ABSTRACT
METHODS OF INQUIRY It brings insight to divide the principal methods of inquiry into two broad, distinct categories: those that reconstruct the past and those that discover or create new knowledge. The first is the method of the historian, archeologist, epidemiologist, journalist, and criminal investigator; the second, that of the scientist in general (as well as the creative artist). Although usefully stated as a dichotomy for the sake of a conceptual distinction, these methods finally fuse in the minds of the better thinkers and practitioners, for the reconstruction of the past often makes use of the scientific method, while science and art build on and digress from the past. Further ref lection suggests that any thorough inquiry employs techniques common to both. This certainly applies to the best practice in criminal investigation. Disciplines as diverse as geology, physical geography, physical anthropology, forensic medicine, statistics, computer technology, and criminalistics can make a contribution. Indeed, the discrete methods they employ may be seen as a continuum, with the ideal drawing on history, science, and art in varying proportions depending on the subject under probe. Therefore, just as the model investigation must utilize both principal methods of inquiry, so must the model investigator. This is not to say that a unique investigative technique may not be developed to deal with a specific problem, and be helpful with others as well. For testing the authenticity of a confession, for example, the tools of psycholinguistics could be put to use. That they have not been put to use thus far indicates the wide range of resources yet to be tapped by criminal investigators.
