Citation

McEwen T, Regoeczi W. J. Forensic Sci. 2015; 60(5): 1188-1198.

Affiliation

Department of Sociology and Criminology, Cleveland State University, 2121 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, American Society for Testing and Materials, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/1556-4029.12787

PMID

26174557

Abstract

Even though forensic evidence is collected at virtually every homicide scene, only a few studies have examined its role in investigation and prosecution. This article adds to the literature by providing the results of a study of 294 homicide cases (315 victims) occurring in Cleveland, Ohio, between 2008 and 2011. Through a logistic regression on open versus closed cases, the collection of knives, administration of gunshot residue (GSR) kits, and clothing at the scene were positively and significantly related to case closures, while collection of ballistics evidence and DNA evidence were statistically significant in the opposite direction. With regard to analysis, the clearance rate for cases with probative results (i.e., matches or exclusions) was 63.1% compared to a closure rate of 56.3% for cases without probative results. However, only 23 cases had probative results prior to arrest compared to 128 cases with probative results after arrest.

Language: en