Does evidence collected by non-police parties become tainted evidence?

Full question:

If someone other then the police collect evidence, would that fall under tainted evidence and also under the fruit of the poison tree?

• Category: Criminal
• Date: 04/07/2025
• State: Kansas

Answer:

Chain of custody is crucial for evidence to be legally acceptable in court. It involves several key elements, even when evidence is collected by non-police parties:

• The evidence collector must properly identify the evidence.
• The collector should be a neutral party with no personal interest in the results, such as hospital or laboratory staff.
• The evidence must be tamper-proof and secured at the collection site.

In Kansas, specific statutes govern the admissibility of evidence, especially for controlled substances. For instance, K.S.A. 22-2902c outlines that:

• The court may admit alleged controlled substances if they have undergone an approved field test administered by a trained law enforcement officer.
• A positive field test result establishes probable cause for the substance's classification.
• Physical evidence must have a completed evidence custody receipt showing continuous possession by law enforcement or related agencies to be admissible.

For DUI cases, maintaining a proper chain of custody for blood alcohol tests is essential. The prosecution must demonstrate:

• The qualifications of the person who drew the blood.
• The time and location of the sample collection.
• The qualifications of the lab technician who analyzed the sample.
• That the sample was accounted for throughout the testing process.
• Proper preservation and storage of the sample.

Any transfer of the blood sample requires documentation to ensure accountability and prevent tampering.