Complete Your Investigation

Mark Lawson has been charged with the murder of his wife, and the case will soon be going to trial. K.C. Hammond has asked you to draw your final conclusions about whether Linda Lawson’s death was a homicide or suicide and to evaluate the strength of your supporting evidence. Follow the process below to reach your conclusions.

Review Any New Information

1. Read through any new case information you received from your mentor based on your earlier requests for information. Update the Evidence Tracker section of the Progress Report with any relevant findings.

   Consider the following:

   • What do the new facts tell you or not tell you about the case?
     
     
   • Are the facts consistent with what you learned from other case materials to date?
     
     
   • Are the facts consistent with your current theory(ies) about the case?
     
     
   • Are the interpretations of the evidence consistent with your current theory(ies) about the case?
     
     
   • Are the facts what you anticipated? Why or why not?

2. Working with your team, do some research to resolve any inconsistencies you may find in the new case information (e.g., if the new evidence raises questions about your current theory).
   
   
   • Refer to the available Resources and the Death Investigation Process for guidance and information to help you interpret the facts of the case.
     
   • Based on your research, determine whether your current theory(ies) about the case is still valid in light of the new evidence, or whether the new evidence causes you to rethink your current theory(ies) about what happened.
     
     
3. Request any additional evidence you may need to help you reach a conclusion about the case. As usual, be sure to provide a strong rationale for each request for information.
   
   
4. Submit your work to your mentor for review.
   
   
   • Make sure all team members sign off on the updated Progress Report.
     
     
   • Draft a summary email for your mentor that encapsulates changes you made since last submitting the Progress Report.

   Repeat steps 1 - 4 until you have resolved all serious doubts about your theory and are ready to draw your final conclusions about the case.

Draw Your Final Conclusions

When you have completed your investigation, prepare your Progress Report for final submission.

1. Explain your final position on the case in part B of the Progress Report.
   
   
   • What is your final conclusion about the Lawson case - - was it homicide or suicide, or is the evidence inconclusive?
     
     
   • What is your reasoning?
     
     
2. Evaluate the strength of your position and supporting evidence.
   
   
   1. Review your position and the key pieces of evidence, as recorded in your Progress Report.
      
      
   2. Evaluate the strength of your position and your supporting evidence by asking yourself the following questions:
      
      
      • How credible are your interpretations of the key facts of this case?
        
        
      • Is your conclusion based on sound logical reasoning?
        
        
      • How certain or confident are you in the position you have taken? Why?
        
        
3. Evaluate your position and supporting evidence from the perspective of a potential jury. Mark Lawson has been charged with homicide. To convict him, the prosecution must convince a jury that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. “Beyond a reasonable doubt” is the standard of proof a jury uses in a criminal case. For more details on how a jury is expected to use this standard to decide a defendant’s guilt or innocence during a trial, you may refer to the resource on The Standard of Proof in a Criminal Case.
   
   Remember that you are in the role of an investigator whose job is to state the facts of the case and draw a conclusion based on those facts. It’s not up to you to prove anything…but it will certainly help you to think about how a jury would interpret what you’re saying. Evaluate your position from the perspective of a potential jury who would be using reasonable doubt to assess your argument.
   
   
   1. Evaluate the strength of your position and your supporting evidence by asking yourself the following questions:
      
      
      • Would a jury believe that your reasoning and your interpretation of the facts support your conclusion of homicide or suicide? If you’re on the prosecution side, would a jury believe your interpretation beyond a reasonable doubt? If you’re on the defense side, does your position present a plausible alternative to Mark Lawson’s guilt.
        
        
      • Are the facts so inconclusive that you cannot come to a decision, doubtful or otherwise?
        
        
4. Update your position, if necessary. If, after evaluating the strength of your position, you decide to change your stance, return to part B of the Progress Report. Update your position and edit your explanation. You may also revisit steps 2 and 3 to ensure that your new position is well-supported.

Summarize your position and rationale in an email to K.C. Hammond. In a separate paragraph, explain how certain you are of your conclusion, including whether or not you believe your conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt - - and why (or why not).

Submit your work

1. Make sure all team members sign off on the updated Progress Report and summary email.
   
   
2. Submit your work to your mentor. Review the checklist located in the Submit Your Work section of this task.

Interpreting Evidence

• Don’t jump to conclusions. Try to remain objective when examining evidence. Your first impression might lead you to an immediate theory, but be careful not to instinctively interpret evidence based on how it fits your initial theory. For example, if your instincts lead you to believe that a physical confrontation and struggle occurred, you might be inclined to interpret a broken doorknob as evidence of that confrontation while ignoring the possibility that the doorknob has been broken for weeks.
  
  
• Avoid assigning meaning to evidence that really doesn’t have any meaning. In spite of what popular television shows may have led you to believe, there is not always a “smoking gun” that will unlock the secrets of the case. Don’t let your imagination run wild. There are aspects of autopsy and ballistics reports that will be completely irrelevant.
  
• Don’t assume that the “experts” are right. Rather than defer to others, instead question their reasoning, regardless of their perceived qualifications. That’s not to say that you should disregard their opinions, but you should always seek to confirm their understanding of the facts and the reasoning underlying their conclusions.
  
  
• Support your conclusions with sound reasoning based on solid facts. Just as you should question experts, other people will question you.
  
  
• Pay close attention to the results of tests, and be certain that you understand how to interpret them. Ask yourself these questions: How are the tests conducted? What is the potential for error?
  

Death Investigation Process - A detailed overview of the death investigation process, including useful resources on evidence gathering and formulating hypotheses about circumstances surrounding the death.

Standard of Proof - Explanation of the concept of reasonable doubt and how to use it to evaluate your position on the Lawson case.

Ask the Experts

How can the mishandling of evidence affect the outcome of a death investigation case?

Tell me about a time when evidence was mishandled and it affected the outcome of a death investigation case?