Samantha Benovitz

ISM
Walters
9/12/2018

Research Assessment 2

MLA Citation:

Lambert, Eric G., et al. “Differences in Forensic Science Views and Needs of Law Enforcement:
A Survey of Michigan Law Enforcement Agencies.” Police Practice and Research, vol. 8,
no. 5, 2007, pp. 415–430., doi:10.1080/15614260701764280.

Before forensic science was developed, crime cases were solved through eye witness

accounts, confessions, and key suspects being found with condemning evidence from the case.

But even now that forensics has grown into a major and necessary science field, is it being

utilized to its full potential and is it appreciated by law enforcement? This question is answered

through the surveys of Michigan Law Enforcement Agencies, conducted by Eric G. Lambert, in

“Differences in Forensic Science Views and Needs of Law Enforcement”. Fortunately, given the

results of Lambert’s research, the majority of the 140 law enforcement agencies surveyed agreed

that forensic science was either important or very important in solving crime cases. Concurrently,

most of these agencies felt that it was important for their applicants to have some forensic

knowledge and to attend forensic technique classes once hired. Overall, the conclusion of this

study was that forensic science is very prevalent in law enforcement agencies in the aiding of

crime solving.

To my surprise, before this survey was conducted, little research had been done to evaluate the

value of forensic science in law enforcement and how law enforcement viewed the importance of

forensic science. The analysis of this topic, prior to Lambert’s findings, stated that the “true value

of forensic evidence” was “underutilized” because of the “limited forensic awareness and
knowledge” of many law enforcement officers and agencies. This report made me very anxious

to continue reading the article, because I definitely did not want this to be the current stance on

forensic science. Thankfully, the results of this survey contradicted the preceding research. In

fact, even the small rural sheriff’s offices and departments felt that forensic science was of great

worth.

In reading this article, I solidified the fact that I would like to work for a large law

enforcement agency in a highly urbanized area. This is because it was discovered that most large

urban departments had their own forensics labs, due to more frequent violent crimes, while rural

areas tended to ship evidence to state labs. Because my ideal career title is Forensic Science

Technician, I will want to work in labs that are a part of a police station, so that I can be sworn in

as an officer and be a part of, not just testing evidence, but collecting it. Also, as noted before,

urban areas have higher violent crime rates, which means there is an even greater use for forensic

scientists. Lastly, urban law enforcement departments depended more heavily on forensic

evidence than those in rural areas, making the case to work in the city even more beneficial.

Although this study was very concise and informative, I would like to delve even further into

this topic. Rather than just law enforcement agencies in Michigan, I would like to know about

agencies all across the United States because it would provide a greater perspective. I would also

like to learn more about urban police departments and their use of forensics in general, as this is

of more interest to me than anything suburban or rural. This information would allow me to gain

more insight into the logistics of the career path I would ideally follow, as well.

In essence, the data provided by Lambert’s study of the relevancy of forensic science in law

enforcement agencies provided an abundance of guidance I previously did not have. I now am

able to say that I absolutely want to be employed in an urban community. I also know, with a
surety, that forensic science is an appreciated art. After examining this article, I am very excited

and motivated to further explore forensic science in order to expand my capacity of the topic.