Citation

Lockwood R, Touroo R, Olin J, Dolan E. J. Forensic Sci. 2019; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Affiliation

American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), 520 8th Avenue, New York, NY, 10018.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, American Society for Testing and Materials, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/1556-4029.14085

PMID

31116432

Abstract

Two hundred prosecuting attorneys completed a survey concerning priorities in taking on animal cruelty cases and the factors that help or hinder prosecuting such cases. Respondents commented on the priority given such cases. Questions also addressed specific kinds of evidence that had been used to decide whether to take on a cruelty case and were used in court.

RESULTS showed that prosecutors most frequently relied upon "traditional" sources of evidence, including detailed medical and crime scene reports and good quality photographic evidence. Other sources of forensic evidence such as DNA, computer forensics, forensic accounting, blood, and trace evidence were rarely employed. Veterinary forensic evidence, including forensic necropsies and detailed medical reports, was viewed as an important factor by a majority of prosecutors in deciding whether to accept a case for prosecution and in achieving a successful outcome, but a need for additional training for investigators was indicated.

© 2019 American Academy of Forensic Sciences.

Language: en

Keywords

animal cruelty; forensic evidence; forensic science; prosecution; survey