"Help me, I'm Amanda Berry. ... I've been kidnapped and I've been missing for 10 years, and I'm, I'm here. I'm free now."

Those were the words that filtered through a 911 operator’s headset on May 6, 2013 in Cleveland Ohio—Amanda Berry was finally free!

But why did it take so long? Why did 10 years have to elapse before Amanda Berry and the other girls held captive would find their freedom and begin the process of restoring their lives? This is an answer that we may never learn.

In reading about the events surrounding the disappearance of Amanda Berry, Gina DeJesus, and Michelle Knight I tried to fathom losing 10 years of my life being held captive and tortured—but I couldn’t. I couldn’t imagine living or experiencing the nightmare, day in and day out, and wondering if I would survive and ever see my family again. Yet somehow, someway, after 10 long years of being held captive, Amanda Berry saw an opportunity, escaped, fled for help, and finally found her long desired freedom.

During these past few weeks we’ve learned about this house of horrors on Seymour Ave and the demented captor, Ariel Castro, who kept these women chained up and tortured them in his basement.

So when I heard the news this past week that Ariel Castro intended to enter a plea of not guilty, a number of my civilian friends turned to me with questions: how could he do this? After all, the evidence is overwhelming. A kidnapped victim escaped. Police unchained and rescued two other victims from the house. Ariel Castro’s suicide note highlighted portions of his crimes—a confession. And yet he has the audacity to enter a not guilty plea? Really!?

As we will see in the days to come, the defense is obviously mounting their tactics for what will probably be one of the most viewed courtroom proceedings in recent history. And while people will be curious to hear about the events that transpired in this house of horror, Ariel Castro’s attorneys will be looking for every opportunity to minimize the harsh realities of the crimes committed against these women. 

As the days draw closer to Castro’s day in court, a number of legal maneuvers will occur. The court will most likely, if they haven’t already, order a psychiatric evaluation of Castro. This will be in preparation for any anticipation of an insanity plea. Proving Castro is found sane and competent to stand trial for his crimes, it is certain that the defense will file motions in order to suppress any evidence. This is an opportunity for the court to evaluate how the evidence was obtained, if it was done legally, and if it will be permitted to be introduced in a court trial.

It is at this juncture that the defense will have to evaluate all of the findings and make their final decision.

While there are still too many unknown variables in how this case will play out in the court system, there are a number of general possibilities: Castro could go to trial and receive a verdict, he could go to trial and then take a last minute plea agreement before the jury returns from deliberation, he could see the make up of the jury upon their selection and decide to take a plea agreement before a trial, or he could enter a guilty plea (which is my favorite option as it will save the tax payers some money).

However, according to some of the media outlets, it sounds like Castro has a story that he wants all the world to hear—though I can’t imagine any story that could justify taking three ladies captive, sexually assaulting them, and chaining them up in the basement for 10 long years.

The key point that I’ve shared with my civilian friends is this; the job of the defense is to look out for the best interest of their client…and their client only! To achieve that they will do whatever it takes to minimize this horrific crime, including shifting the blame.

But what about Amanda, Gina, and Michelle?

As these events unfold in the days leading up to the trial, we need to remember this: we need to give justice a chance. For the sake of Amanda, Gina, and Michelle, we must see this crime through the democratic process and insure just for the victims. Then, after all is said and done, hope and pray that in the aftermath these women will somehow be able to live the rest of their lives peacefully.

— 
Ken Lang is a former Baltimore area homicide detective and an award-winning author of several true crime books, including Walking Among the Dead, Standing In Death’s Shadow, and Death Comes Uninvited. In 2011, he was named one of 50 Great Writers You Should Be Reading by The Author’s Show. He was recently awarded the 2013 DETC Famous Alumni of the Year. 2013 New York Times bestselling author Julia Spencer Fleming says, “Ken Lang is the real deal—a cop with chops!” Ken resides in North East, Maryland with his wife and three children. To learn more about his true crime books and upcoming crime novels please visit his website at www.kenlangstudios.com.

You’re sitting in front of your television watching your favorite weeknight crime show. The perp gets jacked up midway through the show by the stud detective who wrenches the suspect’s arm up behind his back, ratchets the handcuffs around his wrists and recites, “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say…”

And we all know how the rest of the story goes. The bad guy shuts up, the case ends up in court, and through some miraculous witness testimony during the trial the truth comes out. So much for reality!

This past week when I tuned in to the news and heard about the sudden interruption of the FBI’s interrogation of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and U.S. District Court Judge Marianne Bowler, I was blown over.

“Really?!” I thought. “Why wouldn’t you take advantage of the Miranda exceptions?” None of it made any sense to me—or most other Americans for that matter.

In listening to the news reports I thought about the myths and misconceptions that most civilians have regarding their Miranda Rights and thought that maybe I could share from my professional vantage point the reality of your rights.

First, your Miranda Rights need only be administered to you under two specific conditions as prescribed by the United States Supreme Court: (1) you need to be in custody, under arrest; and (2) your interrogators are questioning you about the crime in which you are in custody. It’s a two-fold requirement. If one of these two factors are not present, you do not need to be advised Miranda.

Here is an example that transpires each day in law enforcement across this nation. Let’s say a detective is investigating an allegation of rape. The investigator takes the initial complaint from the victim and has a sexual assault examination revealing injuries consistent with the victim’s account. The detective has one of two options: (1) they can secure an arrest warrant for the suspect, arrest him, and transport him back to the precinct and attempt and interview. Here, Miranda is required because he is in custody and being interviewed about the allegation in which he is under arrest, or (2) the investigator can go to the suspect’s house and conduct an interview there.

Under the second option of this scenario, the suspect does not need to be advised his Miranda. Why? He’s not in custody and is free to decline answering any questions at all. This was the option I generally took when investigating rapes. Because the sexual assault examination already providing me with the evidence to show the force used during the assault I only needed the suspect to admit that he had sex with the victim—though I knew it was rape, I didn’t need him to confess of the force he used. This gave me more than enough to secure a conviction. 

However, Miranda is not that simple and there are a variety of complexities that go to great legal depths that this blog could not possibly cover. However, in the most general of terms, Miranda does have a few exceptions: res gestae statement, imminent threat & safety to the public, and a dying declaration are the three I want to cover briefly.

A “res gestae” (Latin) statement is more commonly known as a ‘spontaneous utterance.’ For example, police are dispatched to a scene of a shooting and upon arrival find a hysterical man with a handgun standing over a body. As the police approach the subject he states, “I shot him, he had it coming!” This statement is admissible in court because the police did not question the suspect. He made the admission on his own free will. (Now certainly a defense attorney would argue the legality of the statement based on his client’s frame of mind at the time of the crime in an effort to get the statement thrown out of court).

A “dying declaration” is just that—a declaration made by a victim who knows that they are in fact dying and confide information to police. An example of this would be police being dispatched to a shot subject. On arrival they find the victim lying in the street bleeding to death. He says, “my wife shot me because I was having an affair.” The Supreme Court has ruled and believes that because the victim realizes that he is facing his demise this statement is true and admissible in court. So a police officer can testify in court as to what the victim said moments before he died (an exception to the hearsay rule). It becomes an exception to Miranda if the victim confesses to a crime, such as “I was selling some crack to Peanut down the street when he shot me.” That statement cannot be used against him if he lives to support charges of drug distribution. See how complex my job can be?

Finally, there is the immanent threat and safety exception. This is to say that if there is a threat or safety issue that can cause people harm in the immediate future officers can question the suspect for up to 48 hours after being detained, without advising them of Miranda, so long as the threat or safety concern can be articulated as being present. I’ve used this once when a murder suspect was arrested and we had information that he had hid the murder weapon somewhere on the property of an elementary school. School was due to be in session in the next few hours and it was important to determine if a child was going to find a loaded weapon on school property.

So why wouldn’t government officials want to use these exceptions to learn more about the plots of terror that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev intended to carry out? Why wouldn’t you want to uncover every aspect of such a horrendous attack to be sure that there were no other attacks looming? We could speculate about the answers for days, perhaps weeks. From a personal point of view it sickens me to think that there are those who are more concerned about a suspect’s “rights” than the safety of the populace.

What is most interesting is that in recent years, during in-service training, I’ve been told that the U.S. Supreme Court has recently considered abolishing the advisement of Miranda warnings. Why? Because it’s so common place in our society (i.e. education, media outlets, true crime TV shows) everyone knows about their rights.

So when you sit down to watch your next favorite crime show, remember this: when they slam the suspect down, cuff him up, and read him his rights, it’s only Hollywood. 

— 
Ken Lang is a former Baltimore area homicide detective and an award-winning author of several true crime books, including Walking Among the Dead, Standing In Death’s Shadow, and Death Comes Uninvited. In 2011, he was named one of 50 Great Writers You Should Be Reading by The Author’s Show. He was recently awarded the 2013 DETC Famous Alumni of the Year. 2013 New York Times bestselling author Julia Spencer Fleming says, “Ken Lang is the real deal—a cop with chops!” Ken resides in North East, Maryland with his wife and three children. To learn more about his true crime books and upcoming crime novels please visit his website at www.kenlangstudios.com.

I was flying 30,000 feet somewhere above the western mountain ranges in Montana when the news story broke.

BREAKING NEWS: Explosions at the Boston Marathon.

The Wi-Fi television feed filled with the airwaves with first responders rushing into the finish line, giving first aid, and evacuating the victims to local area hospitals. As I watched the terror unfold on the screen I couldn’t help but wonder how the events in Boston would affect my flight scheduled to land in San Francisco in the next few hours. Would they divert our flight and have us land immediately? Or would they allow us to continue to our destination? I felt completely helpless, absolutely uncertain about what would happen in the next few minutes.

We all watched this past week as the events unfolded and officials learned about the two terrorists who had planned and executed their attack, then attempted to flee police in a hail of gunfire and homemade bombs. Within minutes the first suspect would lie dead as the second went on the run. The search intensified and within 24 hours the second suspect would be apprehended—the terror over.

Now that we have a chance to breathe a sigh of relief we also have a chance to reflect on the week and the fear that reigned in Boston.

Throughout this past week I stumbled upon a quote that spoke immensely to me about the courage that our Founding Fathers confronted when facing their fears. It comes from Thomas Paine who penned:

“I love the man that can smile at trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” –Thomas Paine

In these days following the bombing in Boston we need to pause and reflect about how we will face future attacks and strive to pursue our principles of uprightness and courage until the end of our days.

Have no fear, take on courage, and live life to its fullest.

Thank you Mr. Paine for reminding me about the adversities you faced in your day when forming this nation… they are truly inspiring for the days that we are facing as free American citizens.

— 
Ken Lang is a former Baltimore area homicide detective and an award-winning author of several true crime books, including Walking Among the Dead, Standing In Death’s Shadow, and Death Comes Uninvited. In 2011, he was named one of 50 Great Writers You Should Be Reading by The Author’s Show. He was recently awarded the 2013 DETC Famous Alumni of the Year. 2013 New York Times bestselling author Julia Spencer Fleming says, “Ken Lang is the real deal—a cop with chops!” Ken resides in North East, Maryland with his wife and three children. To learn more about his true crime books and upcoming crime novels please visit his website at www.kenlangstudios.com.

I’ve heard it said that, “Evidence is overrated.” But when I’ve heard this comment it has only been in good jest.

The truth be told, no case can be solved without direct and convincing evidence. But what about those murder cases where you have absolutely no evidence as to who perpetrated the crime?

Occasionally such crimes are committed and some would think of them as the “perfect crime.” However, I am an advocate that there is no such thing as a perfect murder. No matter how the crime is perpetrated some sort of evidence, no matter how minute, is left behind. The question is actually, “Is the case detective perceptive enough to find the evidence needed to identify the suspect and bring them to justice?”

But for those murders where all you seem to have as evidence is the body, how do detectives solve those cases?

As a former homicide detective I can say that I’ve handled such cases. You’re dispatched to the scene, there lies a body in the street, and there is absolutely no physical evidence. None.

Then you attend the autopsy, hoping and praying for one shred of evidence; scrapped skin under the fingernails; a strand of hair not belonging to the victim; something, anything to give you a push in the right direction. But it eludes you and you’re left with absolutely nothing.

It is here, in this place of solitude, where a good detective puts their experience to work and begins uncovering information leading up to the last moments of a victim’s life. They reach out, speak with the family, speak with friends, and begin digging deep into the life of their victim. They search for pieces of information that may lead them to a piece of evidence that will break open the case. 

Information, good information, is the key to such cases—and the manner in which a detective receives the information is irrelevant in the pursuit of a killer. Sometimes the information comes by way of a whisper in the ear at the victim’s funeral. A name is mentioned and the detective has new direction. Sometimes the information comes through an anonymous phone call. The reason for the murder is conveyed and the investigation can now focus on one subject. Sometimes the information comes by way of someone responding to an offer for a reward. Thankfully, there is no honor among thieves.

But, at best, this is merely hearsay. Nothing of which is admissible in a court of law.

So how do you rise to the occasion and find justice?

You begin by looking into every aspect of the suspect’s life. Ninety-nine percent of the time we are dealing with the criminal element, and murder isn’t the only crime they’re committing. So the detective begins to focus on other crimes that they can use to help lead them to the missing piece of evidence needed for the conviction. Perhaps a drug investigation leads you to author a search warrant that puts you in the suspect’s house to find the weapon or bloodied clothes. Perhaps your investigation leads to a witness who provides you with a cell phone number that belongs to your suspect and you subpoena his records. Perhaps the arrest and charging of an associate of the suspect puts the hammer over his head that compels him to make a deal and turn state’s evidence.

But chiseling away at the insurmountable wall doesn’t always bring the desired outcome in solving a case growing cold.

It does bring progress—and for a family searching for justice, hope.

— 
Ken Lang is a former Baltimore area homicide detective and an award-winning author of several true crime books, including Walking Among the Dead, Standing In Death’s Shadow, and Death Comes Uninvited. In 2011, he was named one of 50 Great Writers You Should Be Reading by The Author’s Show. New York Times bestselling author Julia Spencer Fleming says, “Ken Lang is the real deal—a cop with chops!”

Ken resides in North East, Maryland with his wife and three children. To learn more about his true crime books and upcoming crime novels please visit his website at www.kenlangstudios.com.

Back in mid February I wrote a blog asking “Are Fingerprints Overrated?” and I discussed the realities of fingerprint evidence; how they aren’t always present at a scene and if they are how delicate they can be.

But now I’m posing a new question, “Do fingerprints lie?” The answer to this question may actually surprise you.

Imagine, if you will, that a car has been stolen and that later in the day it was used in a crime—let’s say a bank robbery. During the course of the bank robbery a witness on the parking lot observes a gloved up masked marauder running from the bank, a gun in one hand and the loot in the other. As the armed bandit jumps into the passenger’s seat of the getaway vehicle, the wheels squeal as the car peels off the lot and tears down the road. Thankfully, our witness was cognitive enough to grab the tag number of the vehicle and forward the information to the first officers on the scene.

The first officer arriving radios dispatch and runs the tag through the motor vehicle administration records and puts out a B.O.L.O. (be on look out) for the vehicle. The dispatcher runs the records checks and conveys the registered owner’s information. He also confirms that the vehicle is a stolen vehicle.

Diligent work from the patrol officers soon pays off as they find the getaway vehicle parked on a nearby apartment complex parking lot. The doors and hanging open and the engine is running. Within minutes Crime Lab is on the scene processing the vehicle. From the driver’s side of the interior they recover a number of fingerprints and forward them to the Latents Unit for further analysis.

The Latent Print Examiner inspects the lifts and confirms that they are distinctive enough to enter into the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS). Within an hour, a possible hit is received—a suspect named. The examiner takes the name of the potential suspect and learns that the suspect has a criminal record with a recent arrest for a theft charge. Fingerprints are on file and available for a one on one comparison. The latent print examiner pulls the known prints from the suspect’s arrest record and compares them to the latents lifted from the interior of the stolen vehicle. The suspect is not the registered owner and the vehicle and his prints are positively identified as the ones recovered from the interior of the getaway car. He’s arrested and awaiting trial in the county jail on a $250,000.00 bail.

Open and shut case, right?

Wrong! This is where fingerprints can be deceptive.

Fingerprints are constantly left behind by individuals who are in a variety of places. Some of those people are in these places unlawful while others have a valid reason to be where they’re supposed to be.

In this scenario, what the investigators failed to do was verify if the arrestee had a valid reason to have his fingerprints in the car. Had the investigators pried a little further into this case they would have learned that the week prior to the vehicle being stolen the owner had the vehicle in the shop for some routine maintenance. And yes, the arrestee works at the shop and was the mechanic who worked on the vehicle.

In addition, do you remember my description of the suspect during the actual robbery? Here it is again: “…a witness on the parking lot observes a gloved up masked marauder running from the bank, a gun in one hand and the loot in the other.” Did you notice that the robbery suspect is “gloved up” and “masked?”

Oops!

Meanwhile, the mechanic, who was falsely charged and was being held on the quarter-million dollar bail, lost his job because he couldn’t afford the bail. Unfortunately, the above scenario is one that has played out a hundred times over in real life.

So yes, Fingerprints can lie when the investigators aren’t astute enough to ensure that every stone has been turned over in their investigation.

Do you know of anyone who was falsely accused or convicted of a crime based on shotty fingerprint evidence?

—  
Ken Lang is a former Baltimore area homicide detective and an award-winning author of several true crime books, including Walking Among the Dead, Standing In Death’s Shadow, and Death Comes Uninvited. In 2011, he was named one of 50 Great Writers You Should Be Reading by The Author’s Show. New York Times bestselling author Julia Spencer Fleming says, “Ken Lang is the real deal—a cop with chops!”

Ken resides in North East, Maryland with his wife and three children. To learn more about his true crime books and upcoming crime novels please visit his website at www.kenlangstudios.com.

With the heightened debate over gun control I’ve heard a number of arguments for and against guns in our society. Some of the debate has produced healthy discussions about the need for guns while some have about ludicrous, if not childish arguments.

One of the most recent statements that I had to laugh at was made by California Police Chief Ken James when he recently said, “One issue that always boggles my mind is that the idea that a gun is a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon.”

We have a phrase in our police jargon when we hear such statements like these that goes against all logic.

“Horse crap!” (Yes, this quote is censored).

Being a cop for some 24 years, it is safe to say that I have attended quite a few training programs; training which included six-months of basic training at the police academy and the mandated in-service training every year following my graduation. Through our training I was repeatedly instructed when a subject presents a lethal threat against me, my fellow officer, or a civilian, I may use my firearm as a defensive tool to protect myself and others. To say that I only use my weapon as an offensive tool is to say that when I respond to a call for service I shoot a subject in anticipation of a perceived attack even though the subject has made no aggression towards myself or another.

Here’s the link to Chief James’ press conference if you would like to see the press conference: http://washingtonexaminer.com/california-police-chief-the-idea-that-a-gun-is-a-defensive-weapon-is-a-myth/article/2521563 

Thankfully, I've never had to shoot anyone. Though I have some close calls.

Once again, I say, “horse crap!”

One could argue that a sniper on a SWAT team would be in a position in which an "offensive" posture is taken by the police with their weapon. But having served 3 years as a homicide detective and investigating a handful of police shootings I can confirm that even with our snipers the facts need to show that the sniper fired upon a subject in defense of fellow officers or civilians (i.e. hostages). Speaking from experience, in all the police shootings I've handled, each and every officer described a scenario where an armed adversary became offensive, presented a weapon, and caused the officer to respond with deadly force. That is simply being “defensive,” and good police work (I might add).

Not only have I found this statement laughable, but recently I had the opportunity to be in a judge’s chambers when I overheard two judges discussing the idiotic notion that guns aren’t a defensive weapon. They deliberated and recalled cases they studied in law school and read about long since taking the bar, practicing law, and being appointed to the bench. They discussed how many state laws refer to the ability of a subject to use weapons (including guns) as a defensive measure to protect their family from an intruder making entry into their residence. How can they not be used defensively?

It was at this point that their discussion took a turn and raised a valid question, “Does the government have the ability to rid our society of guns? Will guns ever disappear?”

One judge stood with his arms crossed as he leaned back against the counter and contemplated the question. The other cocked his brow and allowed the grin to stretch across his face as he saw his colleague mulling over the legal quandary.

“Let us consider, for a moment,” the judge said, “one of the most controlled environments that exists in our society and let us evaluate the success in removing all contraband from this society—I’m speaking of the United States correctional system. Here is an institution in which every aspect of a person’s life is controlled. We tell them when to eat, when to sleep, when to have recreation, what they can read, and what to wear. Yet, somehow, in this sterile environment, prisoners are able to obtain illicit drugs, run their criminal enterprises, and stow weapons within their cells. If we cannot control the environment of those who we hold captive, how does the government anticipate controlling the environment of a free people? It’s impossible; guns will never disappear.”

I had to admit, the judge made a brilliant observation. His colleague fully agreed as they trailed off into a corner office to continue their discussion.

The gun control issue in our nation is certainly a serious concern that we need to give great consideration to before haphazardly enacting laws that could potentially create a dreadful demise. After all, it was an armed militia who fought for our freedom that birthed this great nation out of tyranny and oppression. Guns have always been an intrinsic part of our heritage and have helped us maintain the freedoms we cherish. Without guns police won’t be able to defend our rights, soldiers won’t be able to fight for our freedom, and the law abiding citizen won’t be able to defend their castle.

So as to answer the question, “Will guns ever disappear?” No, I don’t see how they ever will.

— 
Ken Lang is a former Baltimore area homicide detective and an award-winning author of several true crime books, including Walking Among the Dead, Standing In Death’s Shadow, and Death Comes Uninvited. In 2011, he was named one of 50 Great Writers You Should Be Reading by The Author’s Show. New York Times bestselling author Julia Spencer Fleming says, “Ken Lang is the real deal—a cop with chops!”

Ken resides in North East, Maryland with his wife and three children. To learn more about his true crime books and upcoming crime novels please visit his website at  www.kenlangstudios.com.

As you can imagine, after 24 years of experience as a law enforcement officer I have come to see some funny and crazy things throughout my career. But having worked as a detective in investigations most of my career I have also come to hear some pretty routine questions.

“Have the fingerprints come back?” is probable the most routine question I hear as a detective.

Even after all these years of working as a detective the question always catches me off guard. It causes me to think about how modern day television has helped and hurt us in the criminal justice system. It’s almost as if every criminal will leave behind fingerprints from every crime they’ve committed. That may be the case for the true crime shows featured on your favorite channel. But in reality nothing could be farther from the truth.

True, today’s criminals may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but they do learn through their experiences and become more proficient at their preferred crime. Let me speak generally for a moment. Most often (not always) your typical criminal starts off committing some minor offenses; let’s say shoplifting from a local store. As they grow older and their “want” matures they begin stealing other property from a variety of locations. Most often, their want is to get high on their favorite narcotic and the stolen property simply becomes a means by which they can cash in some goods and financially facilitate their addiction. Before you know it they’ve stolen everything from their friends and family and begin turning towards strangers houses.

Each time they are caught these criminals read their statement of charges and learn how they were caught. Then, when they commit the crime again, some try to perfect their technique to prevent being apprehended again—and for those caught by their fingerprints they usually start wearing gloves.

But gloves are not the only barrier that keeps investigators from lifting good prints at a crime scene.

First, the surface can be a hindrance. If the surface is a coarse or porous surface then the oils from your skin, which are left behind to make the fingerprint, aren’t detectable. They are either soaked up into the object or are undetectable because of the broken up surface. But people will insist that their should be fingerprints on the surface so we throw down some fingerprint dust, swish it all around, and come up empty. A hard, smooth surface yields the best fingerprints—like the glass in your windows or the smooth top of your countertops.

But even then there can be obstacles that can prohibit a latent print from being left behind; the primary problem being dirty surfaces. If that window or countertop is never cleaned the dirt and grime make the surface much like a porous surface and prevent the fingerprints from adhering. Or, if the surface is rarely cleaned and prints are lifted, the legal issue for investigators becomes whether or not the print was left by a suspect or innocent bystander (there are just too many scenarios to play out here).

Finally, we have the issue of smudging. Not ever time you touch something do you leave pristine fingerprints. For example, take your fingers and press them straight onto the glass of your patio door and lift them straight up. Look closely and you should see your fingerprints with nicely formed spirals and ridges. Now press your fingers onto the glass again in another spot. This time, instead of lifting your fingers straight up, slide them sideways (like you’re trying to force the door open).

Smudges!

You may even have portions of a fingerprint where you see the spirals and ridges. And yes, we can make identifications from these providing we have enough “points” (unique landmarks in the latent) the analyst can mark to make a positive identification. However, we can’t do anything with the smudges. And even though we have advanced technologies in today’s forensic world, we can’t reconstruct the smudge to determine what the original fingerprint looked like. That’s like asking a forensic artist to take a surveillance photo of a masked gunman and to draw the suspect’s face without his mask—it just isn’t going to happen.

Fingerprints are truly a fascinating source of evidence that have helped us solve a number of cases. One of the most fascinating stories I’ve heard was how fingerprints recovered from a body solved a murder. It happened in the homicide unit I worked for when another set a detectives were dispatched to a murder scene. A woman had been strangled and her nude body dumped. When the investigators recovered the body efforts were made to use a ninhydren technique to attempt to lift prints from the body. The ninhydren process is a chemical process applied to the surface through fuming. We often use this process when processing paper, such as letters. In the murder investigation, fingerprints become visible as the fumes interacted with the finger oils and presented the latents in a different color. A photograph was taken to “lift” (make a record) the print and was resized to a life size image. It was scanned into the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) and a match was returned. The former boyfriend was arrested and convicted.

Given our advancements in technology I sometimes wonder if the fingerprint is overrated. After all, in 1989 when I came on the job DNA didn’t exist in my arena of law enforcement—it wasn’t affordable and still questionable. But today DNA is a wealth of evidence that has brought about a great deal of success in solving unsolvable cases, freeing innocent suspects, and bringing about solid convictions. Regardless, we’ll never stop looking for fingerprints when we process our next crime scene and we’ll certainly use them to convict a perpetrator of a crime.

—  
Ken Lang is a former Baltimore area homicide detective and an award-winning author of several true crime books, including Walking Among the Dead, Standing In Death’s Shadow, and Death Comes Uninvited. In 2011, he was named one of 50 Great Writers You Should Be Reading by The Author’s Show. New York Times bestselling author Julia Spencer Fleming says, “Ken Lang is the real deal—a cop with chops!”

Ken resides in North East, Maryland with his wife and three children. To learn more about his true crime books and upcoming crime novels please visit his website at  www.kenlangstudios.com.

My wedding anniversary falls during the first week of January. This past anniversary my lovely bride and I celebrated our 22nd year of marriage with dinner and a movie.

Where did we have dinner? The Lonestar Steakhouse.

Which movie? Les Misérables.

In the tale, Victor Hugo creates a fascinating storyline about a man, Jean Valjean, who finishes a 19 year jail sentence for stealing food to feed his starving family. Valjean is eventually released after completing his term (additional years added for escape attempts) and returns to society, though his criminal life still haunts him. If you’re familiar with the story, Valjean goes on to live the remainder of his life outside the prison walls, but he isn’t necessarily a free man after skipping out on his parole and constantly pursued by Inspector Javert.

It’s a fascinating story—one you should read and see in the theater.

But as I sat and watched this rendition of one of my favorite musicals, I pondered, “Can a criminal really become a productive member of society?”

At first, my police instincts screamed out a resounding “No!” as I though about all the repeat offenders that I had apprehended time and time again—only to recharge them with the same type of criminal offense. It almost becomes a known way of life, the only way of life they come to know. In fact, I have those repeat offenders who faithfully demonstrate that the only environment that they are capable of thriving in is the one offered by the local detention center.

Then it dawned on me. There were those who I had charged for a simple offense and then never saw again. I recalled one instance as a patrol officer when I was dispatched to a local department store on Christmas Eve; a shoplifter in custody. As I spoke with the loss prevention officer I learned how this 18 year old female had stole over $500 worth of brand new clothing. Because of her age and the amount value she had taken the law required that I take her into custody and charge her with certain theft crimes. So I did.

When we returned to the precinct lockup and I processed her, I watched her weep bitterly, begging me to call her father who would hopefully post her bail. I permitted the phone call and was soon greeted by the disappointed father in the lobby. You can only imagine my dismay when I learned that the gentleman was a Reverend and that at the time he was conducting Christmas Eve candlelight service his daughter was being apprehended for her crime.

In time, I learned that the young lady had indeed changed her ways. Perhaps spending most of Christmas day in an isolated cell attributed something to her finding the road of repentance. Perhaps the forgiveness that she experienced expressed a love that she had never realized or known.

Whatever the case, she did become a productive member of society—turning my predisposed thoughts about those who offend onto a new course.

I certainly wish that I had the answer why people offend and how to deter them successfully. In fact, if I had that answer I would undoubtedly write a book, go on a book signing tour, and hit the academic circuit with my newfound discovery. But we humans are a wonderfully made creature. And understanding how and why we do what we do is a knowledge that we may never come to know.

If there has been anything that I have learned as a 24 year law enforcement veteran, it is this… criminals know that they are the dredges of all mankind, but when you treat them with the basic dignity every human deserves they begin to see the potential in who they’re meant to be and not what they’ve necessarily become.

— 
Ken Lang is a former Baltimore area homicide detective and an award-winning author of several true crime books, including Walking Among the Dead, Standing In Death’s Shadow, and Death Comes Uninvited. In 2011, he was named one of 50 Great Writers You Should Be Reading by The Author’s Show. New York Times bestselling author Julia Spencer Fleming says, “Ken Lang is the real deal—a cop with chops!”

Ken resides in North East, Maryland with his wife and three children. To learn more about his true crime books and upcoming crime novels please visit his website at  www.kenlangstudios.com.

I have to admit that I am absolutely ecstatic that my Baltimore Ravens have won the AFC Championship and are on their way to Superbowl XLVII.

What has been most impressive to me during this last portion of this season hasn’t been a sick team finding healing. Nor has it been the recent upswing in the momentum that has brought about some of the most incredible plays I’ve ever seen in playoff history. The most impressive thing that I’ve seen with the Ravens this season has been the testimony of one man: Ray Lewis.

A man who professes a deep commitment to his faith, he certainly has no problem wearing it on his sleeve. It was following his last home game on January 6th when the Ravens knocked off the Indianapolis Colts in a 24 to 9 win his shirt caught my eye. With this being Ray Lewis’ last season much attention fell on this incredibly talented athlete. Nearing the completion of his 17th season in the NFL, the television cameras focused in on Ray’s massive form as he removed his #52 jersey and shoulder pads.

“Psalms 91,” was stenciled across his shirt.

Being a fellow believer, I immediately knew this scripture—know it well. Many times I’ve drawn on this very scripture for courage and strength as a police officer and detective when placed in harms way. It reads:

(1)  He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will abide in the shadow of the Almighty. (2)  I will say to the LORD, "My refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust." (3) For he will deliver you from the snare of the fowler and from the deadly pestilence. (4) He will cover you with his pinions, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness is a shield and buckler. (5) You will not fear the terror of the night, nor the arrow that flies by day, (6) nor the pestilence that stalks in darkness, nor the destruction that wastes at noonday. (7) A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand at your right hand, but it will not come near you. (8) You will only look with your eyes and see the recompense of the wicked. (9) Because you have made the LORD your dwelling place—the Most High, who is my refuge—(10) no evil shall be allowed to befall you, no plague come near your tent. (11) For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways. (12) On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone. (13) You will tread on the lion and the adder; the young lion and the serpent you will trample underfoot. (14) "Because he holds fast to me in love, I will deliver him; I will protect him, because he knows my name. (15) When he calls to me, I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble; I will rescue him and honor him. (16) With long life I will satisfy him and show him my salvation." ~Psalm 91:1-16 (ESV)

Often before executing a raid I will sit in my car and quietly meditate on this scripture, then pray that God would send his angels to encamp about my team as we prepare to enter harm’s way. Its always inspired me… and calmed my nerves.

During these post-season games Ray Lewis’ uninhibited display of faith has been absolutely inspirational and convicting.

As I sat in my living room and watched him whisper “Thank you, Father,” during the national anthem or fall to his knees in worship after a well deserved victory, I was humbly reminded how I need to live my life out loud and be a testimony to others. I only wish I could be as bold. Perhaps I need to make a conscious effort.

Congratulations to my Baltimore Ravens. Well done! And to Ray—thanks for reminding me that we should be living our faith out loud, with unashamed vigor. You’ve been an inspiration to countless people. I hope that one day our Lord will reveal to you every life you’ve impacted.

Now let’s go win Superbowl XLVII.

— 
Ken Lang is a former Baltimore area homicide detective and an award-winning author of several true crime books, including Walking Among the Dead, Standing In Death’s Shadow, and Death Comes Uninvited. In 2011, he was named one of 50 Great Writers You Should Be Reading by The Author’s Show. New York Times bestselling author Julia Spencer Fleming says, “Ken Lang is the real deal—a cop with chops!”

Ken resides in North East, Maryland with his wife and three children. To learn more about his true crime books and upcoming crime novels please visit his website at www.kenlangstudios.com.

It’s just been a few short weeks since the tragic events unfolded in the Newtown, Connecticut elementary school—and my heart still weighs heavy for the family, friends, and teachers whose lives have been forever impacted by this devastation.

Over these past weeks I had the opportunity to listen to the variety of opinions that have been offered by professionals, citizens, and pundits regarding the solution of preventing any further violence to our innocent school children. I’ve heard gun opponent’s cries for stricter gun control laws and I’ve heard security proponents advocate arming teachers.

Some of the opinions offered have been from well-educated and experienced law enforcement officials—most haven’t.

Given that a number of people in my private and professional circles have asked me to weigh in on the topics at hand, I thought that I now would be the appropriate time. Do know that I am basing my responses on my 24-years of experience as a law enforcement officer. I have always been a 2nd Amendment proponent. Always will be. But I’ve decided to steer from my beliefs to share with you some cold hard facts about the realities of the world in which we live.

Gun Control Laws:

In the State of Maryland, we have some of the foremost leading gun control laws this nation has ever produced…and they don’t work! What law enforcement officers have discovered in a State that has such stringent gun control laws is that the laws only keep honest people honest. Sure, we have gun units who are checking ammo purchase logs and shooting range rosters to see if any convicted felons are “in possession” of a weapon (by shooting it at a range) which is a violation of the Maryland law.

The unit is so busy that they are frequently finding convicted felons purchasing ammo or participating in shooting range activities. Then search warrants are executed on their homes and guess what? That’s right. They have guns. Lots of guns. They have rifles, shotgun, semi-autos, handguns, and revolvers. You name it, they get it. And the law doesn’t stop them.

What about the law-abiding citizen who complies with the law? They become hindered. I’ve known many well responsible business owners who want to get a carry permit to carry a concealed handgun on them because of the large amount of money they generate with their business. Unfortunately, with the ‘attitude’ in Maryland with letting citizens arm themselves as the law would permit is next to near impossible. The State has become stingy in issuing bona fide credentials to law-abiding citizens.

I’ve actually known law enforcement officers who have retired and decided 6 months after their retirement to apply for a permit to carry (concealed) because they were receiving death threats from subjects they had arrested and convicted and were being released from jail. The State’s response? Maryland denied these retired police officers the permit to carry and said that they should have had it in place prior to the retirement, even though the law doesn’t require such actions.

So much for the gun control laws.

Let’s Confiscate All the Guns!

To me, this is absolutely laughable. How many of you think that the average law enforcement officers are going to step up, place themselves in harms way by intruding into someone’s house and confiscating their guns. First, the Supreme Court has already ruled, “every man’s home is his castle.” The Supreme Court has already set a precedence that a homeowner can defend his domicile to the fullest measure of the law, which is to include taking the life of another human being in its defense. Officers would knowingly be placing themselves into harms way. And from the conversations that I’ve had with fellow officers, many would refuse to execute this illegal order. It goes against the 2nd Amendment of the United States. It would take an army to disarm the country and that could lead to much more tragic.

What if We Arm the Teachers?

Let me see if I understand this. We want to take the overworked and overburdened teachers, who are struggling to get students through all the required legal educational goals and strap them down with having to learn how to carry and use a firearm? Bad idea!

There is a mentality that every police officer has when going to a call, “There will be a gun at this scene—mine!” And with that mindset officers are cognizant that there is always the potential that an unarmed subject can quickly become armed and dangerous if they are able to struggle the officer’s gun free from the officer’s holster. I can’t imagine training teachers to be in this mindset while trying to educate our children.

What About Holding the Mental Health Profession More Accountable?

You’re on to something here! When I was a street officer in the late 1980s and early 1990s I would often be dispatched to calls regarding the mentally disturbed subjects. I’ve had my share of emergency evaluations sending many people to the local mental hospital for evaluation. And it would be months before I would see some of them again.

Today, things have changed. Recently I worked a robbery investigation where a subject was released from the local mental hospital. Not because he was regular with his medications and able to show that he could function within society. No, because the insurance company refused to pay any more of his benefits. The hospital had to release him.

Homeless and destitute, he began looking for a way to survive. First order of business was finding something to eat. He had passed many restaurants on foot after leaving the hospital, but had no money purchase anything. That’s when he say the neighborhood bank and masterminded his great take. You’ve probably already figured out that if I’m telling you this story it didn’t turn out so well for our friend just released from the hospital. No, he was caught. Red handed.

During his interview he told me that he his insurance company wouldn’t pay for his treatment, or his prescriptions. The mental health professionals, knowing that he couldn’t survive on his own, sent him on his merry way. Now he is getting three square meals and a bed to sleep in at the local jail…and no treatment for his true problems.

I indicated earlier that I had some possible solutions to help. Here are my suggestions for making our schools a safer place for our children:

(1)   Instead of arming teachers, let’s get creative and have some cops become entrepreneurs. They could effectively start an off-duty police security business who contracts out to local schools wanting such services. Officers could be in uniform (if the agency permits) or for those schools who wish to have their security officers more subdued, in professional attire much like the teachers.

(2)   If we are going to arm teachers, then only arm those who have prior military/law enforcement background who are willing to take on the additional task of coming to the aid of our children when danger comes their way.

(3)   We need to hold our mental health professionals more accountable to identifying, diagnosing, and treating those mentally ill subjects in our communities. Turning them loose and hoping for the best isn’t a solution that we as a community are willing to accept.

(4)   Finally, (and this one is sure to stir up some heat), we register our sex offenders, why not register the mentally ill—those who have been diagnosed? In some circles the sexual predator is considered to be one facet of many with a mental problem. Registration wouldn’t necessarily need to be public information. But with law enforcement agencies knowing ahead of time who the problem people could potentially be how hard would it be to monitor their online activity to get a head start on any potential threats intended to be carried out?

(5)   More Mobile Crisis Teams. Our agency has one. It’s a team of trained police officers who solely deal with the mentally ill in our communities. Through this unit officers have become acquainted with mental health professionals and have developed a close working relationship that enables them to better understand the conflict within that the mental subject is experiencing. In turn, officers better address the issues at hand and get the subject help when needed.

These suggestions by no means are intended to be guaranteed measures for every potential threat that the sadistic individual can dream up. It’s virtually impossible for police officers or trained professionals to have a countermeasure for every possible threat.

I wanted to throw some of these ideas around out there to give those of you who are not in the law enforcement community a better perspective of the realities we are facing today. The end goal is to keep our kids safe and to give them a better chance at life than we had growing up.

Until then, I promise to keep a vigilant watch and attentive ear to the radio should a cry for help come from a nearby school, I would have the courage to race into the building and confront the monster as my fellow officers did in Newtown, Connecticut.

— 
Ken Lang is a former homicide detective and an award-winning author of several true crime books, including Walking Among the Dead, Standing In Death’s Shadow, and Death Comes Uninvited. In 2011, he was named one of 50 Great Writers You Should Be Reading by The Author’s Show. New York Times bestselling author Julia Spencer Fleming says, “Ken Lang is the real deal—a cop with chops!”

Ken resides in North East, Maryland with his wife and three children. To learn more about his true crime books and upcoming crime novels visit his website at www.kenlangstudios.com.