Understanding Evidence Chain of Custody: What the "Returns" File Reveals

When a life is taken during a police encounter, the investigation that follows is supposed to be thorough, impartial, and transparent. One of the most critical aspects of any investigation is the chain of custody — the documented trail showing who handled evidence, when, and why.

Today, I'm sharing my analysis of a document from the case file: Bossier_98__Returns.pdf. This 8-page file contains Evidence/Property Receipts from the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections, Office of State Police. These forms document some of the times evidence changed hands during the investigation.

What I found raises serious questions about how this investigation was conducted.

What Is Chain of Custody and Why Does It Matter?

Chain of custody is the chronological documentation of evidence — from the moment it's collected to the moment it's presented in court or closed out. Every transfer must be recorded: who had it, when they received it, when they gave it up, and to whom.

This matters because evidence can be tampered with, altered, or "lost" if it's not properly secured. In cases involving police use of force, video evidence is particularly critical — and particularly vulnerable. A proper chain of custody ensures that the evidence presented is the same evidence that was originally collected, unaltered and complete.

When the investigating agency hands evidence to one of the agencies being investigated, that chain is compromised — even if nothing improper actually occurs. The appearance of impartiality is just as important as actual impartiality.

The Agencies Involved

Before diving into the timeline, it's important to understand who the players are:

Louisiana State Police (LSP) — The investigating agency. When officers from local departments are involved in shootings, State Police typically conduct the investigation to provide independence.

Bossier City Police Department (BCPD) — One of the defendant agencies in our federal lawsuit.

Bossier Parish Sheriff's Office (BPSO) — Another defendant agency. Cpl. Sprankle, whose records were specifically pulled, appears to be from this agency.

Haughton Police Department (HPD) — The third defendant agency.

The Timeline: What the Documents Show

March 6, 2023 — Initial Evidence Collection

State Police moved quickly to collect evidence from all three agencies:

• 10:20 AM: Collected a flash drive and Police Report #23-02546 from Haughton PD
• 11:05 AM: Collected a Samsung flash drive from Bossier Parish Sheriff's Office
• 12:25 PM: Collected 14 DVDs containing body camera and dash camera footage from Bossier City PD

That last item is significant — 14 DVDs represents a substantial amount of video evidence, suggesting multiple officers and vehicles were involved in the incident.

March 13, 2023 — The First Red Flag

Here's where things get concerning.

At 3:10 PM, State Police Trooper Voinche handed a disc containing "multiple dash and body camera videos" to Lt. Michael Booker at BCPD WHo works in the IT department for the agency. — one of the defendant agencies.

The stated reason? "To label."

Think about that for a moment. The State Police — supposedly conducting an independent investigation — handed critical video evidence to a lieutenant at one of the agencies being investigated. And they left it there.

March 23, 2023 — Ten Days Later

The disc wasn't retrieved until March 23rd at 12:30 PM — ten full days after it was handed over.

For ten days, video evidence critical to the investigation sat in the custody of a defendant agency. During that time:

• Who had access to the disc?
• Where was it stored?
• Was it secured, or sitting in someone's desk drawer?
• Is the disc that was returned the same one that was given?
• What exactly does "labeling" a disc entail?

I'm not saying anything improper happened. But the opportunity existed, and that's a chain of custody problem. Standard investigative practice would have State Police maintain physical custody of evidence while having agency personnel verbally identify footage — not hand it over for ten days.

April 24, 2023 — Officer Records Finally Obtained

Nearly seven weeks after the initial evidence collection, State Police finally obtained records for Cpl. Sprankle from the Bossier Parish Sheriff's Office:

• Personnel file
• Drug screen results
• Training file
• Body camera video

Why did it take seven weeks to obtain these records? In any use-of-force investigation, the involved officer's training records and personnel file should be among the first things collected.

July 8, 2023 — Four Months Later

Additional digital evidence — an Apple MacBook, charger, and DVD with photographs — was collected from 4185 Viking Dr. in Bossier City. This address appears multiple times in the Returns file and is LSP's Office in Bossier City. Why wasn't this evidence collected during the initial investigation four months earlier?

The Questions That Remain

After analyzing this document, several questions demand answers:

1. Why was video evidence handed to a defendant agency? Standard practice is for the investigating agency to maintain custody.

2. What happened during those 10 days? "Labeling" a disc shouldn't take ten days.

3. Why the seven-week delay on officer records? Cpl. Sprankle's personnel file, drug screen, and training records should have been obtained immediately.

4. Why the four-month delay on digital evidence? The MacBook and photographs from 4185 Viking Dr. weren't collected until July.

5. Is this everything? Do the videos we've reviewed account for 14 DVDs worth of content? Are there gaps?

Why This Matters

Chain of custody isn't just legal jargon — it's the foundation of evidence integrity. When police investigate police, the public must be able to trust that the investigation is independent and thorough. Handing evidence to defendant agencies, unexplained delays in collecting critical records, and gaps in documentation all undermine that trust.

These are the kinds of details that get overlooked if no one is paying attention. That's why I'm sharing this analysis — because someone has to ask the hard questions.

Download the Documents

I'm making the document available for you to view so you can see for yourself:

• Bossier_98__Returns.pdf — The original 8-page Evidence/Property Receipt file