Investigation Procedures: Difference between revisions

From StarFleet Bureau of Information
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 56: Line 56:
The court-martial will also generally attribute a high probative value to physical exhibits. Physical evidence is highly valued because they are items the court-martial can see and examine to interpret the facts in issue for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Physical evidence can include just about anything, such as weapons, fingerprints, shoe prints, tire marks, tool impressions, hair, fiber, or body fluids. These kinds of physical exhibits of evidence can be examined and analyzed by experts who can provide the court-martial with expert opinions that connect the item of evidence to a person, place, or criminal event. This allows the court-martial to consider circumstantial connections of the accused to the crime scene or the accused to the victim.
The court-martial will also generally attribute a high probative value to physical exhibits. Physical evidence is highly valued because they are items the court-martial can see and examine to interpret the facts in issue for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Physical evidence can include just about anything, such as weapons, fingerprints, shoe prints, tire marks, tool impressions, hair, fiber, or body fluids. These kinds of physical exhibits of evidence can be examined and analyzed by experts who can provide the court-martial with expert opinions that connect the item of evidence to a person, place, or criminal event. This allows the court-martial to consider circumstantial connections of the accused to the crime scene or the accused to the victim.
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Relevant Evidence</h5>
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Relevant Evidence</h5>
Relevant evidence speaks to an issue before the court-martial in relation to the charge being heard. Relevant evidence includes both direct evidence and indirect circumstantial evidence. For either direct or indirect circumstantial evidence to be considered relevant to the court-martial, it must relate to the elements of the offense that need to be proven. If the evidence does not relate to proving the place, time, identity of the accused, or criminal acts within the offense itself, the evidence will not be considered relevant to the charge. The prosecution may present evidence in the form of a physical exhibit that the court-martial can see and examine to consider, or they may present evidence in the form of witness testimony, in which case the witness is telling the court-martial what they perceived within the limits of their senses.
Relevant evidence speaks to an issue before the court-martial in relation to the charge being heard. Relevant evidence includes both direct evidence and indirect circumstantial evidence. For either direct or indirect circumstantial evidence to be considered relevant to the court-martial, it must relate to the elements of the offense that need to be proven. If the evidence does not relate to proving the place, time, identity of the accused, or criminal acts within the offense itself, the evidence will not be considered relevant to the charge. The Trial Counsel(s) may present evidence in the form of a physical exhibit that the court-martial can see and examine to consider, or they may present evidence in the form of witness testimony, in which case the witness is telling the court-martial what they perceived within the limits of their senses.
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Direct Evidence</h5>
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Direct Evidence</h5>
Direct evidence is evidence that will prove the point in fact without interpretation of circumstances. It is any evidence that can show the court-martial that something occurred without the need for the judge to make inferences or assumptions to reach a conclusion. An eyewitness who saw the accused shoot a victim would be able to provide direct evidence. Similarly, a security camera showing the accused committing a crime or a statement of confession from the accused admitting to the crime could also be considered direct evidence. Direct evidence should not be confused with the concept of direct examination, which is the initial examination and questioning of a witness at trial by the party who called that witness. And, although each witness who provides evidence could, in theory, be providing direct testimony of their own knowledge and experiences, that evidence is often not direct evidence of the offense itself.
Direct evidence is evidence that will prove the point in fact without interpretation of circumstances. It is any evidence that can show the court-martial that something occurred without the need for the judge to make inferences or assumptions to reach a conclusion. An eyewitness who saw the accused shoot a victim would be able to provide direct evidence. Similarly, a security camera showing the accused committing a crime or a statement of confession from the accused admitting to the crime could also be considered direct evidence. Direct evidence should not be confused with the concept of direct examination, which is the initial examination and questioning of a witness at trial by the party who called that witness. And, although each witness who provides evidence could, in theory, be providing direct testimony of their own knowledge and experiences, that evidence is often not direct evidence of the offense itself.
Line 130: Line 130:
Hearsay evidence, as the name implies, is evidence that a witness has heard as a communication from another party. In addition to verbal communication, legal interpretations of the meaning of hearsay evidence also include other types of person-to-person communication, such as written statements or even gestures intended to convey a message. As defined by John Sopinka in his book, The Law of Evidence, hearsay is:
Hearsay evidence, as the name implies, is evidence that a witness has heard as a communication from another party. In addition to verbal communication, legal interpretations of the meaning of hearsay evidence also include other types of person-to-person communication, such as written statements or even gestures intended to convey a message. As defined by John Sopinka in his book, The Law of Evidence, hearsay is:


“Written or oral statements or communicative conduct made by persons otherwise than in testimony at the proceedings in which it is offered, are inadmissible if such statements or conduct are tendered either as proof of their truth or as proof of assertions implicit therein” (Sopinka, 1999, p. 173).
NEED CITATION


Hearsay evidence is generally considered to be inadmissible in court-martial at the trial of an accused person for several reasons; however, there are exceptions where the court-martial will consider accepting hearsay evidence. The reasons why hearsay is not openly accepted by the court-martial include the rationale that:
Hearsay evidence is generally considered to be inadmissible in court-martial at the trial of an accused person for several reasons; however, there are exceptions where the court-martial will consider accepting hearsay evidence. The reasons why hearsay is not openly accepted by the court-martial include the rationale that:


The court-martial generally applies the best-evidence rule to evidence being presented and the best evidence would come from the person who gives the firsthand account of events;
The court-martial generally applies the best-evidence rule to evidence being presented and the best evidence would come from the person who gives the firsthand account of events;
The original person who makes the communication that becomes hearsay, is not available to be put under oath and cross-examined by the defence;
The original person who makes the communication that becomes hearsay is not available to be put under oath and cross-examined by the defense;
In hearing the evidence, the court-martial does not have the opportunity to hear the communicator firsthand and assess their demeanour to gauge their credibility; and
In hearing the evidence, the court-martial does not have the opportunity to hear the communicator firsthand and assess their demeanor to gauge their credibility; and
The court-martial recognizes that communication that has been heard and is being repeated is subject to interpretation. Restatement of what was heard can deteriorate the content of the message.
The court-martial recognizes that communication that has been heard and is being repeated is subject to interpretation. Restatement of what was heard can deteriorate the content of the message.
The court-martial will consider accepting hearsay evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule in cases where:
The court-martial will consider accepting hearsay evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule in cases where:
Line 149: Line 149:


By consent of the person being searched
By consent of the person being searched
On authority of a search warrant under Section 487(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada
On the authority of a search warrant  
As part of a search incidental to the lawful arrest of a suspect
As part of a search incidental to the lawful arrest of a suspect
As part of a safety search incidental to the lawful detention of a suspect
As part of a safety search incidental to the lawful detention of a suspect
Line 155: Line 155:
It is important to note that when evidence is being presented to the court-martial, the SFSECIS Agent(s)will be held accountable to provide an explanation of the circumstances under which an item of evidence was searched for and seized. This may involve the SFSECIS Agent(s) articulating not only details of how they discovered the item, but also circumstances to illustrate the offence committed and their authority to arrest, detain, and/or enter a crime scene lawfully
It is important to note that when evidence is being presented to the court-martial, the SFSECIS Agent(s)will be held accountable to provide an explanation of the circumstances under which an item of evidence was searched for and seized. This may involve the SFSECIS Agent(s) articulating not only details of how they discovered the item, but also circumstances to illustrate the offence committed and their authority to arrest, detain, and/or enter a crime scene lawfully


With similar accountability, when a Section 487(1) Criminal Code warrant is issued, the SFSECIS are required in advance to swear an affidavit of facts articulating their reasonable grounds to believe that an offence has been committed and the evidence of that offence exists in the premises to be searched. This warrant and the affidavit of facts can be examined and challenged at the trial. As we proceed through this book we will discuss the process of developing the mental map that enables an SFSECIS Agent(s)to meet the challenge of seeing and articulating the issues of lawful authority to search and seize evidence.
With similar accountability, when a warrant is issued, SFSECIS Agents are required in advance to swear an affidavit of facts articulating their reasonable grounds to believe that an offense has been committed and the evidence of that offense exists in the premises to be searched. This warrant and the affidavit of facts can be examined and challenged at the trial.  
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Exclusion of Evidence by the court-martial</h5>
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Exclusion of Evidence by the court-martial</h5>
In hearing any case, the court-martial has the authority to either accept or exclude any piece of evidence being presented. An evaluation is applied to all evidence to determine if it will be admissible or excluded. The types of evidence that can be admitted or excluded range from the physical exhibits found at the crime scene, to the accounts of events provided by witnesses to a confession taken from a suspect. For SFSECIS Agent(s), it is important to understand that any piece of evidence could be challenged by the defence for exclusion. If challenged, the court-martial will decide if evidence should be excluded based on a number of rules and depending on the type of evidence being presented.
In hearing any case, the Military Judge(s) has the authority to either accept or exclude any piece of evidence being presented. An evaluation is applied to all evidence to determine if it will be admissible or excluded. The types of evidence that can be admitted or excluded range from the physical exhibits found at the crime scene, to the accounts of events provided by witnesses to a confession taken from a suspect. For SFSECIS Agent(s), it is important to understand that any piece of evidence could be challenged by the defense for exclusion. If challenged, the court-martial will decide if evidence should be excluded based on a number of rules and depending on the type of evidence being presented.


In the case of witness evidence, the court-martial will first consider if the witness is competent and compellable to give evidence. A competent witness is generally a compellable witness (R v Schell, 2004). Competent means legally qualified to testify, and compellable means legally permitted to testify. Witness competence and compellability are each decided based upon several factors that will be discussed later in the witness management portion of this book.
In the case of witness evidence, the Military Judge(s) will first consider if the witness is competent and compellable to give evidence. A competent witness is generally a compellable witness. Competent means legally qualified to testify, and compellable means legally permitted to testify.  


If a witness is found to be both competent and compellable, the court-martial will hear their testimony and will then consider the value of the evidence provided after assessing the credibility of the witness. If a witness is found to be either not competent or not compellable, their evidence will be excluded at trial.
If a witness is found to be both competent and compellable, the Military Judge(s) will allow their testimony and will then consider the value of the evidence provided after assessing the credibility of the witness. If a witness is found to be either not competent or not compellable, their evidence will be excluded at trial.


Like witness evidence, physical evidence is also evaluated by the court-martial to determine its admissibility at trial based upon a number of factors. These factors will be discussed further in our chapter on crime scene management; however, they include:
Like witness evidence, physical evidence is also evaluated by the Military Judge(s) to determine its admissibility at trial based on a number of factors. These factors will be discussed further in our chapter on crime scene management; however, they include:


If the evidence was lawfully seized
* If the evidence was lawfully seized
How the evidence was collected, marked, and preserved
* How the evidence was collected, marked, and preserved
If the evidence was somehow contaminated
* If the evidence was somehow contaminated
If the chain of continuity for the evidence has been properly maintained
* If the chain of continuity for the evidence has been properly maintained
A flaw in any of these factors can result in evidence being excluded at trial. In addition, the court-martial can completely exclude any evidence that has been obtained following a violation of the Charter Rights and Freedoms of the accused person. Such infringements on these guaranteed rights and freedoms would include:
* A flaw in any of these factors can result in evidence being excluded at trial. In addition, the Military Judge(s) can completely exclude any evidence that has been obtained following a violation of the Rights and Freedoms of the accused person under the Articles of Federation and the Star Fleet Uniform Code of Military Justice. Such infringements on these guaranteed rights and freedoms would include:


Improper or unauthorized search of a person or a person’s property
* Improper or unauthorized search of a person or a person’s property
Improper taking of a statement from a suspect by failing to provide the appropriate warning and caution under section 10 of the Charter
* Improper taking of a statement from a suspect by failing to provide the appropriate warning and caution of their rights
Failing to provide proper opportunity for the arrested or detained person to speak with counsel after arrest or detainment
* Failing to provide proper opportunity for the arrested or detained person to speak with counsel after arrest or detainment
Failing to properly disclose all the evidence prior to trial to allow the accused to make full defence to the charge
* Failing to properly disclose all the evidence prior to trial to allow the accused to make full defense to the charge
Section 24 of the Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms states:
Section 859 of the Star Fleet Uniform Code of Military Justice states:


24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court-martial of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court-martial considers appropriate and just in the circumstances.
59. (1) A finding or sentence of court-martial may not be held incorrect on the grounds of an error of law unless the error materially prejudices the substantial rights of the accused.


(2) Where, in proceedings under subsection (1), a court-martial concludes that evidence was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter, the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
Practices regarding what evidence may be brought against an individual in trials are addressed by the SFUCMJ. When evidence is obtained through the violation of those articles, the accused is able to apply to have the evidence excluded from the trial under section 831.31.  
 
Practices regarding what evidence may be brought against an individual in trials are addressed by section 24(2). When evidence is obtained through the violation of a Charter right, the claimant is able to apply to have the evidence excluded from the trial under this section (Government of Canada, 2015).
<h4 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">INVESTIGATION</h4>
<h4 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">INVESTIGATION</h4>
A criminal investigation refers to the process of collecting information (or evidence) about a crime in order to: <br>  
A criminal investigation refers to the process of collecting information (or evidence) about a crime in order to: <br>  
Line 189: Line 187:
(4) provide evidence to support a conviction in a court-martial martial<br>  
(4) provide evidence to support a conviction in a court-martial martial<br>  
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Investigative Tasks & Thinking</h5>
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Investigative Tasks & Thinking</h5>
'''To understand the process of investigation, it is necessary to comprehend the distinction between investigative tasks and investigative thinking.'''
'''In order to understand the process of investigation, it is necessary to comprehend the distinction between investigative tasks and investigative thinking.'''
* Investigative tasks relate to identifying physical evidence, gathering information, evidence collection, evidence protection, witness interviewing, and suspect interviewing and interrogation.
* Investigative tasks relate to identifying physical evidence, gathering information, evidence collection, evidence protection, witness interviewing, and suspect interviewing and interrogation.


* Investigative thinking is aimed at analyzing the information collected, developing theories of what happened, the way an event occurred, and establishing reasonable grounds to believe.
* Investigative thinking is aimed at analyzing the information collected, developing theories of what happened, and the way an event occurred, and establishing reasonable grounds to believe.


<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Witnesses</h5>
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Witnesses</h5>
Beside physical evidence, another major source of information in a criminal investigation is people, namely witnesses and suspects. Witnesses can be classified as either primary or secondary. Primary witnesses are individuals who have direct knowledge of the crime because they overheard or observed its occurrence. This classification would include crime victims who observed or who were otherwise involved in the offense. Eyewitnesses would also be included here. Secondary witnesses possess information about related events before or after the crime. Informants and victims who did not observe the crime would be best classified as secondary witnesses.
Besides physical evidence, another major source of information in a criminal investigation is people, namely witnesses and suspects. Witnesses can be classified as either primary or secondary. Primary witnesses are individuals who have direct knowledge of the crime because they overheard or observed its occurrence. This classification would include crime victims who observed or who were otherwise involved in the offense. Eyewitnesses would also be included here. Secondary witnesses possess information about related events before or after the crime. Informants and victims who did not observe the crime would be best classified as secondary witnesses.


<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Suspects</h5>
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Suspects</h5>
Reasonable suspicion and probable cause are two very important legal concepts in a criminal case. They could have a direct impact on whether the SFSECIS have the authority to detain you, arrest you, and take other actions in your case. An experienced criminal defense attorney may be able to prove that law enforcement officials lacked reasonable suspicion or probable cause as a way to get the charges against you dismissed or reduced to a less serious offense.
Reasonable suspicion and probable cause are two very important legal concepts in a criminal case. They could have a direct impact on whether Star Fleet Security or SFSECIS Agents have the authority to detain you, arrest you, and take other actions in your case. An experienced Defense Counsel may be able to prove that law enforcement officials lacked reasonable suspicion or probable cause as a way to get the charges against you dismissed or reduced to a less serious offense.
<h6 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Reasonable Suspicion</h6>
<h6 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Reasonable Suspicion</h6>
Reasonable suspicion is the legal standard that the SFSECIS must meet in order to briefly detain a person and search him for a weapon. This standard is not as high as for probable cause. The SFSECIS must have reasonable suspicion that a person has committed a crime, is currently in the process of committing a crime, or plans to commit a crime.
Reasonable suspicion is the legal standard that the SFSECIS must meet in order to briefly detain a person and search him for a weapon. This standard is not as high as for probable cause. The SFSECIS Agents must have reasonable suspicion that a person has committed a crime, is currently in the process of committing a crime, or plans to commit a crime.


Reasonable suspicion must be based on more than a hunch. It must be established by the circumstances or facts at the time a person is detained and the officer’s training and experience. Reasonable suspicion exists when an objectively reasonable SFSECIS officer would suspect that a crime has been, is, or will be committed.
Reasonable suspicion must be based on more than a hunch. It must be established by the circumstances or facts at the time a person is detained and the officer’s training and experience. Reasonable suspicion exists when an objectively reasonable SFSECIS Agent would suspect that a crime has been, is, or will be committed.
<h6 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Probable Cause</h6>
<h6 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Probable Cause</h6>
Under the The Charter of the United Federation of Planets, people are protected from unreasonable searches or seizures or the issuance of a search warrant without probable cause. In order to establish probable cause to arrest someone, the Security Officers/SFSECIS must have sufficient knowledge of facts or evidence that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a crime has been, is, or will be committed and that the person being investigated committed the offense. Arrests made with or without a warrant must be based on probable cause.
Under the The Charter of the United Federation of Planets, people are protected from unreasonable searches or seizures or the issuance of a search warrant without probable cause. In order to establish probable cause to arrest someone, the Security Officers/SFSECIS must have sufficient knowledge of facts or evidence that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a crime has been, is, or will be committed and that the person being investigated committed the offense. Arrests made with or without a warrant must be based on probable cause.


A higher standard is required to establish probable cause than reasonable suspicion. It cannot be shown based on a suspicions or a guesses. It must be based on facts and hard evidence. In some cases, sufficient probable cause can develop after detaining someone based on reasonable suspicion.
A higher standard is required to establish probable cause than reasonable suspicion. It cannot be shown based on a suspicion or a guess. It must be based on facts and hard evidence. In some cases, sufficient probable cause can develop after detaining someone based on reasonable suspicion.
<h6 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Means - Motive - Opportunity</h6>
<h6 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Means - Motive - Opportunity</h6>
* Means (ability to perform the crime)
* Means (ability to perform the crime)
* Motive (reason to commit the crime)
* Motive (reason to commit the crime)
* Opportunity (did the alleged suspect have the opportunity or did something make it easy for them to commit the crime)  
* Opportunity (did the alleged suspect have the opportunity or did something make it easy for them to commit the crime)  


<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Forensic Experts</h5>
<h5 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Forensic Experts</h5>
Line 228: Line 225:


<h3 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">LABRATORY</h3>
<h3 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">LABRATORY</h3>
After evidence is collected at the scene, work continues in the lab. Forensic specialists analyze the evidence to help Security and SFSECIS with the investigation. While they may help gather evidence on the scene, their particular skills are evident in the analysis they perform after evidence is collected.
After evidence is collected at the scene, work continues in the lab. Forensic specialists analyze the evidence to help SF Security and SFSECIS with the investigation. While they may help gather evidence on the scene, their particular skills are evident in the analysis they perform after evidence is collected.


<h3 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">court-martial ROOM</h3>
<h3 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">court-martial ROOM</h3>
In the trial of a person charged with an offence in a criminal court-martial proceeding, the judge will hear the evidence and arguments presented by both the prosecution and the defence. The prosecution and the defense exist in court-martial in an adversarial relationship with the onus resting with the prosecution to prove the facts of the case beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense may challenge the evidence, question the testimony and the credibility of witnesses, and present alternate theories of events or evidence, where the accused person could be considered not responsible or sometimes less responsible for the alleged offence.
In the trial of a person charged with an offense in a court-martial proceeding, the Military Judge(s) will hear the evidence and arguments presented by both the Trial Counsel(s) and Defense Counsel(s). The Trial Counsel(s) and the defense exist in court-martial in an adversarial relationship with the onus resting with the Trial Counsel(s) to prove the facts of the case beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense may challenge the evidence, question the testimony and the credibility of witnesses, and present alternate theories of events or evidence, where the accused person could be considered not responsible or sometimes less responsible for the alleged offence.


<h4 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Members of a court-martial Martial</h4>
<h4 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">Members of a court-martial Martial</h4>
Line 242: Line 239:
* Security Officer(s)  
* Security Officer(s)  
<h4 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">BURDEN OF PROOF</h4>
<h4 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold;">BURDEN OF PROOF</h4>
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard measure of proof that the criminal court-martial will apply when determining if evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient to convict the person charged with an offence. If the evidence is sufficient, and the burden of proof has been satisfied, the court-martial may convict the accused. In these cases, the onus to prove all the elements of the charge rests completely with the prosecution. The accused person is not required to prove that they are innocent.
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard measure of proof that the criminal court-martial will apply when determining if the evidence presented by the Trial Counsel(s) is sufficient to convict the person charged with an offense. If the evidence is sufficient, and the burden of proof has been satisfied, the court-martial may convict the accused. In these cases, the onus to prove all the elements of the charge rests completely with the Trial Counsel(s). The accused person is not required to prove that they are innocent.
</center>
</center>
<h2 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold; border-bottom-style: none; border-style: none;">WORKS USED</h2>
<h2 style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS','Arial'; color: royalblue; font-weight: bold; border-bottom-style: none; border-style: none;">WORKS USED</h2>
Retrieved from "http://boi.alt-starfleet-rpg.com/Investigation_Procedures"