LEOs/Investigators, how is this possible?

truckemup97

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Messages
3,318
Reaction score
559
Location
Indian Territory
Weleetka murder weapon sought | www.krmg.com

In the above article, you will see that the OSBI knows not only the make and model of the weapon used, but they know the serial number, too. How do they know that if they don't have the weapon? I don't believe most of what I see on CSI, but is there some way to match a fired bullet or casing to, what? Is there a database now that some states require a fired casing?

My only other thought was that someone found the gun in a ditch somewhere, picked it up, took it to the gun show and sold it before they realized it was a murder weapon. They then would have called the OSBI and given them the serial number and where they sold it. That sounds kind of far-fetched to me. The guy who picks up a gun out of a ditch and doesn't call LE isn't really the kind of guy who records a S/N before he sells a gun.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?
 
Register to hide this ad
The last new gun I bought was a ruger .44 special. I was surprised to get a fired caseing with it. On checking I found that supposedly, some areas require that caseing when the gun is regestered. Maybe a case was found at the scene that matched? This was all new to me too.
 
It sounds like someone must've told them that was the specific weapon and evidence supports that conclusion.

Without specifics (which I do not want to know) we could come up with all kinds of ideas.

I'm sure CSI has very little if anything to do with it. Most of the time it comes down to burning shoe leather and talking to people. I don't watch CSI because it is a bunch of hokey bravo sierra.
 
I'm willing to bet that they have a suspect or suspects that have been interviewed and that is how the information was developed. As Palmetto Sharpshooter said, most investigations are solved through the application of shoe soles to pavement. The crime lab stuff is icing on the cake for the courtroom, and rarely will it be given more weight by a jury than witness testimony, especially eyewitness testimony. Even though eyewitness testimony is some of the most unreliable evidence you can have.
 
Even though eyewitness testimony is some of the most unreliable evidence you can have.

I'll second that. Long, long ago when I worked at a retail electronics store right after high school I was held up at gunpoint. After it was over I could give a general description (height, build, ethnicity) but couldn't have picked him out of a lineup. Didn't remember his face at all. He was 2 feet away from me across the sales counter and the gun was about 6 inches from my chest. It was like a line on TV or the movies - all I saw was the gun.
 
+ 1 to all of the above.....
When my department bought G's(really difficult for me to use that word) several years ago, each pistol came with a fired case in it's box to be removed at time of issue and saved for possible forensic use if need be...
My guess would be they were able to ID the pistol from a fired case recovered at the scene...
 
Last edited:
you didn't hear??? Glock started "micro-printing" the serial number of the gun on the end of the striker, so that every fired shell has a microscopic print of the serial number on it.
 
As far as I remember, only 2 states require(d) the spent case for the gun to be registered. New York and Maryland if I remember correctly.
I think Maryland has since recognized the stupidity of trying to keep up that database and have stopped the requirement.

Either way, far as I know there isn't a documented account of any investigation being assisted by the fired case data bases.

Before the question is asked, for those guns not supplied with an expended case they had to be take to a police department. The officers would fire the gun, save and record the case and other info required.
 
A lot was left out of the article. But it sounds to me, that they have a suspect, and know he bought that gun (hense, the serial number). So now they want the gun and owner to come forward. (new owner not involved in shooting). Now with that information they could determine if in fact it was the gun used in the crime, and if the new owner can say he got the gun from the suspect "AFTER" the crime.

That would tell the cops if it was the gun and if the suspect had the gun at the time of the crime. They probably know the suspect bought the gun and he sold the gun, but when.

In reality it tells us more about poor reporting then police work.

Its called Real Police Work. (ground work) which is used in solving more crimes the all the TV CSI stuff out there.

I was a certified UCSI Instructor (Uniform CSI Instructor) and I can tell you the TV CSI shows and real world police work is af far a part as you can get.

If you want a realistic cop show, watch "Barney Miller"
 
My guess would be they have a suspect..and an informant...and went to the gunstore he bought the gun from..and got the serial number from the FFL dealer's records. Would be my guess anyhow.
 
If you want a realistic cop show, watch "Barney Miller"

Barney Miller, probably the most realistic Police themed show ever on television. If you have never been "In Harness" in a moderate to large department you wouldn't understand.
 
Barney Miller, probably the most realistic Police themed show ever on television. If you have never been "In Harness" in a moderate to large department you wouldn't understand.


Barney Miller is quintessential NYPD.
 
I would also like to know how they came up with this information.

The barrels on a Glock is made in such a way that determining which gun fired which round is almost impossible.
 
I'll second that. Long, long ago when I worked at a retail electronics store right after high school I was held up at gunpoint. After it was over I could give a general description (height, build, ethnicity) but couldn't have picked him out of a lineup. Didn't remember his face at all. He was 2 feet away from me across the sales counter and the gun was about 6 inches from my chest. It was like a line on TV or the movies - all I saw was the gun.
Agree totally. Was in court when a fight broke out. I carefully studied the three indivisuals because I knew I would be a witness. And you know what? To my horror I realized that I could not with certainty identify them if they had changed their clothes :eek: All I remembered was what they were wearing! THAT was a sobering experience to say the least!!
 
Agree totally. Was in court when a fight broke out. I carefully studied the three indivisuals because I knew I would be a witness. And you know what? To my horror I realized that I could not with certainty identify them if they had changed their clothes :eek: All I remembered was what they were wearing! THAT was a sobering experience to say the least!!

You did better than a lot of people.

An eye opening experience for academy students, is when one of the TO's would walk in, fire a cap gun at another TO, and then walk out of the room. The TO still there would say, "I've just been murdered. Without talking to anyone, write down the suspect's description."

The variance in descriptions of height, weight, facial hair, shirt color, and even race, among the students reports, was always amusing. 3 minutes after the incident, many/most of them got it wrong.

Being observant, especially under stress, is a skill that doesn't come naturally for most. You have to force yourself to notice and remember things, even when you're worried about getting shot.
 
forensic evidence is what detectives use to test they're hypothesis in an investigation. it either supports or fails to support what you uncover with your feet, eyes and mouth! Even then it may lead you astray.

when i was in Army MP school in 1980 i sat through a class where an instructor gave us some basic observational tips and formula, then laughed at us and said we were now documented as "trained observers"! BTW, this took less than 30 minutes.
 
Back
Top