Falcon99 once bubbled...
I would think that if a diver found a gun, recovered it, called the police to pick it up, yadda, yadda, a sworn statement is also protocol. If properly documented with all details (who, what, where, when, how), I don't see how a defense lawyer would argue about the "chain of custody" because the sworn statement to Law Enforcement is part of that. If you are going to split hairs here, would the act of you marking it disturb the evidence anyway?
Another thought that crossed my mind... If it's THAT big of a trial and gets bad enough to argue custody chain issues just because a non-police diver found it, I would figure on much more evidence beyond a firearm found under a bridge.
Jim
Jim,
What you say is really quite correct...to a point...and, as they say, the Devil is in the details!
Since you said, in your complete post, that members of your family are lawyers, I guess I shouldn't have to remind you that a defense lawyer will (and should) argue about ANYTHING, including whether or not the sun is still shining somewhere on any cloudy day!
When I go into remarks on the subject of evidence recovery, I am actually in the "teaching" mode, and what we are trying to get across is the BEST or most effective way.
If you mark the object, it should not be by tying something to it. A small buoy on a line with a sufficient weight dropped near the item will enable the team to find it again.
Particularly with a weapon, there may be prints on the weapon (Yes, they do survive for some time!), there may be physical evidence attached to the weapon, and it should actually be recovered in a container with some of the water it was submerged in. Much as you see on CSI, the bagging, tagging, marking and recording, IF DONE PROPERLY, can put together an ironclad case!
You are quite right that there almost always will be other evidence, but this may be the one critical piece that will CONVINCE the jury.:grad:
