Body Recovery After the “First 48”: Implications for Sexual Homicide Investigations
| Author | Kylie Reale,Eric Beauregard |
| Date | 01 May 2019 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1088767918795209 |
| Published date | 01 May 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2018
Article
Homicide Studies
2019, Vol. 23(2) 126 –144
Body Recovery After the
© 2018 SAGE Publications
Article reuse guidelines:
“First 48”: Implications
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/1088767918795209
DOI: 10.1177/1088767918795209
journals.sagepub.com/home/hsx
for Sexual Homicide
Investigations
Kylie Reale1 and Eric Beauregard1
Abstract
There is a lack of research examining the relationship between body recovery
times and the “first 48,” despite the risk of forensic evidence deteriorating and the
difficulty in forming leads without a body. The study explores factors influencing
body recovery—both during and after the critical 48-hr investigative window—in
sexual homicide cases. Offender characteristics, victimology, contact scene and
body recovery locations, and forensic awareness strategies are used to predict body
recovery after the “first 48.” Findings suggest that certain offenders can delay body
recovery past the first 48 because they utilized detection avoidance strategies during
the crime-commission process.
Keywords
first 48, sexual homicide, body recovery, forensic awareness
Homicide investigations take an immense amount of time, man power, and police
resources, which means that critical steps need to be taken in the early part of the inves-
tigation to formulate leads (Sewell, 1994). Consequently, law enforcement training has
always suggested that the “first 48 hours” is the most important time period for the
successful conclusion of a homicide investigation (Carter, 2013; Sewell, 1994), as the
loss of vital information and evidence accelerates after this time frame (Dean, Fahsing,
Glomseth, & Gottschalk, 2008). More recently, the emphasis on this time period has
been popularized by television shows such as The First 48, which document the first 48
1Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
Corresponding Author:
Eric Beauregard, Professor, School of Criminology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive,
Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, Canada.
Email: ebeaureg@sfu.ca
Reale and Beauregard
127
hrs of a homicide or missing person’s investigation, and build the show around the
premise that solvability decreases drastically if leads are not developed in this time
frame (Dibiase, 2015). Despite its colloquial usage, this adage is rooted in the estab-
lished finding that the more time that elapses from the initial investigation, the higher
the likelihood that the case will remain unsolved (Addington, 2007; Dean et al., 2008;
R. D. Keppel & Weis, 1994; Pastia, Davies, & Wu, 2017; Regoeczi, Jarvis, & Riedel,
2008). The basis for emphasizing the first 48 hrs is because this time frame includes the
most vital tasks in a successful homicide investigation, namely, managing the crime
scene, focusing on a suspect, and following leads (Carter, 2013). By the time investiga-
tors have reached the third task, there is usually a clear understanding of the facts and
evidence, as well as the identification of a possible suspect.
Although the first 48 hrs have not been a specific focus of empirical research, time
has been identified as a crucial factor in homicide clearance (Geberth, 1996; R. D.
Keppel & Weis, 1994; Regoeczi et al., 2008). For instance, Regoeczi et al. (2008)
emphasize the importance of how long it takes investigators to clear a homicide, espe-
cially considering that public support is likely to decrease the longer an investigation
takes. However, most studies neglect any consideration of offender characteristics or
strategies used by the offender in efforts to avoid detection, despite research indicating
that certain offenders will use strategies at the crime scene, such as moving the victim’s
body in efforts to delay body recovery and slow down the investigation (Beauregard &
Field, 2008; Fox & Levin, 1994; K. D. Rossmo, 2000). This is concerning as homicide
clearance rates in both Canada and the United States indicate that approximately 25%
to 30% of homicides go unsolved (Cotter, 2014; Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2017).
This is down considerably from the 1970s, despite decreases in the overall number of
homicides (Pastia et al., 2017; Riedel & Jarvis, 1998). To understand this phenomenon,
researchers tend to focus on victim (e.g., race, gender, age; Addington, 2006) or offense
characteristics (e.g., weapon involvement, crime scene locations; e.g., Litwin & Xu,
2007; Mouzos & Muller, 2001; Regoeczi et al., 2008), without accounting for the time
it takes to recover the victim’s body. Yet, one of the most crucial aspects of a police
investigation, especially in the first 48 hrs, is finding the victim’s body to determine that
there has in fact been a homicide (Beauregard & Martineau, 2014b). Being able to
recover a victim’s body has long been considered integral to identify foul play in a
missing person’s case and to solve a homicide, in general. Once a suspected homicide
is established, then investigators can move through the critical steps of the first 48 hrs
to formulate leads before evidence is compromised (Carter, 2013). To address this
knowledge gap, the current study will focus on factors that influence body recovery
time—both during and after the critical 48-hr investigative window—by examining
solved cases of sexual homicide offences in Canada.
Literature Review
Emphasis on the First 48 Hrs
The notion of the first 48 hrs as a critical time period is supported by Canadian homi-
cide clearance rates. For instance, clearance rates in Canada indicate that in about half
128
Homicide Studies 23(2)
of solved homicides, a suspect is apprehended within the first 48 hrs and up to 70% are
apprehended within the first week (Cotter, 2014). As to why, research on homicide
clearance rates indicate that some cases are solved quickly because they require little
investigative effort; this is typically due to circumstances that allow for quick appre-
hension of the suspect, such as catching the offender at the crime scene, eyewitness
identification of a known suspect, or the offender turning himself in (Beauregard &
Martineau, 2014a). Certain offense characteristics may also lead to a quick closure, for
instance, in cases of domestic homicide where the offender and victim are related
(Riedel & Jarvis, 1998; Roberts, 2007) and the offense occurred in the home (Jiao,
2007).
Conversely, some cases take considerably longer to close. These cases can pose
significant challenges to police investigations as they may involve multiple crime
scene locations, especially if they are carried across different police jurisdictions
(Dibiase, 2015). For instance, some offenders are aware of the challenges this poses to
investigations and use this as a deliberate strategy to delay the investigation (Lepard,
Demers, Langan, & Rossmo, 2015). Furthermore, when a person is missing, even if
murder is suspected, the absence of a body poses unique challenges to investigators,
especially during the first 48 hrs. In fact, Skinner and Lazneby (1983) suggest that
body recovery will determine the ease and reliability with which a case is solved as the
remains may constitute the only physical evidence contributing to the successful
apprehension and conviction of the person(s) responsible. Without a body, homicide
investigators may be unable to connect similar cases or reliably exclude potential sus-
pects (Lepard et al., 2015).
Furthermore, without a body and disposal site, investigators are limited in their abil-
ity to collect forensic evidence or secure crime scene locations before evidence deterio-
rates or is tampered with (Beauregard & Martineau, 2014b; Dibiase, 2015). The absence
of forensic evidence of crime scene locations can delay police confirming foul play,
which can comprise or slow down the investigation (Beauregard & Martineau, 2014b;
Lepard et al., 2015). Considering the victim’s body contains crucial forensic evidence,
the timeliness of recovery is essential. Not having a body often means there is no crime
scene, without either, forensic examiners are unable to collect key pieces of information
such as time of death, analyze wounds to match the weapon, or conduct DNA tests on
bodily fluids such as blood or semen. Furthermore, evidence of bite marks, blunt force
trauma, and even fingerprints are not likely present when a body has not yet been
located (Dibiase, 2015). As such, body recovery is an integral process of homicide
investigations, and arguably the most important piece of evidence (Brown, Keppel,
Weis, & Skeen, 2006; Dibiase, 2015; Skinner & Lazenby, 1983). Thus, the first 48 hrs
represents a critical phase of the investigation as the faster an investigator can gather
clues, the greater the chance of finding the victim’s body and apprehending a suspect.
Forensic Awareness
The absence of evidence, crime scenes, or a delay in the time it takes to recover a
victim’s body, can be related to specific strategies used by the offender to thwart
Reale and Beauregard
129
police investigations. More specifically, when used to describe an offender, the con-
cept of forensic awareness infers that some offenders will adapt their modus ope-
randi or take precautions, before, during, or post–crime commission to decrease
their chances of apprehension (Beauregard & Martineau, 2012). In criminological
research, forensic awareness refers to an offender’s knowledge or understanding of
the...
To continue reading
Request your trial