( SAMPLES OF SUCCESSFUL POLICE ART )

• Although I am mainly a portrait artist, I have been known to assist law enforcement agencies with renderings that led to the arrest of felons. I work as a free agent, that is, I don’t maintain a position as part of any law enforcement organization. My services are usually hired by agencies seeking a means to deal with high profile cases.
• I was not trained at the FBI Academy, but my technique is almost exactly the same process as taught by Karen Taylor who has included my accomplishments in her textbook “Forensic Art and Illustration”. Also, I have been used on cases such as the Green River Murders, I-5 Killer (Roger Kibbe), and the Unabom investigation. Other cases, such as Richard Chase (the Vampire Killer), the Beauty Shop Bandit, the Mechanic Murder, and a few others in the Sacramento area, revealed my effectiveness in working with investigators. My work has also been used to display successful police art at the Carnegie Science Center in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.  ( REFERENCE LETTER )

• In 2002, I was one of two police artists who appeared on the show “Worst Case Scenario” in a segment entitled “Eye Witness”. I have included a DVD so that you may see how everything was stacked up against our profession. I would like you to take 10 minutes of your time to see how the media perceived a police investigation to work. When viewing the segment, please take note that the subject to be identified was fully disguised. The witnesses saw nothing more than a man running by and shouting some words at them; no gun or weapon, no personal threat to their life. The program claims that they are showing the way police investigations work. Not so, in my opinion. Part is true; the witnesses are separated for individual interrogation. Later, in the line-up, the program has all the witnesses taking part together, which is not the way I have ever seen it work. My comment would be that a police artist would have a part in deciding which witnesses should be used, which I did in this case, but was not mentioned in the segment. The witness I designated was able to help me produce a good sketch, and to identify the man without his disguise in the line-up. I’m sure the media was not ready for that!
• When a police agency contracts me to work a case, I not only provide a drawing or drawings, but also a report showing the process of how the composite drawing or drawings were created. A report of this nature will help the investigation study the witness, and also will add to the credibility of the witness’s testimony.
• I also have the ability to work with a witness over the Internet. Due to copyright laws, I have had to create my own feature kits to work with. This has caused me to have a pause in my police art career so I could learn how to create a web based composite interview website. It is a new concept, but is not much different than working with a witness in person. It creates records that are easily used in the final report. (SEE SAMPLE WITNESS REPORT) More about: On-Line Witness Interviews

• If you are the department artist and if you are interested in furthering your skills in art, I am available to instruct you in how to use the pencil to draw portraits quickly and accurately. I do not teach my own technique. My task would be to analyze your technique and find the problems you face and how you might deal with them. We are all different, we all see differently, and sometimes it takes a skilled eye to help you improve. Most instructors are bent at making you think the way they do. My view is that it’s the teacher’s task to help you see your own problems within your own drawing procedure. I have drawn people all my life and can easily capture accurate likenesses. In the field of police art, an artist that has to deal with extracting a likeness hidden within some one’s memory, would be at a great disadvantage drawing from description if they could not easily draw some one posing in front of them. After all, it is the job of the composite artist to extract a likeness out of the memory of an eyewitness. This means you should try to take note of the lighting as well as the view, noting the distance from the subject and other obstacles or distractions that could have hampered the witness. So if called for, you should be able to create a picture close to what the witness observed. I have worked in all media and have done some of my best police work in color. So I feel that I can look at your work and tell you what problems you are having. I do so constructively. As a result, it is your job to become more aware of the problems you have, and to correct your procedure to overcome them in your own way.

• There are investigators who are skeptical of cognitive police art. I can only say that some witnesses can help produce a drawing or sculpture that can convey a useful identity to the public so that the public's input will help investigation efforts in a timely manner. I must be, or that is I am one of these useful artists because in having done around 50 cases, the work I created has been successful more than 50% of the time. Remember, not all witnesses have the best view or memory. Conditions dictate what the investigation has to work with, and not all witness are useful. This is not an easy field of work, as you have to analyze your witness as well as working with them. Part of the job is to judge the ability of the witness and convey that knowledge to the investigation so that experts above my position will have the input to help them make decisions. There are artist that cannot extract useful information in a way that would expedite a capture. If the likeness is too vague, then investigations are confronted with too many false leads and lose valuable time.
• There was a news item on CNN News Network where their Chief Medical Correspondent, Sanjay Gupta (psychologist), had taken the viewpoint that the FBI interview technique could confuse the witness. This was in reference to a rival police artist of mine who apparently was facing criticism over her previous work. Gupta and the artist put forth the opinion that showing the witness too many images can confuse them and thereby damage the witness's memory. Defending the FBI interview technique you simply have to admit that if you can confuse a witness, then you don't have a witness. This is a simple fact, that you only have a witness if they can testify in front of a defense lawyer that will certainly cross examine the witness as much or more than the artist would. Imagine what a witness with a foggy memory could do to the adjudication process. We all see many different people every day. Does this harm a good memory? Or could it harm a witness's memory of a criminal's face whom has a gun or knife, and pointing it at them demanding a wallet or purse? Simply, the police artist is only the tool of the witness, and is there to create a picture close to the witness's memory. This can only be done through the process of elimination, which is what the FBI technique is all about. Psychology has no place at the hands of a police artist, and it can only damage the witness. I find the news item and it's criticism invalid.