How to use this Page

Did you know with a few simple, inexpensive materials and some creativity you can create your own forensics lab for early elementary kiddos? You can! I lead a STEAM focused program at my library for first, second and third graders entitled Imagination Lab. The idea is that for four weeks in the fall, and again in the winter, we meet up after school to explore a variety of concepts that fit under the broad umbrella of STEAM. We experiment, sometimes I demonstrate, and we always create something to take home. In the past few weeks we have explored the science behind sound, polymers, and color, but my favorite topic may just have been forensics!

Inspired by the awesome Mad Scientists Club CSI program, I crafted my own 45-minute program for first through third grade patrons. I think this is a great program that can be easily modified for older children and held without breaking the budget purchasing special science equipment. The most fancy items you’ll need are magnifying glasses.

First, start off discussing what the word “forensics” means and what sorts of evidence might be helpful at a crime scene. Since my program was for early elementary school students, and I mostly have first graders in my group, we kept our discussion of crime scenes to stolen cookies, missing stuffed animals and library robberies.

Once you think everyone has a good basic understanding of the topic, you’ll want to get into the really fun part which is hands-on experimenting! Be sure to share some cool facts about fingerprints and using fingerprints to solve crimes before you start. You can find more neat facts in the great book Crazy for Science with Carmelo the Science Fellow by Carmelo Piazza . I have used this title for many program ideas, including our fingerprinting experiments. Check it out if you have it in your collection! Each chapter introduces a different branch of science and all the experiments are linked to science curriculum requirements for grades K through 3.

Below you can see some of the details from the program so you can easily replicate this at your library!

Fingerprinting detective supplies. Image from author.

Examine Your Fingerprints

Materials:

• Pencils
• Clear tape ( I used book tape)
• White paper (copier paper works fine)
• Fingerprint pattern cards (You can find many images of typical fingerprint patterns online. I printed out the images on cardstock and distributed a card to each child.)
• Mini-magnifying glasses

1. Color a small square (about 4 inches) onto the white paper with a pencil.
2. Press the top part of your index finger onto the pencil square, rolling it back and forth several times. You should have a very dirty finger!
3. Press the clear tape firmly onto the dirty finger.
4. Slowly pull the tape off the index finger and press it onto a clean sheet of white paper. The fingerprint should now be visible on the paper!
5. Look at the details of the fingerprint with a magnifying glass. Try to identify what pattern each individual fingerprint is using the fingerprint pattern cards.
6. Try this process with other fingers and compare patterns with your index finger as well as neighbor’s fingerprints.

Lifting Fingerprints 

Fingerprints! Image from author.

Materials:

• Small paintbrush
• Corn starch (I measured a couple tablespoons into small plastic cups for each table to share.)
• Clear tape ( I used book tape)
• Dark black paper (construction paper or cardstock)
• Paper plate (ideally coated paper plates, not just the regular white kind) 

1. Rub the fingerprint part of your index finger down the side of your nose or in your hair/ scalp to get your finger dirty. (Gross, I know. But it works.)
2. Press your oily finger against the center of the plate.
3. Dip the paintbrush into the corn starch. You don’t need a lot! So be sure to shake off the extra powder before removing from the cornstarch.
4. Use the brush to lightly “paint” the powder over the center of the plate where the fingerprint should be. The powder should stick to the oily fingerprint. Be sure to not press too hard or you will smear the fingerprint! This might take a couple tries to get right.
5. “Lift” the fingerprint from the plate by placing a piece of tape firmly against the fingerprint. Then slowly and carefully peel the tape up.
6. Place the sticky side down on the black paper.
7. You should see the fingerprint on the paper!
8. Take it farther and see if you can lift fingerprints off of nearby counter tops or door handles!

Mystery powder identification. Photo from author.

After our fingerprinting, we identified a “mystery powder” (aka powdered sugar) by observing chemical reactions. The kids loved it! I used instructions from Quirkles.com that you can find and follow yourself here. If you have time you can also create some fingerprint artwork using washable ink pads and markers, but my little detectives had so much fun we ran out of time! The kids were so excited to be able to take their fingerprints and fingerprint pattern cards home to share what they learned.

There are so many more fun ideas for forensic experiments and extension activities out there- this is just the tip of the iceberg. I’d like to do this program again but set up a mock crime scene involving a stuffed pigeon, caution tape, and stolen cookies. Happy investigating fellow librarians!

The post Fingerprints and Forensics with First-graders appeared first on ALSC Blog.

"Why, hello," said Mrs. Whitmore, opening her door.
     The young faces looked so different up close, she thought, and it seemed that the boy was more then (sic) merely anxious.  He was searching her face so intently that she averted her eyes.
     "Welcome," she said, stepping aside. "Do come in."
     The untied sneakers, the shuffling way they walked, the shifting eyes; like no one had taught these children the proper way to carry themselves.
     "I made some cakes," Mrs. Whitmore said abruptly.
"Pudding cakes.  Would you like some?"
     She disappeared into the kitchen and overheard the boy whisper, "It's the left one.  See how it bulges a little?"
     "No more than your big bug-eyes right now," the girl replied. "Jimmy's pulling your chain. He's got no idea."
     Jimmy?
     "Ruby," the boy said, "Why do you think they call him the Minister of Information if -- Oh, hello."
     Mrs. Whitmore marched back in with a tray from the kitchen and nearly dropped it on the coffee table in front of the couch. A piece of cake, and the boy -- Tex, was it? made to lunge for it and then recoiled, glancing oddly at her face and turning away, moving back toward the window.
    "This is real nice," he said in an alto voice that surprised her. "You can see all the way past DeWitt through here."
     "Yes, it's quite a view," Mrs. Whitmore said.
   &nbs

0 Comments on Poison Most Vial - a review as of 1/1/1900

Add a Comment

David Canter is Professor of Psychology at the University of Hudderfield. Widely known for developing systemic offender profiling in Britain and creating the emerging field of Investigative Psychology, he also provides evidence to government enquiries and major court cases. His new book is Forensic Psychology: A Very Short Introduction, and in the short excerpt below he looks at what a ‘psychopath’ really is.

There are many individuals who commit crimes who understand perfectly what they do and its illegality but who have no obvious mental problems. They are lucid and coherent with no signs of any learning disability or psychotic symptoms. Some of them can be superficially charming and are intelligent enough to be very plausible on first acquaintance. They do not hear voices or think that they are commanded by forces beyond their power to commit crimes. Yet, over and over again, they abuse people, lie without any compunction or remorse, can be unpredictably violent, and seem unable to relate effectively to others over any extended period. Various forms of criminality are almost inevitably an aspect of the lifestyles of these individuals. In the jargon of mental health professionals, such people may be given a diagnosis that implies that their ‘personality’ is somehow disordered.

In psychiatric medicalization of human activity, a whole set of ‘personality disorders’ has been identified that attempts to distinguish different ways in which individuals may have difficulty in relating to others. The one that has found its way into popular discourse is ‘psychopathic disorder’. There are complications here because the term ‘psychopathic disorder’ is not a medical diagnosis but a legal term under English and Welsh law that refers to a ‘persistent disorder or disability of the mind’, not that far removed from the McNaughton rule that first emerged over a century and a half ago. Thus there is some debate as to which of the psychiatric diagnoses of personality disorder are closest to the legal definition of ‘psychopathic disorder’, and whether any of them relates to the popular conception of a psychopath.

The Hollywood portrayal of the psychopath is someone who is inevitably a merciless serial killer, often some sort of cross between Dracula and Frankenstein’s monster. Silent films from the 1920s such as The Cabinet of Dr Caligari to the more recent Kalifornia, or No Country for Old Men, never really provide any psychological insights into the actions of the monsters who are the anti-heroes of their dramas. They are presented as pure evil. The rather more psychologically interesting films such as Psycho or The Boston Strangler provide pseudo-Freudian explanations for the nastiness of their villains, but still present them as rather alien individuals who can appear unthreatening but deep down are malevolent.

Until you have met someone whom you know has committed horrific violent crimes but can be charming and helpful, it is difficult to believe in the Hollywood stereotype of the psychopath. Without doubt, there are people who can seem pleasant and plausible in one situation but can quickly turn to viciousness. There are also people who just never connect with others and are constantly, from an early age, at war with those with whom they come into contact. If we need a label for these people, we can distinguish them as type 1 and type 2 psychopaths. The former have superficial charm, are pathological liars, being callous and manipulative. The clearest fictional example of this sort of psychopath is Tom Ripley, who has the central role in

An exciting new website is RomanceUniversity.org. Billed as a place where friends are made and dreams are realized, it is proving to be the place to go for not only romance writers, but writers in general, and readers of all genres. Check it out. There is something for everyone.

One of the entries pays tribute to Kate Duffy, long time acquisition editor of romantic literature. While her last stop was with Kensington, her involvement with the romance genre is a pedigree many aspire to attain. Please take a moment to read.

Back at the ranch - er - the Windy City RWA ranch that is, our guest speaker this week is Joe Welk and his topic is Forensic DNA Analysis. Whether you're a CSI junkie or just fascinated by all things forensic, this talk is for you. He is quite impressive. Go to http://www.windycityrwa.org/ for more info. I'm the program coordinator for our group and I'm always excited when I find a Subject Matter Expert (SME) such as Joe who can present a hard-to-understand topic in a way that let's the rest of us in.

Reports continue to emerge from Publishers Weekly regarding the various regional results of the book industry. Go to http://www.publishersweekly.com/ and search on great lakes for one of the regional reports.

In the midst of so many writers conferences folding, we at Love Is Murder want to entice everyone out there to stay tuned to our annoucements regarding our 2011 Annual Love Is Murder Con held the first weekend in February 2011. Our website will be updated soon with all the exciting new details.

Also, I'm spearheading a new adventure called Writers in Support of Heroes. The idea is to honor all our heroes in society. The group description is as follows:

"A group of writers, whether published or not, who support all kinds of heroes including the brave members of our armed forces to those on the front lines in hospitals, fire stations, police departments, schools, and so much more. Our support ranges from donating books, supporting literacy efforts, and helping those who face danger and difficult challenges to explore their experiences through the power of telling their story."

Please go to http://www.meetup.com/ and signup if you aren't a member already and join me in celebrating and raising money for all our heroes.

Take care and have a happy writing/reading day, and remember the power of your story is just plain powerful!

It has been argued that television shows that deal with crime and forensic science; shows like CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, or CSI: Miami etc. give food for thought to criminals or wannabe criminals. There is of course a degree of truth in this. But television programmes and movies about crimes, detectives and police investigations have been around for ever. Let alone the books, magazines and articles about the subject. Classic figures like Sherlock Holmes and Hercules Poirot may seem out of date, but they would give an insight to police investigations at their time.

But another affect of these programmes, was the exponential increase of forensic science degrees offered by universities around the world. Recently it was stated by a Scottish university academic, that before CSI, they could hardly have enough students in chemistry or biology to keep the course running. Add the word forensics in the title of the degree, and the next day your course is overbooked.

British universities (that is where my experience derives from, although I assume that the same goes for USA and other countries) now offer Bachelors and Masters in any possible discipline that can have the word “forensics” fit in its title. Biology and forensics, Chemistry and forensics, forensic accounting, forensic engineering, computer forensics, forensic informatics, forensic linguistics, forensic archaeology … you name it. There is a forensic title for ..everything.

The question occured to me during my studies, when during a career orientation class, I suggested that if not all of us find a job with law enforcement or the government upon our graduation, we might as well become the “perfect criminals”. The answer of one of the participating professors surprised me. He said that they do not joke about it, as they believed it was a matter of time to see one of their graduates arrested by Interpol at the 8 o’clock news. Another added that if the student was a good one, he would not get arrested in the first place. And then I realised that studying forensics, the first thing you must do is to start thinking like criminal.

In our course we had a lot of theory and labs in identifying fingerprints, blood, other bodily fluids, examine papers and tool-marks, footwear prints and blood stains. We learned what the police protocols are in a crime scene. We even had a large scale crime scene exercise to practice our new skills. During our theory and practical labs, we also learned what you need to clean a crime scene from blood, how not to leave DNA evidence and how to break a window without having any glass traces on our clothes.

In the rest of the course, in computer forensics, we learned how we can avoid leaving digital evidence, destroy traces of our activities and make sure we are not identified.

In a sense, we were trained to become the perfect “crime mind”. We know the police protocols, and we even know how to plant evidence or even how to make things “look like an accident”!!!

Sounds funny when we discuss it with friends, but it is not a funny story at all. This means that people with the right skills can pull off more careful plans and execute them with scientific precision, leaving the law enforcement trying to put the pieces together with a very little probability of success.

On the other hand of course, a forensic scientist can understand the risks of certain illegal activities, and this understanding can keep him/her away from trouble.

What can be done, is a rather philosophical question. You can not stop offering forensics courses in the universities, and you can not make it a secretive in-house thing for the police. The industry will collapse and the research will simply cease to exist.

A few years ago, in Athens, the terrorist group “17 November” was dismantled, after one of its members was injured trying to place a bomb. The group were the “untouchables” of European terrorism for more than 25 years. The Greek police was helped by the FBI, Scotland Yard and even the MI5 (according to some sources), but they managed to do absolutely nothing for a quarter of a century. It turned out that the group consisted of very few individuals, highly trained and very well educated; one of the head figures being an academic.  It is this kind of hi-tech crime that forensic scientists can be involved in.

The issue needs to be addressed, but only at an academic level at this stage.

Education can not be controlled and barred to certain people, in our society. There may be safety measures as to who gets access to crime related education, but then again a lot of other disciplines will have to start imposing restrictions. It is also almost senseless to check criminal records, as an 18 year olds student is not likely to have any criminal record, or in some cases some cautions for being drunk or breaking the peace.

There is no proof that forensic scientists become “Godfathers”, but the truth remains that they can, if they wish. A new breed of hi-tech criminals that would be faster, smarter and more up-to-date then their police counterparts, can be a scary prospect for the future.

But this is just the theory. There are black sheep in every family … so there are bound to be some bad ones in forensics. But truth be told, most of us have a good sense of justice, and are getting satisfaction by contributing to the fight against crime.

As for the law enforcement agencies, it is their responsibility to train their people, update their procedures, hire “new blood” with new ideas and modern training, and keep one step ahead from the criminals.

In my ever-obsessive need to stake my claim as a Native Daughter of the lovely borough other writers now think they discovered circa 1985, I post this hip, hot essay from author Colson Whitehead as originally read in this Sunday's New York Times Book Review section:
I WRITE IN BROOKLYN. GET OVER IT. (his title, not mine)

I started reading Colson's novel JOHN HENRY DAYS and I can't remember why I put it down. It was during Springsteen's Seeger Sessions tour and I was big on learning more about the iconic John Henry, the Steel Driving legendary hero.
(I think I stopped reading more due to my Springsteen show schedule and less because of the quality of the writing. I remember the reviews. They liked it.)

statue of John Henry

In case the memo has not reached your desk yet: Brooklyn has always been cool and kind to writers. I should know. Stamping foot, pouting lips. I was there before you. So get over it. ;>

pretty little map of Brooklyn; double click to enlarge for a better view

My cordless mouse is dying so I am about to melt into the ether, like the Wicked Witch of the West. Foiled by technology. And I have no idea where the replacement batteries are. What kind of modern convenience is this?

I so wanted to write about the biography I just bought from Amazon. I could not find it in the stores. I can't wait to crack it open and fall in: it's the biography of Betty Smith, author of one of my favorite books... wait for it... A TREE GROWS IN BROOKLYN. (Click link to browse its glorious, Brooklyn-authentic pages.) Better yet, because I don't want you to leave here without a gift, Browse Inside here (and don't say another disparaging word about Brookly bum-types again): ;}

Browse Inside this book Get this for your site