criminal Cases. Charleston: BiblioBazaar, LLC
Weston, P.B. & Lushbaugh, C. (2008). Criminal Investigation: Basic Perspectives. 11th ed. New York: Prentice Hall