Running head: VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY

Name

Course Title

Violent Crime Case Study

3/1/2017
VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY 1

Introduction

The purpose of this report is to examine and analyze the issues and problems listed within

the case study. It will include a discussion of the crime scene investigation and analysis of the

evidence at the scene, a discussion of the investigative steps and strategies involved in this

homicide investigation, a discussion of both interviews of witnesses and interrogation of

suspects, explanations that counter defense efforts to suppress evidence, and a discussion of the

application of modern scientific techniques and technology to investigative processes. There

exist various stereotypes and biases in the criminal justice system, and many are apparent in this

homicide case. More specifically, the general intelligence-led crime scene analysis model will be

described, as well as sexism-related biases in determining the perpetrators, and the defendant’s

motion for the dismissal of the knife, DNA, and confessions as evidence.

Crime Scene Investigation

This section will discuss the crime scene investigation, as well as analyze the evidence at

the scene. The police were notified at 1046 hours, and they arrived at 1051 hours. The crime

scene was a wooded area behind the parking lot of a Pizza Hut restaurant. Two truck drivers for

Standard Medical Imaging reported that while making a U-turn in the parking lot behind the

building, they noticed a red pile that appeared to be fresh blood. The victim appeared to be a

young, deceased female. Her face and neck were covered in blood. The police officers at the

crime scene collected many items of evidence, including two black caps founds near the victim’s

body. D/CPL. Case observed a large puddle of bright red blood which was approximately two

feet between lines of a sparking space on the north side of the parking lot. A trail of small drops

of blood followed in a south west direction. There were also two drag marks from the puddle.

The victim’s body was located nearly 15 feet north into the woods from the curb. It appears she
VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY 2

was dragged by her feet or ankles, and her body was well-reserved. The body has had many stab

wounds on her neck and abs. She had been stabbed once in her upper back as well. However, a

weapon was not identified in the crime scene.

It can be inferred from this evidence that the murder was pre-meditated, and the killers

were determined to ensure the victim was dead rather than merely wounded. Given the multiple

stab wounds in very vulnerable locations on the victim’s body, it becomes clear the killers

wanted her to bleed heavily and die. More specifically, there were many stab wounds around the

victim’s neck, which demonstrates that the killers struck repeatedly and had the goal of killing

the victim in mind. It can also be inferred that the killers acted recklessly and did not take care to

hide their identities, given that they left two masks nearby the victim’s deceased body.

Furthermore, the killers fled the scene before attempting to clean up the blood or hide the body

very well. This is evidenced by the pool of fresh blood at the scene, as well as the bloody drag

marks that led directly to the location of the body. Despite the notion that the murder itself was

pre-meditated and intentional, the killers did not take very much care to dispose of the body.

They did not care that they body would obviously be located soon, but rather, only to kill her.

Investigative Steps and Strategies

This section will describe the investigative steps and strategies involved in this homicide

case. Police forces arrived at the crime scene nearly 5 minutes after being called. They gathered

evidence, took observations, and noted the significant items relating to the case (e.g. the black

masks and drag marks). The victim did not have any identification on her, so the officers

obtained attendance/absentee rolls for local high schools. After discussing with the mother of

Ashley Smith, the officers obtained a photograph, but due to the excessive amount of blood on

her neck and face, they could not identify her solely using the photograph. The mother then
VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY 3

reported that Ashley had a large mole in the middle of her back, and the victim also had a large

mole in the middle of her back. Finally, results of a fingerprint test confirmed that the victim was

indeed Ashley Smith.

This process of crime scene investigation follows the intelligence-led crime scene

processing model. The officers initially underwent the trace process of crime scene examination

(Ribaux et al., 2010), where they gathered all pertinent information regarding the crime scene

environment to link entities and make sense of the offense committed. This is demonstrated by

the officers’ observations regarding the blood, masks, location of body, and location of crime

scene. Furthermore, the officers transitioned into the second phase of crime scene processing,

where they collect data that feeds different processes. This collection process must be timely,

selective, and planned accordingly to the accessibility of data (Ribaux et al., 2010). The officers’

actions align closely with this model. The collection was timely; officers first arrived only 5

minutes after being reported and immediately began physical evidence and making observations

of the scene itself. It was also selective; the officers obtained attendance/absentee rolls only for

local high schools, and then they reached out specifically to the potential mother of the victim.

Finally, these strategies align with the accessibility of the data. They knew they could quickly

gather information from nearby high schools and be in close contact with potential relatives of

the victim; all this data was very easily accessible.

Interviews and Interrogation Suspects

This section will discuss the interviews conducted, as well as the interrogation of the

suspects. Mrs. Smith, the victim’s mother was interviewed (“Violent Crimes”, 2000). She

explained that she and her partner had separated and divorced recently, and this divorce was hard

on the victim. Ashley had snuck out of the house on the evening of the date she was murdered.
VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY 4

Her mother reported that she had never known Ashley to sneak out before that night. She also

reported that at the beginning of the respective schoolyear, Ashley’s grades began to drop. Her

mother also explained that Ashley would receive calls late at night from a male she did not know

or had never met. She felt that Ashley’s best friend, Heather Thomas, who would come home

with Ashley nearly every day, would know who Ashley was with just moment before her death.

Moreover, she advised that Ashley had a boyfriend named Jason Phelps who lived in the same

area, was 17 years old, and only knew Ashley for a short period of time. Mrs. Smith also

provided information regarding other male teenagers associated with Ashley in some significant

capacity. Furthermore, on the morning of 11/2/00, she found Ashley hanging out with a 17-18-

year-old male identified as “Kyle.”

Mrs. Smith’s words are particularly interesting, and she only considers males as suspects.

According to Sergio Herzog and Shaul Oreg (2008), female perpetrators receive far more lenient

punishments and less attention than male perpetrators. The main principle behind this notion can

be extracted and used as a lens for Mrs. Smith’s interview. In other words, males are suspected

more harshly, frequently, and unjustly than are females, especially in violent crimes. This

becomes true when analyzing the interview with Mrs. Smith. She describes Ashley’s current

boyfriend at the time, as well as other boyfriends she had in prior years. She also describes other

males she was associated with from her high school in addition to males who would call her on

the phone. She mentioned her best friend, Heather, but only spoke about her in hopes that she

might know who her killer was, rather than suspected she might be the killer herself. This

demonstrates that she only considered male suspects, and dismissed the idea of a female

perpetrator. It is interesting she would first mention Ashley’s boyfriend, as a significant other is

supposed to satisfy very basic, caring needs, but not her best friend.
VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY 5

Heather Thomas, Ashley’s best friend, was also interviewed (“Violent Crimes”, 2000).

She advised the officers that she had been with Ashley on the night of 10/31/00, and lately,

Ashley had only been hanging out with her, Kristen Williams, and her boyfriend, Jason Phelps.

Heather was in obvious hysteria now, and she had begun crying even before she was informed

that Ashley had been murdered. It was unclear why she was crying, and this is generally

suspicious behavior, but the circumstances of the situations dictate that crying is not atypical.

Other interviews with Ashley’s friends took place, but they were not transcribed for analysis.

There was a second interview conducted with Ashley’s mother a few days later. To her

knowledge, Ashley did not ride with anybody but her to school. If she was not available to take

Ashley, Ashley would walk with her neighbor, Heather Thomas. Mr. and Mrs. Wronka inform

officers of the events that occurred leading up to the event. They explain that after school, they

saw Ashley with Heather Thomas, Jason Phelps, and another unidentified white male. Later in

the evening, Ashely’s brother, Tony, arrives and explains he must do work in the basement. The

phone rings, but Ashley picks it up before Tony can. Shortly after, Ashley left the house. Ashley

came home and informed her mother she had fallen asleep at Kristen William’s house. Her

mother went to sleep and ordered Ashley to do the same. When her mother awoke the next

morning, Ashley was not there. She filed a run-away report, and went out searching for Ashley.

She first consulted Heather, who did not know of Ashley’s whereabouts, and then consulted

Phelps’ brother, but he did not know where either of them were. She then found Ashley with

“Kyle.”

Following, a second interview with Heather Thomas was conducted. A few of the other

friends who were interviewed noted that both Heather and Ashley had an interest in the same

male, Patrick O’Donnell (“Violent Crimes”, 2000). She was questioned about him, but denied
VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY 6

having a relationship with him, and denied that she was jealous of Ashley for being involved

with him. She noted that Ashley was sexually active with O’Donnell. After this interview, Case

believed that Heather was withholding useful information that would assist with solving the case.

Heather’s behavior during this interview was particularly suspicious and interesting. She would

not explain why she began to cry, she was interested in a male Ashley was involved with, and

she hesitated to provide information regarding a “Jay.” It would be very interesting to see how

Case would have viewed this person in interview differently had she been male.

There was also an interview conducted with Jason Phelps (“Violent Crimes”, 2000). He

voluntarily came in for questioning, and he took a polygraph exam. The results showed that he

was deceptive, but did not clarify as to what extent. During this interview, Phelps admitted to

having sex with Ashley once, and explained that he smokes copious amounts of marijuana and

drinks alcohol daily so he might have been confusing the dates in his mind. He also admitted to

owning a butterfly knife, and appeared to get angry. Nonetheless, he was willing to have his

blood drawn and his house searched. It is interesting the officers wanted to take so much action

in relation in Phelps, but did not ask Heather to do the same. The officials in this case received

consent from Phelps to search his house. The legality of this action is dependent on the age of

Phelps, as well as whether they had probable cause to do this. To show that a search is

reasonable, the police must be able to reason that it is more likely than not that a crime was

committed (“Search and Siezure”, n.d.). In this case, this would mean the officials would have

needed to either obtain a warrant, or have believed it was more likely than not that Phelps was

the perpetrator in this crime.

A third interview with Heather Thomas was conducted (“Violent Crimes”, 2000). During

this interview, the officers gave Heather a set of simple questions to test the stress in her voice. It
VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY 7

was shown she was truthful on the first 5 questions, but was deceptive on the last 4 questions,

which asked if she was with Ashley hours before her death, if she snuck out of her house the

night Ashley died, if she knows who killed Ashley, and if she was withholding any information,

respectively.

Later in the month, a call was received from Monica. Martin, who was calling on behalf

of her daughter, and she said the killer had confided in her daughter’s boyfriend. The killer was

identified as Michael Stewart who had propositioned Ashley for sex, and when he was denied,

beat and raped her. This occurred at a party that was supposedly held at a house in Oakland

Mills, and everybody there was drinking. Four days later, an unidentified female called

explaining that 4 young black males were involved in the murder of Ashley. She explained that

they had gotten her drunk and then taken advantage of her. She further explained that one of

these men was named Frederick and he did not believe that she would withhold the information

from officials, so he stabbed her in the neck and head repeatedly.

Evidence Suppression

The defense ordered a motion to suppress the knife found, the DNA evidence and the

confessions. According to the Exclusionary Rule, judges, juries, and courts may dismiss

evidence that was illegally obtained (“How to Suppress”, n.d.). For example, if a police officer

coerced a citizen into providing confession or giving up certain pieces of evidence, these may be

dismissed in court. However, in this case, the police officers obtained the evidence legally. The

murder weapon was turned into the police by a citizen who was a truck driver and found it on the

side of the road. The truck driver had heard that a young woman was murdered, but he didn’t pay

attention to the location. However, when he saw the knife on the road, he thought of the story

and turned it in. This piece of evidence is legitimate and cannot be suppressed. The “fruit of the
VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY 8

poisonous tree” doctrine also provides a constitutional challenge to this case, but it does not hold

because the evidence was not obtained illegally. This doctrine states that evidence obtained via

illegal processes may be entirely excluded from trial (“How to Suppress”, n.d.). Overall, the

knife and DNA were collected legally.

On the other hand, it can be reasonably argued that the confession was coerced out of

Jones, and therefore, it cannot be used in trial. After Jones had admitted to choking Ashley in the

house, the detectives said that they knew he had choked her in the car. This was a lie; they did

not know, and they said it for the sole reason of pulling information out of Jones. Jones then

admitted to choking her in the car. However, given the circumstances of the situation, it is

possible he felt coerced to say this. The detectives also repeatedly asked if Jones stabbed Ashley,

and he repeatedly said no until he admitted to stabbing her in the stomach. Such repetition from

detectives at a time when the suspect’s future was at stake could easily be interpreted as

coercion. It is likely the suspect felt nervous, and like he needed to say certain things to please

the detectives. Overall, more investigation regarding the coercive strategy of the detectives is

necessary to conclude that Jones was coerced into confession.

Conclusion

Overall, the approach taken by the officers at the crime scene matches the intelligence-led

crime scene investigation model, this case aligns with the stereotype that males appear more

suspicious in relation to violent crimes, and the defendant’s motion to exclude the knife and

DNA cannot be granted, but there might be merit to dismissing the confessions as evidence due

to coercion. Throughout the investigation, the police officers seemed to obtain information and

evidence legally, although the situation is very ambiguous. The Exclusionary Rule presents a
VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY 9

constitutional challenge in this case, and more specific investigation and explanation of the

defendant’s motions are necessary to conclude anything absolutely.

VIOLENT CRIME CASE STUDY 10

References

Herzog, S., & Oreg, S. (2008). Chivalry and the Moderating Effect of Ambivalent Sexism:

Individual Differences in Crime Seriousness Judgments. Law & Society Review, 42(1),

45-74. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5893.2008.00334.x

How to Suppress Evidence. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/how-to-suppress-evidence.html

Ribaux, O., Baylon, A., Lock, E., Delémont, O., Roux, C., Zingg, C., & Margot, P. (2010).

Intelligence-led crime scene processing. Part II: Intelligence and crime scene

examination. Forensic Science International, 199(1-3), 63-71.

doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.03.011

Searches and Seizures: The Limitations of the Police. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/searches-and-seizures-the-limitations-of-the-

police.html

Violent Crimes Unit Incident Report. (2000). Retrieved March 1, 2017.