Media Conflict with Forensic Post-Blast Investigations

Since the Boston bombings, I have received several emails from previous students who are asking me to better explain the IEDs that were used in the Boston Marathon. Without going into to much technical detail on construction, I have found this diagram that has been widely circulated internationally throughout news outlets (hence why I am reposting it for demonstrative purposes without any ethical qualms). It should be noted that any speculation at the early stages of a forensic investigation should not lead to a confirmed conclusion until any crime scene/ case is cleared. As such, this blog post is about how the media can damage a major crime scene investigation at a blast site.

It should be noted that this type of device has already been used in the 2005 Delhl's Sarojini Nagar Market bombing, the 2006 Mumbai train bombings, the failed 2010 Stockholm bombing attempt, and the failed 2010 New York Times Square bombing attempt, so it's construction is not a new one. 

Now onto my main part of this post, how the media conflicts with forensic investigations. Since this incident this diagram has been widely circulated along with a brief incorrect history over the construction of the device. Several media outlets have eluded readers that the device construction has a long history in the Middle East indirectly implying that the suspect(s) may be from the same region. I have even seen media photos before the detonation of "possible suspects" at the scene who are of potential Islamic descent without giving any explanation of why they are "suspects". This adds fuel to the anti-Islamic biases that some Americans and Brits possess, and indirectly diverts attention away from any other possible non-Islamic suspect(s) which may or may not impact the actual investigation. As previously mentioned the construction of the device has a deeper history and connection to other parts of the world than the media is exploring. Further, the media appears to be releasing crime scene photos of victims and additional diagrams and photos of the epic center of both detonations without any regard to the on-gong investigation. Based on my detective experience, I can tell you that the releasing of too much information by the media can destroy an investigation, arrest, trial, and even people's lives. A perfect example of this was the handling of the Atlanta Olympic bombing investigation. 

Richard Jewell was a security guard working the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. During his security detail he discovered a pipe bomb and alerted Atlanta Police and helped evacuate the area--saving lives before it detonated. Because he discovered the device and had an eccentric history of wanting to be a hero and police officer the media began trying him without any actual forensic evidence, and with unreliable and inaccurate information. The media trial began with the local paper releasing his name as a possible suspect in the FBI investigation, from there the media snowball spun out of control. As a result of the media two victims even civilly sued Jewell himself before the investigation was completed. In 2005, Jewell was exonerated and the investigation was closed, disclosing that serial bomber Eric Rudolph was responsible for the incident. Jewell then successfully sued NBC, A.J.C. (local newspaper), CNN, New York Post, etc. after he and his family were cruelly and publicly tried by the media. Jewell eventually was able to full-fill his law enforcement dream after his exoneration, but he died at the age of 44 from heart disease and diabetes. One has to wonder how much his international media attention damaged his overall health.

Media speculation will naturally be at an all time high in an incident like this in America and other parts of the Western world, but for some odd reason similar incidents like this occur everyday in other parts of the Eastern world without any media attention at all. On a personal note, I have a hard time understanding how the media holds American lives more highly than others who are victims of other terrorists type events that occur in much larger scale and with worst destruction in other parts of the world (this topic is for another blog post, and due to space constrains will be properly addressed later). As such, I would like to encourage the media to respect the integrity of the crime scene without falsely reporting or referencing possible bomber M.O. (modus operandi) and allow the professionals to do a fair and accurate forensic investigation. Do we really need to know every detail leading to an arrest? With the release of abundant information, once an arrest is made how will this effect jurors in a criminal trial? Bombing investigations can take up to several weeks and it is a slow methodological process to collect and analysis forensic evidence at a crime scene. As such, we need to be patient and not prematurely point bias fingers at any suspect(s) until the guilty party is found.