Why Your Criminal Defense Attorney Must Visit the Crime Scene

How a Simple Site Visit Can Uncover Evidence That Wins Cases

The Power of Independent Investigation

Many criminal cases come down to one person’s word against another’s. In these “he said, she said” situations, the prosecution relies on witness testimony while the defense challenges credibility. But what if objective evidence existed that could settle the matter conclusively?

After 25+ years of criminal defense experience, I have learned that this evidence often exists. Police frequently fail to collect it, however. Crime scene investigation therefore plays a critical role in case preparation.

A thorough site inspection can reveal surveillance cameras, identify potential witnesses, expose problems with the prosecution’s timeline, and uncover physical evidence that contradicts the alleged victim’s story. When police fail to collect readily available evidence, that failure itself becomes powerful ammunition at trial.

The Gap Between Arrest and Conviction

Understanding the different legal standards is essential. Police only need probable cause to make an arrest—a relatively low threshold that simply requires reasonable grounds to believe a crime occurred. Officers can arrest someone based solely on an alleged victim’s statement, without investigating further.

At trial, however, the State must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Our legal system considers this the highest standard. An officer might have enough to arrest someone, but without thorough investigation, the State may lack what it needs to convict.

Legal Standards: Arrest vs. Conviction

A skilled Tampa criminal defense attorney exploits this gap by highlighting evidence the police should have gathered but did not.

When and How I Investigate Crime Scenes

My approach to crime scene investigation depends on the stage of the case and what is at stake. In disputed fact cases where evidence preservation is critical, I may send an investigator early to document the scene and identify surveillance cameras before footage gets overwritten. When a case heads to trial, however, I personally visit the scene myself.

Why I Go Personally Before Trial

Walking the scene before trial serves multiple purposes. First, it allows me to become intimately familiar with the location—the distances, the sightlines, the layout. This familiarity gives me confidence during cross-examination because I know exactly what I am talking about.

Second, the officer on the stand will know I have been there. Many attorneys never visit the crime scene, and officers grow accustomed to that. When they realize the defense attorney has personally inspected the location, it changes the dynamic. They cannot exaggerate distances, misremember layouts, or gloss over details.

Using Technology Before the Visit

Before physically visiting a scene, I often use Google Street View to familiarize myself with the area. This tool can show building layouts, potential camera locations, and the general environment. While Street View images may be outdated, they provide a valuable starting point and help me know what to look for when I arrive in person.

Case Study: The Community Pool Battery Case

This case from my files illustrates why crime scene visits matter—and why acting quickly to preserve evidence is so critical. I took over the defense of a client charged with battery after another attorney had been handling the case for some time. On paper, this case looked difficult.

The incident occurred at a local community pool. An alleged victim claimed my client hit him, and an eyewitness corroborated his account. Nevertheless, I believed my client was innocent and was determined to prove it.

The Prosecution’s Witnesses

At trial, the State presented two witnesses. First, the alleged victim testified that my client struck him during a verbal dispute in the pool’s parking lot. Then a female eyewitness who observed the confrontation from a distance testified that she saw my client swinging his arms and yelling before the alleged victim fell.

Our Defense: The Victim Lied, The Witness Was Mistaken

My client admitted there was a heated argument. He acknowledged raising his voice and gesturing emphatically. However, he insisted he never touched the alleged victim.

Forgive me if this offends you, but in the courtroom, we do not always have the luxury of being politically correct. With my client’s permission, I explained to the jury that my client is Hispanic and, like many people from Hispanic cultures, he speaks with his hands and can be animated during disputes. What the eyewitness interpreted as punching was simply passionate gesturing during an argument.

Admittedly, this defense required the jury to believe my client over two prosecution witnesses. Standing alone, it might not have been enough. But I had an ace up my sleeve.

What I Found at the Scene

Before trial, I drove out to the community pool and walked the parking lot where the alleged battery occurred. After photographing the area from multiple angles, I found exactly what I suspected: surveillance cameras mounted on poles and building corners throughout the parking lot, with clear sightlines to where the incident occurred.

By the time I took over the case, the video had long since been recorded over. Neither the police nor the previous attorney had preserved it. But the cameras were still there—and that fact became the centerpiece of my cross-examination.

The Cross-Examination That Won the Case

The Verdict

Why Police Often Fail to Collect Evidence

This case illustrates a frustrating reality: police frequently skip thorough investigations before making arrests. Officers handle enormous caseloads and face pressure to clear calls quickly. Once they have probable cause to arrest, many consider their job done.

Some officers also develop tunnel vision, focusing on evidence that supports the alleged victim while ignoring evidence that might exonerate the defendant.

Evidence Police Commonly Overlook

When Failing to Investigate Is Ineffective Assistance

Defense attorneys have a constitutional obligation to provide effective representation. When an attorney fails to visit a crime scene and that failure affects the outcome, it can constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.

If evidence at the scene would have made a difference—surveillance footage, witness vantage points, physical impossibilities in the prosecution’s theory—the attorney’s failure to discover it may support an appeal or post-conviction relief. Thorough investigation is not optional in serious cases; it is part of the minimum standard of competent representation.

What an Effective Crime Scene Visit Includes

When visiting a crime scene, I approach it systematically. First, I photograph everything—the location, surrounding buildings, potential camera locations, sightlines, and any physical evidence. Then I identify potential witnesses by canvassing nearby businesses and residences.

Most importantly, I assess the prosecution’s version of events against the physical reality of the scene. Does their timeline make sense? Could witnesses really see what they claim? Are there inconsistencies between the police report and the actual layout? This meticulous approach has helped me win cases that initially seemed unwinnable.

Frequently Asked Questions

Questions About Police and Evidence Collection

Questions About Working With Your Attorney

Questions About Choosing a Defense Attorney

Questions About Appeals and Post-Conviction Relief

Experience Makes the Difference

With over 25 years of criminal defense experience, including service as Chief Operations Officer of the Hillsborough County Public Defender’s Office, I have learned that thorough preparation wins cases. Police mistakes, overlooked evidence, and incomplete investigations create opportunities for the defense. Only an attorney who conducts an independent investigation will find them. Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato leaves no stone unturned.

The battery case at the community pool could have ended in conviction if I had simply accepted the police report at face value. By the time I took over, the video was long gone. But a simple drive to the scene and a few photographs exposed a critical failure in the investigation.

The jury understood that if video evidence had existed and no one—not the police, not the previous attorney—bothered to preserve it, they could not be certain beyond a reasonable doubt that my client was guilty.

Call (813) 727-7159 for a Confidential Consultation

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.

620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602

Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

Related:

Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney

Tampa Police Mistakes Can Lead to Case Dismissal

Domestic Violence Defense in Tampa

Why You Need a Trial Warrior, Not Just a Negotiator