Evaluating Canadian Legal Changes in Context: Homicide Investigator Insights

The Homicide Investigation

The flow of crime through the criminal justice system as a sequence of decision points, called the “Funnel Model,” when applied to homicide, begins when a person is killed by another person in suspicious circumstances, followed by an investigation, arrest, prosecution, and in the event of a conviction, imprisonment, and in some cases eventual release (Liem & Eisner, 2020). Not all deaths will result in a criminal conviction. Acquittals at trial may occur due to viable defences such as self-defence or the failure of the prosecution to otherwise prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. A finding of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder holds a defendant factually though not legally responsible for an unlawful death. Pre-trial and mid-trial evidential rulings may result in the Crown directing a stay of proceedings on the basis that a reasonable likelihood of conviction no longer exists. Homicide prosecutions may also come to an end by virtue of a judicial stay of proceedings for constitutional violations or due to prosecutorial discretion. Deaths that do not result in convictions for homicide reflect the fact that each case must be decided on its own facts with the application of relevant law.

Previous research has indicated that the factors negatively impacting homicide clearance include changes in the law, the changing nature of homicides, and decreased community support (e.g., cooperation with investigators; Braga et al., 2019). Victim characteristics, event characteristics, the availability of investigative resources, and investigation policies and procedures also impact whether homicides are solved (Braga et al., 2019). Homicide investigations are often complex, resource intensive, and demand the “highest levels of individual and organisational skill” (Atkin & Roach, 2015, p. 1) from investigators. Investigative work has been described as an art, craft, science, or a combination of these approaches. The art of homicide investigation includes “intuition, instinctive feelings and hunches” related to the ability of investigators to determine false from genuine information, whereas the science refers to investigators who are skilled in scientific approaches and knowledgeable in the “psychology of interview techniques and of the social sciences of crime analysis and policing.” The “craft” of investigative work is “experience driven” (Tong & Bowling, 2006, pp. 324, 325). Investigative work also includes gathering technical data and evidence in compliance with existing law.

Innes (2002) described a structured investigative process whereby the investigation progresses through the following three phases: (1) the response to the homicide crime scene with a focus on physical evidence gathering, establishing the history of the victim, and witness interviews; (2) the information collection stage and following up investigative leads, establishing what is relevant and irrelevant, identifying a prime suspect(s), and gathering sufficient evidence for future prosecution; and (3) building a detailed narrative for the prosecution, the “case construction phase,” including the collection of data and reports (pp. 676, 677).

Traditional investigative techniques include the collection of physical evidence from crime scenes, victims, and suspects, including fingerprint impressions, DNA, weapons, bloodstain patterns, and other biological material. Victimology and witness interviews are essential as are neighborhood canvasses and video collection. Determination of the cause and manner of death by a forensic pathologist is a critical step (Liem et al., 2020). The writing of search warrants for premises, vehicles, and mobile devices is a necessary and often laborious task (Pizarro et al., 2020). Additionally, court orders for access to private information from telecommunication companies (subscriber information, call log data, cell tower location data, etc.), medical records, financial records, and social media applications are essential components of an investigation.

Advancements in technology contribute to more effective police investigations (Hough et al., 2019). More specifically, technological advances such as video and cell phone data analysis are important investigative techniques to rely upon and utilize (Pizarro et al., 2020). Further, case law and legislative provisions provide direction for the police on how to lawfully conduct homicide investigations. How the police undertake their investigations may challenge existing legal precepts and fuel legal change (Innes, 2003), examples of which are discussed below.

Brookman et al. (2019) interviewed homicide investigators from the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US) and observed some of their homicide investigations. They determined that case solution was impacted by the investigators and their agency’s strategic and investigative tactics. Brookman et al. (2019) asked investigators to provide insight into factors they believed impacted homicide solution. Researchers divided the findings into two categories: (1) environmental factors, which are generally out of the control of police agencies and (2) organizational factors, with the acknowledgement that occasionally the police can influence environmental factors (Brookman et al., 2019). Investigators identified several environmental factors (e.g., case and community characteristics) which they perceived hampered them in solving homicide cases as well as the impact of police organizational factors such as investigator qualities and experience; the availability of resources; the use of forensic science and technology; police culture and attitudes; case profile; and police perceptions of the community (Brookman et al., 2019). Brookman and Jones (2019) conducted a four-year ethnographic study of the use of forensic science and technologies (FST) in UK homicide investigations. The key findings included: (1) traditional investigative methods such as witness interviews continue to be critical in advancing homicide investigations as FST results are often delayed; (2) video/CCTV and mobile phone data are often accessible in the early stages of investigations and are essential in identifying suspects; (3) certain cases take longer to solve; (4) the solvability of a case is dependent upon a complex set of investigative actions and collaborations; and (5) some FSTs are rarely used but their findings can be critical to the investigation (Brookman & Jones, 2019).

Brookman’s collaborative research was the foundation for this study whereby homicide investigators and managers throughout Alberta (Canada) were surveyed to provide their views and insights into advancements in FST evidence as well as changes in law and how both may impact homicide investigations. Similar questions were used for our study to determine if Alberta homicide investigators were impacted in similar ways by FST evidence as Brookman and Jones (2019) found in their study. Departing from Brookman’s research, our study additionally asked questions regarding changes in the law and their perceived impact on homicide investigations.

Law and Prosecution

Studies examining the processes involved in homicide investigations are lacking in the existing research and further qualitative studies are required to expand academic knowledge of police tactics and procedures (Pizarro et al., 2020). Specifically, there is a paucity of research in relation to the impact changing laws have on homicide investigations.

The legal system directly influences how investigations are conducted, allowing police a range of powers (and restrictions) to carry out their investigative techniques, and subsequently constitutes the basis for resulting legal work (Innes, 2003). When the legal framework changes, the “bounded set of principles and procedures” change, impacting how investigators conduct homicide investigations (Innes, 2003, pp. 54, 55). A Canadian study by Malm et al. (2005) examined police service delivery and the corresponding cost over a 30-year period. Part of their focus was on the increase in time and expense required for criminal investigations caused by “Supreme Court decisions, legislative policies, social policies, and technological advancements” (p. 2). In summary,

The patterns and requirements of police work are defined by law and are continually redefined by new judicial decisions, new legislation, and new government policy initiatives. Since the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was entrenched in 1982, the Supreme Court of Canada has moved to redefine substantive, procedural, and evidentiary law in line with its requirements. As a consequence, demands on police operations have increased dramatically without proportional increase in budget or person-power. In turn, these demands have had a significant workload effect on police organisation and their ability to serve the public. (Malm et al., 2005, p. 10)

Currently, the resources required to conduct a thorough homicide investigation continue to escalate in scope, complexity, and cost. Malm et al. (2005) described changes in the law that impacted disclosure requirements and procedural changes due to constitutional challenges which resulted in greater scrutiny and limitations being imposed on investigators. These changes in the law restrict the ability of the police to “place suspects under arrest, to question them in custody, and to search and seize their property” which in turn impacts the efficiency of investigations (Innes, 2003, p. 74). The results of the current study echo these sentiments and provide specific examples of recent challenges imposed on homicide investigations from a legal context.

Changing Legal Context

Prior to the advent of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter) in 1982, the law relating to search and seizure and related police investigative powers was relatively static. Without a constitutional method for excluding evidence, most evidence gathered by the police was ruled admissible absent any applicable common law provisions. The Charter and its judicial interpretation have significantly impacted the police in their ability to gather evidence in a manner that will withstand judicial scrutiny as well as the way in which prosecutions are conducted. These changes have been impactful and have affected the way in which homicide investigations and prosecutions are conducted.

For the current study, we have focused on two decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) that have direct application to homicide investigations and prosecutions. ¹ The subject matter of these decisions relates to judicially imposed time limits for conducting and concluding criminal prosecutions and limitations in the recovery of data from smartphones and other electronic devices. These cases will be summarized and described in terms of their impact on homicide investigations, tying in respondent data from the 2020 research study that underpins this article.

Present Study

The research question guiding this study is - what impact do changes in the law have on homicide investigations? This question is relevant owing to the lack of focused research on the interplay between SCC rulings and their impact at the homicide investigation level. The current inquiry therefore seeks to bridge this gap and add to the literature by exploring whether changes in the law impact the investigation of homicide cases. ² To do so, this study surveyed subject matter experts (homicide investigators and managers) to gain further insight into an area of heretofore limited research, particularly relevant to Canadian homicide investigations.

Study Context

The province of Alberta has a population of 4.3 million people (Government of Alberta, 2021), with 7,687 serving police officers (Government of Canada, 2020). Of those sworn members, the number of homicide investigators per organization varies depending on the size of each agency. Table 1 provides an overview of the number of homicide investigators employed by police agencies in Alberta in the fall of 2020. It is important to note that smaller police agencies such as Lacombe, Taber, Blood Tribe, Tsuu T’ina, and Lakeshore police services do not have dedicated homicide investigators. These agencies rely on the provincial policing contract with Alberta Justice and Solicitor General to provide support if a homicide does occur. Typically, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) assist those agencies when required. The composition of participating police agencies in 2020 are presented in Table 1.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Composition of Participating Police Agencies, 2020.

Alberta police agency	Dedicated homicide investigators sworn/of all ranks
RCMP	74
Edmonton police	24
Calgary police	24
Lethbridge police	6
Medicine Hat police	9
Camrose police	4

In Alberta, the homicide rate was 2.2 homicides per 100,000 population in 2019, and Calgary and Edmonton had 24 and 32 homicides, respectively (Government of Canada, 2020).

Method

In 2020, a research study was conducted in Alberta examining police perceptions of external factors influencing homicide investigations in Alberta. Access to police services across the province was facilitated by the Alberta Association of Chiefs of Police (AACP) who supported our study by providing an introductory email with a link to the survey. This introductory email made it clear that participation in the study was entirely voluntary and at the discretion of individual officers who were not obligated to participate. Police chiefs’ offices forwarded this email to their respective units and/or personnel responsible for homicide investigations. The invitation was limited to those currently working on homicide investigations and was distributed across the province. This study received approval from the University of Calgary Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board (CFREB).

Respondents were given approximately six months in 2020 to complete the survey. An email follow-up reminder was sent out and the survey completion deadline was extended by several months, to increase response rates The online survey was created through Qualtrics and formatted for cellphone compatibility. Although 97 respondents started the survey and provided some information, 52 officers ultimately completed it. We estimate our response rate at 53%. Most of the respondents we surveyed (68.5%) had been police officers for 15 or more years, while nearly 85% have worked for 11 or more years. The average number of homicides per year that respondents investigate ranged from a low of 1 to over 30. Most respondents (80%) indicated that they investigate on average 25 or more homicides per year.

Beyond initial close-ended questions establishing experience, position, and homicide investigation volume, the survey included questions about judicial decisions, legislative changes, social policies, technological developments, and their impact on investigator workload. Each of these sections included open-ended questions—some of which form the basis of the findings we highlight below. Our analysis of these questions was conducted according to Creswell (2012): each co-author (4) was provided with all open-ended responses for an initial read-through. Each researcher then developed a coding scheme to organize the data into what we individually identified as key themes and subthemes. We then compared our respective findings and organized our themes according to those typically most prevalent across the team, but also according to which themes we deemed empirically most relevant. While our questions provided direction, the open-ended nature of the questions enabled respondents to interpret questions in ways that were wide-ranging and are reflected in the narrative presented below.

The focus of the discussion that follows is on the changes in Canadian law and its impact on homicide investigations, as informed by respondent input and summarized in Table 2. This line of inquiry is the first of its kind in Canada. SCC decisions apply to all Canadian provinces; however, our research focus was strictly on Alberta. Furthermore, not every homicide investigator and/or manager participated in the survey, therefore data saturation was not achieved. The law survey questions and findings are presented in Table 2.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Law Survey Questions and Findings.

Survey question	Summary of responses
Have the time limits imposed by Jordan affected homicide investigations? Please explain.	48 responses: yes (34); and no (14).
	Yes for the following reasons: delay of arrests so “Jordan Clock” doesn’t start; larger investigations affected the most; Jordan has become the next technicality argument for defence; suggestion the Crown is taking more plea deals to avoid the pressure of the “Jordan clock”; increased pressure on investigators to get disclosure done quickly; increase in workload; due to public safety reasons some arrests have to be made quickly while still waiting to receive forensic and technological evidence.
	No for the following reasons: Jordan has more impact on the prosecution than the police; investigations and disclosure have remained constant; courts are to blame for the failing system.
Has Marakah impacted your ability to obtain text messages sent by the suspect in a homicide investigation? If so, how?	49 responses: yes (44); and no (5)
	Yes for the following reasons: it has increased the number of warrants required which slows down the investigation and subsequent forensic analysis; causes delay in access to the information; the orders have become quite complicated; witnesses more reluctant to give up their devices; has prevented the real time sharing of information from witnesses and victims with police as they can no longer consent to the search of their devices; increased workload.
	No for the following reasons: not as much for homicide investigations due to the major case management model where affiant role is tasked out, more difficult for patrol and other investigators with less support.
Have you ever failed to obtain evidence of text messages before they were deleted or otherwise destroyed because you did not obtain judicial authorization in time to capture the evidence?	50 responses: yes (19); no (31)
How has the requirement to obtain judicial authorization for text messages affected the time it takes to conduct a homicide investigation?	41 responses: yes, it affected the investigation (31); no, hasn’t affected the investigation (4); didn’t answer the question directly (6).
	Yes, it has affected the investigation: increased the time; makes everything longer as writing more court orders; digital evidence is something that can disappear quickly, so may lose evidence with the delay for a court order; and it has slowed the flow of early evidence that can impact the collection of evidence.
	No it hasn’t affected the homicide investigation;
Have the requirements of Marakah ever caused you to decline to gather evidence of text messages?	50 responses: yes (9); no (41)

Results

Respondents were asked to describe legal external factors found outside the organizational context (out of the control of the organization and not under its mandate) that negatively impact homicide investigations. Questions were geared toward eliciting respondent feedback focused primarily on the SCC decisions in Jordan and Marakah.

One survey question asked respondents whether the time limits imposed by Jordan affected homicide investigations. Of the 48 respondents who answered this question the majority (n = 34) answered yes and provided multiple explanations. Their primary concern was the delay in arresting murder suspects until disclosure is ready because the “Jordan clock” of 30 months starts as soon as the defendant is charged (n = 16). Other issues raised included: (1) the necessity to shift or increase resources to address disclosure demands (n = 5); (2) a rush for interview transcription completion and receipt of forensic analysis results (e.g., autopsy, crime lab analysis, cell phone analysis, etc.) (n = 4); (3) increased pressure on Crown Prosecutors and judges to avoid cases being stayed (n = 3); (4) delays in laying charges increasing victim family frustration, negative media attention and public safety concerns (n = 5); (5) the necessity to shift or increase resources at the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (n = 1); (6) concern that the Crown is less likely to run a trial and more likely to accept plea deals with reduced sentences because of their workload and the backlog in the courts (n = 2); (7) increased workload for investigators and file coordinators (n = 1); and (8) Jordan has provided the defence with another technical argument (n = 1). One respondent pointed out that disclosure has changed a great deal (e.g., an email between the investigating team instructing them there is a meeting on the file is now part of disclosure). There may be hundreds of these emails as part of a file and days of vetting before the information is released. Radio communication can also be part of disclosure. The respondent indicated that police do not have the resources or manpower to balance an investigation with the need for disclosure, resulting in more time required to get the disclosure to the Crown’s office. It should be noted there was transference of responses by other non-law specific questions whereby respondents acknowledged the need for increased resources to support disclosure demands and a rush on expert reports.

Respondents who disagreed that Jordan affected homicide investigations (n = 14), stated the following: (1) police disclosure has remained constant and the courts are to blame for the failing system (n = 2); (2) investigators did not feel that their investigations had been impacted (n = 7); (3) the time limits have made disclosure more concise and increased pressure to complete disclosure requirements in a shorter timeline, viewing this as a positive factor relating to homicide investigations, and has resulted in resources being shifted for the collection and input of data, vetting, and ultimately complete disclosure of homicide files (n = 1); (4) timelines hold investigators to a higher threshold of proof, delaying arrests until all the evidence has been collected (n = 1); and (5) the Crown and the courts are more impacted than police investigators (n = 3).

Most respondents agreed that Jordan has resulted in increased demands for timely, complete disclosure, however most agencies did not observe any corresponding increase in homicide resource allocation. These timelines add pressure to team members who are often redeployed to other murders and assigned new key roles such as affiant, primary investigator, or file coordinator. Respondent feedback emphasized that the proliferation of digital evidence is both a benefit and a challenge to homicide investigations. Searches of computers, mobile devices, and vehicle infotainment systems generate large volumes of data that need to be analyzed and disclosed with proper vetting to the Crown, mindful of Jordan ceilings. One respondent explained that Jordan has put extra strain on investigators as Crown Prosecutors are more likely to withhold charge approval for murder cases until all evidence sought (e.g., crime lab results, telecommunication company results, firearm analysis, and autopsy reports, etc.) is in place. The respondent added that the capacity of the RCMP National Forensic Laboratory Services (RCMP Lab) has decreased over the years with respect to turnaround times for submitted DNA exhibits. Diary dates used to be provided with a usual turnaround time of 60 days for homicide investigations, but due to COVID, the RCMP Lab has recently removed all diary dates and no longer provides estimates of turnaround times for DNA exhibits, which creates additional time pressures.

Respondents were asked whether Marakah impacted their ability to obtain text messages sent by the suspect in a homicide investigation. Most respondents agreed that this case has impacted homicide investigations immensely (n = 44). Explanations included the following: (1) it has caused extensive delays in accessing victim’s cell phone data along with the possible loss of evidence (n = 6); (2) there is more work for investigators because a victim’s representative or witness can no longer simply consent to the police searching their cell phone as judicial authorization is required (n = 2); (3) the time delay for obtaining the authorization can result in the loss of evidence, witness coercion, and may allow a suspect to flee before investigators are aware of their identity or have enough evidence to pursue charges (n = 2); (4) the case takes away a victim’s representative’s or witness’s right to consent to the police searching their cell phone (n = 4); (5) it has added significant work to the affiant role as more judicial authorizations are required, and they are time consuming to write (n = 29); and (6) it sometimes causes mistrust by witnesses as they have to surrender their phones to police for a prolonged time until they get the authorization and technological assistance to access and download the phone data (n = 1). The remaining participants (n = 5) either disagreed with no explanation why (n = 3), were not concerned by the authorizations required for an investigation, conceded that people accused of a crime have the right to privacy regardless of circumstances (n = 1), or their response indicated they possibly did not fully understand the case law itself (n = 1).

Respondents were asked how the requirement to obtain judicial authorizations for text messages affected the time it takes to conduct a homicide investigation. Respondent feedback focused mainly on how it has slowed the flow of early information which may impact the collection of evidence. One respondent explained that it comes down to delay and while an authorization is pending the witness or suspect may delete messages off their device. Investigators may still be able to retrieve deleted data but that takes time and resources to accomplish.

Marakah was identified by respondents as a case that negatively impacted the ability of the police to seize electronic data without a warrant, specifically emails, text messages, and any other electronic messages received by a witness or complainant, which can no longer be seized by police without judicial authorization. As a result, additional time and resources are required to lawfully obtain this type of data. One respondent described the ability of the police to seize, without consent or judicial authorization, a handwritten letter from a suspect to a witness or complainant, but not an electronic communication. Another respondent stated that the requirement for police to obtain authorization to look at a consenting witness’s or deceased victim’s phone has changed the pace of the investigation, sometimes causing a 24 to 72-hour delay in their ability to learn critical information in the early stage of the investigation. It was suggested that this delay gives the suspect the opportunity to destroy evidence and interfere with witnesses. The same respondent explained that witnesses are less likely to cooperate with the police if they must surrender their phones until a judicial order has been granted whereas before Marakah, police could immediately look at consenting witness and victim phones, review and photograph the conversations, and return them to the owner immediately. Numerous respondent comments reflected the opinion that the judicial system is increasingly more difficult to navigate. Changing case law and the corresponding level of detail required in Informations to Obtain judicial authorizations result in lengthy and technical terminology, requiring complex drafting and concordant delay.

Discussion and Conclusion

Academics generally agree that there is limited research about the criminal investigative process (Campbell et al., 2017; Horvath et al., 2001; Innes, 2002; Liederbach et al., 2011). Specifically, there is a paucity of research and information on external factors such as changes in the law associated with advancements in FST evidence and their impact on homicide investigations. The current study was designed to identify factors believed to impact homicide investigations by canvassing homicide investigators in Alberta to add practitioner knowledge and insight to the limited available research.

Several themes emerged through our study: (1) the time required to conduct homicide investigations; (2) the complexity of investigations due to technology and associated changes in the law; (3) increased requirements for judicial authorizations; and (4) the need for additional investigative resources. The focus of this article is on the impact of changes in the law and the results presented here support our review of the legal changes and add context from the perspective of investigators regarding how the investigative process is impacted by changes in law.

Respondents agreed that most of the changes in the law cited in this study have increased the complexity of homicide investigations and the time required to conduct them. Charter-focused case law often creates pressures that impact investigations. For example, Jordan exacerbates investigational pressure by tightening disclosure and trial timelines. Investigators often delay the arrest of suspects to prepare disclosure and Crown Prosecutors more frequently withhold charge approval until investigators provide assurance that disclosure is ready. Postponing the arrest of homicide suspects can place public safety in jeopardy and at the very least frustrate victim families and friends by delaying what they view as “getting justice.” However, despite the pressures caused by Jordan, we believe it would be an error to cast Jordan as bad case law. There has been a long and unhealthy history of homicide prosecutions in Canada lasting many years and suffering repeated delays for reasons that are less than salutary. Delay is a friend of neither truth nor justice. The paradigmatic shift caused by Jordan has served to hold the feet of investigators, counsel, and the court to the fire. From a societal perspective, it is reasonable to expect expeditious investigations and prosecutions though the delivery of these goals is impacted by other changes in the law discussed in this research.

Examples of such changes are those highlighted by Marakah which significantly increased the circumstances in which judicial authorizations are required to gather electronic evidence. Respondents noted that this has injected a level of procedural complexity that has made homicide investigations even more onerous than before. They anecdotally described the need to obtain multiple authorizations to acquire volumes of data which must then be scoured to find relevant evidence, and the corresponding significant disclosure obligations. Whether or not one agrees with the SCC’s stance on privacy interests is immaterial. These additional procedural hurdles must be factored into homicide investigations and how they are resourced. We suggest that it is neither feasible nor desirable for police agencies to effectively respond to changes in the law such as those highlighted here without supplementing existing investigational resources.

From the survey responses, it is clear that homicide investigators understand that the law requires strict adherence to the principles enshrined in the Charter and related case law to ensure that the evidence relied upon in court meets admissibility tests. Respondents expressed concern that the burden to meet the continuing and evolving challenges of the law is a major factor impacting investigations. To effectively address these challenges, in addition to the need for adequate resources, investigators must maintain good communication with the Crown Prosecutors’ office for interpretation of the law and guidance on its implementation. Additionally, periodic formal in-house training for investigators on developments in the law and continued investigative team “roundtable” discussions on how to apply the law to desired investigative techniques throughout the course of an investigation are recommended.

The observations of Brookman et al. (2019) were supported by this study in relation to rapidly changing technology and the struggle of investigators to stay abreast of it, and the legal response to those changes. Our research is the first study of its kind in Canada. Our working theory was that the changes in the law highlighted in this research adversely impact the efficacy and timeliness of homicide investigations, but we did not have any data to confirm that beyond anecdotal commentary. Conceivably, investigators may have found these changes to be of minimal or no impact. The value of this research is that it provided substantive research data from homicide investigators which allowed us to test our theory. This is important because it may provide a foundation for pursuing changes in how homicide investigations are resourced and conducted.

We recognize that the criminal and constitutional law of Canada is different from that of the US and the UK, and therefore it is important to consider our research question in the Canadian context. That said, despite these regional differences, we believe that there are commonalities that can be extended beyond Canadian borders. The relevant commonality for the purpose of our study is that the lack of police resources continues to affect the ability of homicide investigators to perform their tasks effectively and expeditiously in the face of changes in the law that place increased demands on investigators. These changes may impact the amount of evidence that is collected and the timeliness of its collection. These investigational complexities and their ramifications would likely be problematic in other countries as well though we have focused on Canada in this article.

It would be difficult to empirically assess the precise impact of the Jordan and Marakah decisions on the investigation of homicides. Cases may falter for a myriad of reasons and there is no repository that catalogues the precise reasons for case failure absent reviewing every decision in Alberta. However, anecdotally we suggest that these cases have adversely impacted investigations, both in terms of complexity and the resources required to respond to these changes, as per survey results. This information is useful for managers and police executives to better understand why increased overtime and resource requests continue to rise and provides contextual information to other criminal justice professionals regarding challenges faced by homicide investigators. It also provides findings that could be used to justify increasing the resources provided for the investigation of homicides. This is important because requests for resources are more persuasive when supported by research data than mere anecdotal commentary.

This study contributes to the very limited literature relating to the impact of changes in the law on homicide investigations and opens the door for future discussions and scholarship on the matter. The SCC has charted a path for all to follow and police agencies must respond accordingly.

Limitations and Future Directions

Restricting this survey to Alberta respondents when the decisions of the SCC have national application may be territorial and epistemic limitations. We viewed Alberta as being a manageable data set and an appropriate place to start this research. Expanding the breadth of this research to other Canadian jurisdictions would potentially validate the current study findings in a broader context. Given the national scope of the SCC rulings, it is unlikely that the survey findings herein would not be largely replicated, but there is merit in finding out. Additional limitations include narrowing the survey to two leading cases rather than canvassing respondents on a broader array of rulings. Further research could include a larger array of SCC cases that have impact on police procedures. An additional research component would be to include the opinions of Crown Prosecutors as that additional perspective may broaden the scope of knowledge on the impact changes in the law have on homicide investigations. Finally, although our focus is on changes in Canadian law, we believe similar issues identified by the Alberta respondents may be extrapolated to homicide investigations in other jurisdictions though further research would be needed to confirm that. A more ambitious project would be to conduct research that extends to the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and other relevant common law jurisdictions with the goal of comparing the impact of changes in the law on each nation’s homicide investigations. It is our belief that with relevant changes in law for any country, the strain on homicide investigations would be exacerbated in the absence of supplemental resources.