trifles in fact investigation

When one cruises or surfs for something interesting or worthwhile to investigate, one may be fortunate enough to stumble upon a suggestive evidentiary trifle. For example, while walking around one's home, one may find what appears to be smudged and bloodied fingerprint F on a window sill. This apparent fingerprint may generate this question:

To wit: What (interesting) hypothesis or possibility (if any) does F suggest (or support)?

The answer(s) is (are) probably provided (principally) by imagination:

But compare the assigned reading on abductive inference (as they call it) by Josephson & Josephson.

Possibility 1: A person who was attempting to burglarize the house left the (apparent) fingerprint F.

Possibility 2: One of the observer's children left the fingerprint F while playing.

Possibility 3: A neighbor left the fingerprint F to play a hoax or to intimidate the occupant(s) of the house.

Possibility 4: The apparent fingerprint F is a smudge left by a crow.

There are, of course, other possibilities.

There are also both coarser versions and more refined versions of the above possibilities.

For example:

Possibility A: A wrongdoer left F on the window sill.

Possibility A.1.1: John Jones left F while attempting to burglarize the bedroom of the house on June 1, 2001.

And so on.

Evidentiary trifles - small observations - frequently (if not always) have a suggestive or abductive force, they have a semiotic quality (i.e., they seem to stand for something else, are a sign of something else). So, consider this: One way to begin an investigation is simply by being alert to little details, to see if such bits and pieces might, serendipitously (to some degree), suggest or point to something interesting, some interesting possibilities or hypotheses.

FINIS

Go to Peter Tillers' Home Page

Go to Home Page for Fact Investigation